CAP Talk

General Discussion => The Lobby => Topic started by: CadetFaith on October 20, 2014, 02:58:05 PM

Title: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: CadetFaith on October 20, 2014, 02:58:05 PM
(Apologies if this isn't in the best fitting board)

So, I'm a male Cadet Airman Basic in the Maryland Wing that's been in Civil Air Patrol for roughly 5 months or so (going off the top of my head). I love the activities, comradery, and wearing the uniform. However, (and it's kind of strange to explain on this forum) I'm very unhappy with myself, and, for several reasons, believe I may be potentially happier as a male-to-female transgender. As I've developed these feelings, getting haircuts to fit Civil Air Patrol has become more and more uncomfortable and anxious.
Are there any past cases of, or validity to, requesting something like permission to abide by female grooming standards desite being biologically male? I understand the importance of respecting the Air Force uniforms we've been allowed to wear; I just don't want to have to either wait until I'm 21 or prematurily leave the cadet program to even begin growing out my hair like, y'know, a girl.

Sorry for the somewhat uncomfortable topic!
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Eclipse on October 20, 2014, 03:03:35 PM
No.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Flying Pig on October 20, 2014, 03:33:53 PM
Its not an uncomfortable topic.  The answer is No.  The US military doesn't allow it either.  And for the record.... great way to attempt to bait negative comments about gay cadets in CAP. 
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Майор Хаткевич on October 20, 2014, 03:41:07 PM
Quote from: Flying Pig on October 20, 2014, 03:33:53 PM
Its not an uncomfortable topic.  The answer is No.  The US military doesn't allow it either.  And for the record.... great way to attempt to bait negative comments about gay cadets in CAP.


Honestly, if anyone came at this with a negative view on anything LGBT, it would be out of line with CAP Core Values and EO.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: NIN on October 20, 2014, 03:59:15 PM
NHQ is actually looking at ways to address this (esp transgender issues) but nothing is really written.

I think the rule, for the moment, is "the gender you've ID'd as is probably the gender you participate as"

Now, this doesn't mean that you and your commander can't have a conversation about your specific situation and circumstances.

But for the moment there is no national level guidance on it, which basically means at least until there is some definition, that its between you and your commander.

As I once said "how many male cadets would identify as female for the purposes of billeting at summer encampment?" :) (thats kind of a joke, but speaks to the need to be a little more careful/thoughtful/formal about it)
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: MSG Mac on October 20, 2014, 04:05:10 PM
Before even bringing this subject to the forums, have you addressed this problem to your parents, Squadron Commander, a  Medical Professional, or Chaplain? Transgender operations take several years of psychological  counseling, hormone therapy, and finally a series of operations. As said earlier the D of D doesn't allow transgender individuals into the services, but CAP doesn't have DOD standards for joining other than the criminal background checks for Senior and the Citizenship or Permanent Residency regulations.   
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: LSThiker on October 20, 2014, 04:51:46 PM
The legal implications vary depending on state.  The best to answer these questions is a coordination with you, your parents, your doctor, your commanders, and CAP legal.  These are people that will make the final determination. 

I have several friends that are transgender.  My state refuses to do anything for them without a signed letter from a medical doctor.  While the regulations state no, CAP legal may state otherwise.  Also, just because the USAF does not allow it, does not mean CAP will not.  The USAF can limit a lot of things while CAP cannot due to our civilian status. 
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: CadetFaith on October 20, 2014, 07:33:21 PM
Quote from: Flying Pig on October 20, 2014, 03:33:53 PM
Its not an uncomfortable topic.  The answer is No.  The US military doesn't allow it either.  And for the record.... great way to attempt to bait negative comments about gay cadets in CAP.

Er. My intention was nowhere near attempting to draw negative attention. If anything, I was trying to word my post as to be as far from inflammatory as I could manage. I'm sorry if I didn't realize that some part of my post, or the topic in general, could be considered drama-bait.

Quote from: MSG Mac on October 20, 2014, 04:05:10 PM
Before even bringing this subject to the forums, have you addressed this problem to your parents, Squadron Commander, a  Medical Professional, or Chaplain? Transgender operations take several years of psychological  counseling, hormone therapy, and finally a series of operations. As said earlier the D of D doesn't allow transgender individuals into the services, but CAP doesn't have DOD standards for joining other than the criminal background checks for Senior and the Citizenship or Permanent Residency regulations.

I have not. The purpose of this post was primarily to get an idea of whether or not I would be allowed, in CAP, to grow longer hair if I were to 'transition'. I don't want to go to a gender therapist, be medically diagnosed with gender dysphoria (it's still a possibility that I don't have any such thing, and it's just teenage hormonal silliness or something), and then wind up not only unable to join the military (I've accepted that this will be the case if I were to pursue this) but also unable to grow my hair to a 'feminine' length.


I appreciate the informative answers, and apologize if I was confusing, got too personal, or if I've made a big deal out of nothing. Or anything else someone would want me to apologize about, I don't know. :P
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: LSThiker on October 20, 2014, 07:44:14 PM
Quote from: CadetFaith on October 20, 2014, 07:33:21 PM
I don't want to go to a gender therapist, be medically diagnosed with gender dysphoria (it's still a possibility that I don't have any such thing, and it's just teenage hormonal silliness or something), and then wind up not only unable to join the military (I've accepted that this will be the case if I were to pursue this) but also unable to grow my hair to a 'feminine' length.

By helping my friends, it can be a very long and very confusing journey.  Seek help and guidance from support groups, when needed.  Do not attempt it alone.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Eclipse on October 20, 2014, 07:55:30 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on October 20, 2014, 04:51:46 PMThe USAF can limit a lot of things while CAP cannot due to our civilian status.

Cannot?  CAP is a private organization with "at will" membership.  It can, and does, limit anything it wants.

Further, the USAF determines the wear standards for all of CAP's uniforms, and therefore has the final word on who can where which
styles and the manner in which they will be worn, including any grooming issues.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: LSThiker on October 20, 2014, 08:06:32 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on October 20, 2014, 07:55:30 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on October 20, 2014, 04:51:46 PMThe USAF can limit a lot of things while CAP cannot due to our civilian status.

Cannot?  CAP is a private organization with "at will" membership.  It can, and does, limit anything it wants.

Yes it can limit certain things, but not anything it wants.  Can CAP say "no blacks allowed"?  No women?  No Muslims?  No disabled?
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Eclipse on October 20, 2014, 08:24:14 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on October 20, 2014, 08:06:32 PMYes it can limit certain things, but not anything it wants.  Can CAP say "no blacks allowed"?  No women?  No Muslims?  No disabled?

Citation, please.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: LSThiker on October 20, 2014, 08:25:24 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on October 20, 2014, 08:24:14 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on October 20, 2014, 08:06:32 PMYes it can limit certain things, but not anything it wants.  Can CAP say "no blacks allowed"?  No women?  No Muslims?  No disabled?

Citation, please.

CAPR 36-1

The Constitution of the Civil Air Patrol, Article VII, states, "Discrimination based on
age, disability or the provisions of Title VI and VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is
prohibited."
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Eclipse on October 20, 2014, 08:44:26 PM
The CAP constitution has no power of law and can be changed, by CAP, any time it wants to change it.

CAP chooses to cooperate with any number of regulations enacted by the federal government and related agencies
and organizations as best practice, but not because of legal mandate. 

Title VI likely applies because of the appropriation, but it obviusly doesn't provide for the allowance of carter blanche
behavior or dress by members.  Title VII however, doesn't apply, except for HQ employees.  NHQ makes it very clear that members are not employees.
The ADA and HIPPA are two more that come to mind, except for the small number of HQ employees.

Voluntarily cooperating, doesn't equal "mandated".

In this case it's irrelevant anyway, since the subject is not within CAP's control, nor is there any allowance for
a local CC to "make allowances" - that would be about the worst case I could imagine, since it would set an expectation
not supported anywhere except for with in that unit - encampments, SARExs, NCSAs, nor any other outside activities
would be mandated to allow the practice.  At a minimum, if its an issue, it needs to be addressed directly nu the Wing CC and JA,
with approval of any "compromise" by NHQ.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: LSThiker on October 20, 2014, 08:48:25 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on October 20, 2014, 08:44:26 PM
The CAP constitution has no power of law and can be changed, by CAP, any time it wants to change it.

CAP chooses to cooperate with any number of regulations enacted by the federal government and related agencies
and organizations as best practice, but not because of legal mandate. 

Title VII for example, doesn't apply, except for HQ employees.  NHQ makes it very clear that members are not employees.
The ADA and HIPPA are two more that come to mind.

Voluntarily cooperating, doesn't equal "mandated".

Perhaps you should actually read CAPR 36-1:

QuoteTitle VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides that no person in the United States
shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be
denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or activity
receiving federal financial assistance.

QuoteTitle III of the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 provides that no person in the United
States shall, on the basis of age, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or
be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal
financial assistance.

QuoteDOD Directive 5500.11, Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs, is the
basic implementing directive for Department of Defense compliance with Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, and is applicable to the Civil Air Patrol

QuoteDOD Directive 1020.1, Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Handicap in Programs and
Activities Assisted or Conducted by the Department of Defense, is the basic implementing
directive for DOD compliance with the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section 504. It states that no
qualified handicapped person in the United States shall on the basis of handicap be excluded
from participation in, denied the benefit of, or otherwise subjected to discrimination under any
program or activity conducted by the Federal Government or receiving Federal financial
assistance.

QuoteAFI 36-2707, Nondiscrimination in Programs and Activities Assisted or Conducted by
the Department of the Air Force, is the Air Force implementing directive for DOD Directive
5500.11 and DOD Directive 1020.1.

Basically, the USAF and CAP legal disagrees with you and so does the US Law as long as we continue to receive federal money, which we do.  So again, no CAP cannot limit anything it wants as long as it wants to stay in its current paradigm.  So in this case, I think I will trust CAP and USAF.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Eclipse on October 20, 2014, 08:51:02 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on October 20, 2014, 08:48:25 PMSo again, no CAP cannot limit anything it wants as long as it wants to stay in its current paradigm.

Private organizations may do whatever they like.  The rest is a matter of funding and public relations.

You might also consider exhaling on a response long enough for someone to finish typing.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: LSThiker on October 20, 2014, 09:13:10 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on October 20, 2014, 08:51:02 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on October 20, 2014, 08:48:25 PMSo again, no CAP cannot limit anything it wants as long as it wants to stay in its current paradigm.

Private organizations may do whatever they like.  The rest is a matter of funding and public relations.

You might also consider exhaling on a response long enough for someone to finish typing.

Sorry, perhaps instead of posting then editing, you can finish your thought and then hit post.  I cannot predict when you will decide to edit your posts after you post. 

Yes, private organizations may do whatever they like, except when the USAF tells CAP what they cannot do based on their own regulations and US law.  So yes, if CAP were to cut all ties with the USAF and drop all federal funding, then yes CAP could restriction membership to all of those.  If that happens, I doubt this conversation would even be necessary as CAP would likely die due to the lack of funding.  Regardless, CAP cannot now because the USAF says otherwise.  Moving on from this rather pointless academic discussion. 
Title: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Storm Chaser on October 20, 2014, 09:23:42 PM
Interesting. CAP limits the age in which someone can become a member. CAP also limits the age in which members can participate in certain activities and in which they can be qualified in certain specialties. It also limits some members from participation in certain activities based on disability and other physical limitations. Would all this be considered discrimination? What about the fact that, while discrimination based on race, sex, age, color, religion, national origin, or disability is expressly prohibited in CAPR 36-1, there's no clear prohibition against discrimination due to sexual orientation?

CAPM 39-1 clearly states that members must adhere to the required grooming standards for the USAF-style uniform and that changes in standards or exceptions must be approved by the USAF. It also states that "[l]ocal commanders do not have the authority to waive grooming and appearance standards." In other words, while CAP should not discriminate against its members, it can require them to comply with grooming standards, such as haircuts, regardless of the personal preferences of its members.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: LSThiker on October 20, 2014, 09:29:52 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 20, 2014, 09:23:42 PM
Interesting. CAP limits the age in which someone can become a member. CAP also limits the age in which members can participate in certain activities and in which they can be qualified in certain specialties. It also limits some members from participation in certain activities based on disability and other physical limitations. Would all this be considered discrimination?

No assuming there is a strong rationale for this limitation and it can be legally supported.  For example, NBB, supposedly, requires 16 year olds because Wisconsin work laws.  disability might also mean not participating safely in the event.   

QuoteWhat about the fact that, while discrimination based on race, sex, age, color, religion, national origin, or disability is expressly prohibited in CAPR 36-1, there's no clear prohibition against discrimination due to sexual orientation?

This is where CAP legal would need to be involved as sexual orientation is not federally protected, yet it is protected at the state level (some at least).  So it would be interesting to see which direction CAP would go in this case. 

QuoteCAPM 39-1 clearly states that members must adhere to the required grooming standards for the USAF-style uniform and that changes in standards or exceptions must be approved by the USAF. It also states that "[l]ocal commanders do not have the authority to waive grooming and appearance standards." In other words, while CAP should not discriminate against its members, it can require them to comply with grooming standards, such as haircuts, regardless of the personal preferences of its members.

Again, this would require CAP legal to make the decision with coordination with CAP-USAF.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: FW on October 20, 2014, 09:53:05 PM
Grooming standards for cadets are straight forward, and do not allow for a wide range of options.  Your question, however, poses an interesting problem better handled by professionals.  Gender identity is a complex issue.  CAP has a non discrimination policy which may extend to transgendered members, but this is better dealt with after you talk to someone who has the expertise to have a meaningful conversation with you.   

In my opinion, the only option for you is to dress according to regulation.  If you identify as male, or female... :angel:
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: lordmonar on October 20, 2014, 10:07:55 PM
We had this issue a few months back.  The policy handed to us by NHQ is that the gender on the ID presented to the squadron is your gender and you follow the dress and appearance regs for that gender.  I know that NHQ is working on this and they will published guidance when the figure it out.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Майор Хаткевич on October 20, 2014, 10:18:29 PM
How do we address members whose religions prohibit women from wearing pants? I knew some cadets with bdu skirts. Also some religions that don't allow males to cut beards or hair?
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Ned on October 20, 2014, 10:28:09 PM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 20, 2014, 10:18:29 PM
How do we address members whose religions prohibit women from wearing pants? I knew some cadets with bdu skirts. Also some religions that don't allow males to cut beards or hair?

See, generally, CAPR 39-1 paragraph 1.5 for guidance on requests for religious accomodations.

Ned Lee
Member, NUC
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Майор Хаткевич on October 21, 2014, 01:15:58 AM
I've been aware of some of those, but as a cadet and not directly involved. So in leave the question for those with experience.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: NIN on October 21, 2014, 10:04:08 AM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 20, 2014, 10:18:29 PM
How do we address members whose religions prohibit women from wearing pants? I knew some cadets with bdu skirts. Also some religions that don't allow males to cut beards or hair?

Did you KNOW cadets with BDU skirts, or did you HEAR about it?  The number of people who swear they've seen "BDU skirts" makes it sound pretty prevalent. I've seen one world's fair, a picnic and a rodeo, and I've never seen a BDU skirt.  Its like Bigfoot, or a $1000 bill....

We have a male cadet in an adjacent squadron who is a Native American and has a religious need for the length of his hair, or something like that. He wears Blue BDUs and white/grey. While I have not seen a letter from NHQ that says "This cadet is authorized to wear this uniform in this way in deviation of CAPM39-1 for religious accommodations," but I have been told that it was coordinated thru channels. He's not in my unit, so its really no skin off my nose.  It looks a little weird (C/TSgt on BBDUs and whites & greys), but there it is. And its probably the best solution considering the circumstances, and he's a very active and participating member, so hey, solution in hand, drive on.

What generally happens is that people who have these specific prohibitions (ie. beards, pants) don't tend to gravitate toward CAP. So you get 1-2 people a year who need some accommodation.  OK.  Fine.  Adjust fire and drive on.

If I had a female cadet who couldn't wear pants for some religious reason (can anybody point me at a specific religion that disallows pants on women, BTW? I keep hearing about this religion in a very non specific way. I'd be curious to understand more.), when it came time to wear BDUs, I would probably coordinate some kind of policy exception that put her in a polo shirt & grey skirt or something like that.

Can't wait for the flight-skirt option, in Nomex.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: NIN on October 21, 2014, 10:14:15 AM
Quote from: CadetFaith on October 20, 2014, 07:33:21 PM
I appreciate the informative answers, and apologize if I was confusing, got too personal, or if I've made a big deal out of nothing. Or anything else someone would want me to apologize about, I don't know. :P

No need to apologize.  Honestly, its an interesting situation that CAP units have to address at some level, and there are a LOT of facets to it.  And a LOT of opinions. There are a couple ways to get it right and a number of ways to get it wrong.

The discussion here may often be wide ranging, slide off topic, and come across as negative, but what you see is a cross-section of folks from across the country, in urban and rural areas, red and blue states, who see different socio-economic dynamics, etc, sharing their experience with CAP. Before the Internet, well, nobody knew anybody much beyond the border of their wing, let alone three regions away. Now we have the benefit (and sometimes, disadvantage) of the experience of folks all over the country.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Tim Medeiros on October 21, 2014, 10:24:10 AM
Quote from: NIN on October 21, 2014, 10:04:08 AM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 20, 2014, 10:18:29 PM
How do we address members whose religions prohibit women from wearing pants? I knew some cadets with bdu skirts. Also some religions that don't allow males to cut beards or hair?

Did you KNOW cadets with BDU skirts, or did you HEAR about it?  The number of people who swear they've seen "BDU skirts" makes it sound pretty prevalent. I've seen one world's fair, a picnic and a rodeo, and I've never seen a BDU skirt.  Its like Bigfoot, or a $1000 bill....

<snip>

If I had a female cadet who couldn't wear pants for some religious reason (can anybody point me at a specific religion that disallows pants on women, BTW? I keep hearing about this religion in a very non specific way. I'd be curious to understand more.), when it came time to wear BDUs, I would probably coordinate some kind of policy exception that put her in a polo shirt & grey skirt or something like that.

Can't wait for the flight-skirt option, in Nomex.
Two young ladies (sisters) from ALWG at the time attended an NCSA I was at, I can't remember if I was staffing it or a participant at the time.  At least one of them has since changed her religious views, unfortunately I cannot recall off the top of my head what the former religion was.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Storm Chaser on October 21, 2014, 11:26:16 AM
Quote from: NIN on October 21, 2014, 10:04:08 AM
If I had a female cadet who couldn't wear pants for some religious reason (can anybody point me at a specific religion that disallows pants on women, BTW? I keep hearing about this religion in a very non specific way. I'd be curious to understand more.), when it came time to wear BDUs, I would probably coordinate some kind of policy exception that put her in a polo shirt & grey skirt or something like that.

Can't wait for the flight-skirt option, in Nomex.

The minimum basic uniform "meets the requirements of most CAP events" according to CAPM 39-1. There are only a few instances in which the blue service uniform wouldn't be acceptable. In those few circumstances (field work, for example), a "skirt" wouldn't be practical either. There's no need to make up "solutions" that are not covered in the regulations just to accommodate people. If a female cadet can't wear pants, then she wears the service uniform with skirt and doesn't participate in activities that would require pants such as ground team work.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: LSThiker on October 21, 2014, 11:44:12 AM
Quote from: NIN on October 21, 2014, 10:04:08 AM
If I had a female cadet who couldn't wear pants for some religious reason (can anybody point me at a specific religion that disallows pants on women, BTW? I keep hearing about this religion in a very non specific way. I'd be curious to understand more.), when it came time to wear BDUs, I would probably coordinate some kind of policy exception that put her in a polo shirt & grey skirt or something like that.

There are mennonites, Brahmanites, Orthodox Jew, and the more common specific sects of pentacostal christians.  There are a minority of Catholics that believe as well. 
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: lordmonar on October 21, 2014, 12:46:57 PM
Quote from: NIN on October 21, 2014, 10:04:08 AM
I've seen one world's fair, a picnic and a rodeo, and I've never seen a BDU skirt.  Its like Bigfoot, or a $1000 bill....
You can't say that any more (https://www.etsy.com/listing/200312458/below-the-knee-military-bdu-camo-skirt?utm_source=google&utm_medium=product_listing_promoted&utm_campaign=clothing-women-skirt-low&ione_adtype=pla&ione_creative=54864596075&ione_product_id=200312458&ione_product_partition_id=89242174835&ione_store_code=&ione_device=c&ione_product_channel=online&ione_merchant_id=12768591&ione_product_country=US&ione_product_language=en&gclid=Cj0KEQjwiJiiBRDh3Z-ctPfS5MgBEiQAAlkbQtzpcTJq2wBQWKO4XfussIlntBWS5-6hpBhHUNWerWwaAluF8P8HAQ)
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: NIN on October 21, 2014, 12:50:16 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 21, 2014, 11:26:16 AM
The minimum basic uniform "meets the requirements of most CAP events" according to CAPM 39-1. There are only a few instances in which the blue service uniform wouldn't be acceptable. In those few circumstances (field work, for example), a "skirt" wouldn't be practical either. There's no need to make up "solutions" that are not covered in the regulations just to accommodate people. If a female cadet can't wear pants, then she wears the service uniform with skirt and doesn't participate in activities that would require pants such as ground team work.

I think the "non participation in ground team and similar activities" is more or less a given based on manner of dress. 

I was speaking of a non-pants option when the rest of the unit is in BDUs, within the limitations of good taste and decorum when it comes to "How much can this cadet participate in" when wearing a skirt.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Eclipse on October 21, 2014, 01:09:20 PM
((*cough*))...utilikilt...((*cough*))...
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: go4spaatz on October 21, 2014, 01:31:06 PM
Quote(can anybody point me at a specific religion that disallows pants on women, BTW? I keep hearing about this religion in a very non specific way. I'd be curious to understand more.)

Extremely conservative Baptists. My family *was* for a while. My sister didn't join CAP because of the pants issue with BDUs. My parents felt if you couldn't fit in with the organization, and follow uniformity, you shouldn't really join. That said, my previous church actually had no female members who wore pants, ever.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Майор Хаткевич on October 21, 2014, 01:58:25 PM
Quote from: Tim Medeiros on October 21, 2014, 10:24:10 AM
Quote from: NIN on October 21, 2014, 10:04:08 AM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 20, 2014, 10:18:29 PM
How do we address members whose religions prohibit women from wearing pants? I knew some cadets with bdu skirts. Also some religions that don't allow males to cut beards or hair?

Did you KNOW cadets with BDU skirts, or did you HEAR about it?  The number of people who swear they've seen "BDU skirts" makes it sound pretty prevalent. I've seen one world's fair, a picnic and a rodeo, and I've never seen a BDU skirt.  Its like Bigfoot, or a $1000 bill....

<snip>

If I had a female cadet who couldn't wear pants for some religious reason (can anybody point me at a specific religion that disallows pants on women, BTW? I keep hearing about this religion in a very non specific way. I'd be curious to understand more.), when it came time to wear BDUs, I would probably coordinate some kind of policy exception that put her in a polo shirt & grey skirt or something like that.

Can't wait for the flight-skirt option, in Nomex.
Two young ladies (sisters) from ALWG at the time attended an NCSA I was at, I can't remember if I was staffing it or a participant at the time.  At least one of them has since changed her religious views, unfortunately I cannot recall off the top of my head what the former religion was.

2005, and I believe you were a blackhat. I was 15, and called her Alabama. I fell in love with her southern drawl. Still have a picture with one of the sisters somewhere from departure day. Don't remember  the sect she was part of either.

Also, Nin:
(http://coinsite.com/wp-content/uploads/specimen-us-1000-bill.jpg)
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: NIN on October 21, 2014, 02:12:15 PM
Quote from: go4spaatz on October 21, 2014, 01:31:06 PM
Extremely conservative Baptists. My family *was* for a while. My sister didn't join CAP because of the pants issue with BDUs. My parents felt if you couldn't fit in with the organization, and follow uniformity, you shouldn't really join. That said, my previous church actually had no female members who wore pants, ever.

Hmmmm. Yeah, gotta love the Bible Belt, eh? :)

Title: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Storm Chaser on October 21, 2014, 02:33:54 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on October 21, 2014, 12:46:57 PM
Quote from: NIN on October 21, 2014, 10:04:08 AM
I've seen one world's fair, a picnic and a rodeo, and I've never seen a BDU skirt.  Its like Bigfoot, or a $1000 bill....
You can't say that any more (https://www.etsy.com/listing/200312458/below-the-knee-military-bdu-camo-skirt?utm_source=google&utm_medium=product_listing_promoted&utm_campaign=clothing-women-skirt-low&ione_adtype=pla&ione_creative=54864596075&ione_product_id=200312458&ione_product_partition_id=89242174835&ione_store_code=&ione_device=c&ione_product_channel=online&ione_merchant_id=12768591&ione_product_country=US&ione_product_language=en&gclid=Cj0KEQjwiJiiBRDh3Z-ctPfS5MgBEiQAAlkbQtzpcTJq2wBQWKO4XfussIlntBWS5-6hpBhHUNWerWwaAluF8P8HAQ)

Does that option come with flip flops for those who don't want to wear combat boots? :D

Quote from: NIN on October 21, 2014, 12:50:16 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 21, 2014, 11:26:16 AM
The minimum basic uniform "meets the requirements of most CAP events" according to CAPM 39-1. There are only a few instances in which the blue service uniform wouldn't be acceptable. In those few circumstances (field work, for example), a "skirt" wouldn't be practical either. There's no need to make up "solutions" that are not covered in the regulations just to accommodate people. If a female cadet can't wear pants, then she wears the service uniform with skirt and doesn't participate in activities that would require pants such as ground team work.

I think the "non participation in ground team and similar activities" is more or less a given based on manner of dress. 

I was speaking of a non-pants option when the rest of the unit is in BDUs, within the limitations of good taste and decorum when it comes to "How much can this cadet participate in" when wearing a skirt.

If a uniform is not approved by CAP/CC (and published accordingly), it's not a CAP uniform. Period. Local units are not allowed to get "creative" when it comes to uniforms. If a female cadet can't wear pants, then she only wears the AF-style service uniform with skirt and only participates in those activities that don't require pants. If it was a male cadet who couldn't wear pants for whatever reasons, then he just can't participate in CAP. The same goes for grooming standards such as haircut.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: NIN on October 21, 2014, 02:45:13 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 21, 2014, 02:33:54 PM
If a uniform is not approved by CAP/CC, it's not a CAP uniform. Period. Local units are not allowed get "creative" when it comes to uniforms. If a female cadet can't wear pants, then she only wears the AF-style service uniform with skirt and only participates in those activities that don't require pants. If it was a male cadet who couldn't wear pants for whatever reasons, then he just can't participate in CAP. The same goes for grooming standards such as haircut.

Not entirely true.  Like I said before, we have a C/TSgt who has a religious accommodation for grooming and wears BBDUs and white/grey. Technically thats not a cadet uniform per 39-1, right? But there it is. 

I'm sure that some sort of dispensation has been coordinated thru NHQ/DP or similar. I don't believe that this cadet just showed up in BBDUs and said "Hey, here I am!"

It works. Its not perfect, but it works, and it allows the organization to accommodate a member's religious beliefs without too much craziness.

That cadet is wearing a CAP-distinctive uniform (BBDUs or whites/greys) that is properly the same as anybody else in CAP wearing that uniform (senior members, that is), but he's a cadet.

Making something totally different up, like a BDU skirt, is an entirely different kettle of fish (and I would agree that its not authorized. Period).  But having a female cadet who is not allowed to wear pants for religious reasons participate in either their blues (with a skirt) or, potentially, in a golf/polo shirt combo with the grey skirt as a "more of a work uniform", while everybody else is in BDUs as a UOD, is likely the more reasonable and appropriate option than making stuff up like a BDU skirt.


Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Eclipse on October 21, 2014, 02:47:16 PM
Quote from: NIN on October 21, 2014, 02:45:13 PM
I'm sure that some sort of dispensation has been coordinated thru NHQ/DP or similar. I don't believe that this cadet just showed up in BBDUs and said "Hey, here I am!"

You might want to actually confirm that...
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Storm Chaser on October 21, 2014, 02:49:39 PM
I don't have a problem with cadets wearing CAP distinctive uniforms if approved by NHQ and published in CAPM 39-1. What I said was that it's not up to the local commander to make that determination. 
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: NIN on October 21, 2014, 02:59:33 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on October 21, 2014, 02:47:16 PM
Quote from: NIN on October 21, 2014, 02:45:13 PM
I'm sure that some sort of dispensation has been coordinated thru NHQ/DP or similar. I don't believe that this cadet just showed up in BBDUs and said "Hey, here I am!"

You might want to actually confirm that...

Why?

This cadet participates in wing and national activities in these uniforms, specifically ES training and missions here, and HRMS and Blue Beret nationally. 

He's not in my squadron. Why is it my responsibility to insert my beak where it doesn't belong?

I have been told by knowledgeable parties that a solution was sought and coordinated thru channels, and that this cadet is "good to go." Is that not good enough? Do I march up to the wing commander and demand to see the email chain or a written authorization from NHQ?

At a certain point, you need to basically assume that people are doing what they're supposed to be doing and that when a commander or someone with more knowledge of the situation says "Its been handled thru channels," then its on them. 

And if I don't miss my guess by too much, this cadet has the written authorization photocopied and in his wallet or something. 


Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Eclipse on October 21, 2014, 03:12:05 PM
For starters I thought the cadet was in your unit.  If he's not in your AOR, then I agree, not your problem.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: NIN on October 21, 2014, 03:39:13 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on October 21, 2014, 03:12:05 PM
For starters I thought the cadet was in your unit.  If he's not in your AOR, then I agree, not your problem.

This one has gone far enough afield of OP's original intent, but we've just spent time (hours?) discussing the authorization of one cadet to wear non-cadet uniforms for the purposes of religious accommodation.  ONE cadet out of SEVERAL HUNDRED in my wing.

Yet, I submit to you, the larger issues at hand are the larger plurality of cadets (and seniors) who don't wear the wrong uniform, but rather, wear the uniform wrongly.  Not just in my wing, but all over the country. And I'm not talking just the egregious "berets and campaign hats crap that we just made up on the spot" wrongly, I'm talking "trying to wear the uniform correctly per 39-1, with no other modifications, and failing miserably."


This is not a CAP-Talk specific issue, BTW, focusing on the .01% exception rather than the > 30% rule.  But it is indicative of how we're happy to pounce on the ONE guy who in someone's estimation "is wrong," but at the same time we (the organizational "we") can't be bothered to address and enforce the rules on the many members who show up with bad haircuts, no shave, wrong colored t-shirts, insignia all over the map, out of weight standards, etc.

Its almost like "we can gang up on this one guy, but heaven forbid we tell a bunch of folks they're wrong."





Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Eclipse on October 21, 2014, 04:07:59 PM
I dunno, I call out the organization as a whole, and the leadership, specifically, for the lack of will and
command imperative in that regard on a regular basis, only to be told, specifically, by those leaders that
they don't feel it is within their mandate to get involved.

I have had to deal with these exception issues on a larger scale, and much more often, as I'm sure you
have, then the average member who participates primarily at their home squadron.

For the most part these "exceptions", approved or otherwise, tend not to bubble up until an encampment,
NCSA, SAREx or similar activity where the member is away from their home leadership and any "allowances"
that leadership has chosen to make outside actual authority, and then it's a urination match between
parents and leaders because some unit CC couldn't be bothered (etc.) to either get things properly approved,
or explain the program properly.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: JeffDG on October 21, 2014, 05:20:40 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on October 21, 2014, 04:07:59 PM
For the most part these "exceptions", approved or otherwise, tend not to bubble up until an encampment,
NCSA, SAREx or similar activity where the member is away from their home leadership and any "allowances"
that leadership has chosen to make outside actual authority, and then it's a urination match between
parents and leaders because some unit CC couldn't be bothered (etc.) to either get things properly approved,
or explain the program properly.

That's actually not exclusive to "unofficial" accommodations.  Let's take the case at hand in the OP.

Let's say they route it through the CoC and NHQ grants a waiver for this cadet to wear the female uniform, including grooming standards.  Now, I'm doing sign-in for a SAREX, checking IDs and such, and see someone in BDUs show up who is, obviously, outside of male grooming standards but the ID card says "male".  Now, I'm not privy to the waiver granted, nor should I (or even if I'm the IC) be, it's really none of my business 99.9% of the time. 

What kind of documentation should be presented to the mission staff at that point?  The cadet would be entitled to wear the BDU uniform as presented, and approved by NHQ (as the OPR has the authority to waive regulations when appropriate), but if I'm the IC, I'm going to want to see some evidence of that (because I'll get you good money the issue gets kicked up to the IC eventually, because nobody's going to have a clue what to do!)
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Storm Chaser on October 21, 2014, 05:51:27 PM
Unless there was a legal gender change, I don't see why NHQ would make such accommodations.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Eclipse on October 21, 2014, 05:55:59 PM
Quote from: JeffDG on October 21, 2014, 05:20:40 PMNow, I'm not privy to the waiver granted, nor should I (or even if I'm the IC) be, it's really none of my business 99.9% of the time.

Disagree - as IC or member otherwise in command or in charge, it's incumbent upon you in insure that all members
are qualified to participate, which includes their being in proper uniform.   It's not unreasonable for a member expecting this
sort of accommodation to have to present the documentation of the waiver to those in charge.  Presumably there are grooming
issues to be addressed as well.

You don't need, necessarily, to know why, the accommodation was granted, but yo need to know that it was, and the boundaries of it.
"Cadet Simpson is hereby granted a waiver to 39-1 in that he is allowed to forgo the requirements to be clean shaven, and will
wear the blue field uniform to any activity where other cadets are required to wear the woodland camouflage BDU."

Quote from: JeffDG on October 21, 2014, 05:20:40 PM
What kind of documentation should be presented to the mission staff at that point? 

The letter of waiver or other approval from NHQ, which should also be attached to any applications
for activities like encampments, etc.

Since all cadets require F32s for all activities now, it should be attached to that when submitted.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Chappie on October 21, 2014, 08:04:42 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on October 21, 2014, 11:44:12 AM
Quote from: NIN on October 21, 2014, 10:04:08 AM
If I had a female cadet who couldn't wear pants for some religious reason (can anybody point me at a specific religion that disallows pants on women, BTW? I keep hearing about this religion in a very non specific way. I'd be curious to understand more.), when it came time to wear BDUs, I would probably coordinate some kind of policy exception that put her in a polo shirt & grey skirt or something like that.

There are mennonites, Brahmanites, Orthodox Jew, and the more common specific sects of pentacostal christians.  There are a minority of Catholics that believe as well.

There are definitely those groups.  They interpret a passage in Deut. 22:5 that reads: "A woman must not wear men's clothing, nor a man wear women's clothing, for the LORD your God detests anyone who does this." as women should not wear pants.   I was an Associate Pastor in a church back in the early 70's for a very short time.   Did not last long.   My wife wore pant suits to work and the Senior Pastor kept harping on this (as well as her pierced ears)...a could not and would not submit to their from of "Biblical legalism".
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: NIN on October 21, 2014, 08:10:24 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on October 21, 2014, 05:55:59 PM
The letter of waiver or other approval from NHQ, which should also be attached to any applications
for activities like encampments, etc.

Since all cadets require F32s for all activities now, it should be attached to that when submitted.

No.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Cadetter on October 21, 2014, 08:18:45 PM
Quote from: Chappie on October 21, 2014, 08:04:42 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on October 21, 2014, 11:44:12 AM
Quote from: NIN on October 21, 2014, 10:04:08 AM
If I had a female cadet who couldn't wear pants for some religious reason (can anybody point me at a specific religion that disallows pants on women, BTW? I keep hearing about this religion in a very non specific way. I'd be curious to understand more.), when it came time to wear BDUs, I would probably coordinate some kind of policy exception that put her in a polo shirt & grey skirt or something like that.

There are mennonites, Brahmanites, Orthodox Jew, and the more common specific sects of pentacostal christians.  There are a minority of Catholics that believe as well.

There are definitely those groups.  They interpret a passage in Deut. 22:5 that reads: "A woman must not wear men's clothing, nor a man wear women's clothing, for the LORD your God detests anyone who does this." as women should not wear pants.   I was an Associate Pastor in a church back in the early 70's for a very short time.   Did not last long.   My wife wore pant suits to work and the Senior Pastor kept harping on this (as well as her pierced ears)...a could not and would not submit to their from of "Biblical legalism".

Some of my family's best friends felt that way. Were shocked that I would wear pants.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Майор Хаткевич on October 21, 2014, 08:33:33 PM
Not a biblical scholar...but when those passages were written...I don't think ANYONE wore pants...
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Cadetter on October 21, 2014, 08:37:59 PM
From what I've studied, you are correct...
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: JeffDG on October 21, 2014, 08:39:33 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on October 21, 2014, 05:55:59 PM
Quote from: JeffDG on October 21, 2014, 05:20:40 PM
What kind of documentation should be presented to the mission staff at that point? 

The letter of waiver or other approval from NHQ, which should also be attached to any applications
for activities like encampments, etc.

Since all cadets require F32s for all activities now, it should be attached to that when submitted.

Good points.  For me, I would accept a letter from the Squadron/CC clearly stating that a waiver of such-and-such from NHQ was on file at the squadron.  I tend to give the "Integrity" thing some weight, and if they're willing to sign their name to it, so be it.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Eclipse on October 21, 2014, 09:13:47 PM
Fair enough I probably would too though depending on who that was, I'd probably trust but verify.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: a2capt on October 21, 2014, 09:42:59 PM
Bryan Bowers - The Scotsman (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoUV5d09JZw#)
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Wispin on October 22, 2014, 07:19:07 AM
I've been lurking for a few years and never made an account on CAPTalk, but this topic caught my attention.

First, CadetFaith, let me start by saying that you aren't the only one that's had this issue in CAP. I've been in CAP for a little over 3 years now, as a Cadet recently-turned Senior Member. I'm transgender myself, and have been seeing a psychologist and endocrinologist for treatment. That, obviously, creates the issue that my body will be changing in some pretty radical ways over the next year.

Service is important to me (as I'm sure it is with you, as you mention your interest in the military and CAP activities) and I've been heavily involved with ES, SAR and DR, both in CAP and elsewhere. Right now, I serve as the ES officer for my squadron. The idea of transitioning within the context of a CAP squadron bothers me for several reasons, not the least of which because I live in a religious area - it's not that I fear discrimination for myself, but rather that I don't want to negatively impact the ability of other cadets to experience CAP because of any bigotry their parents might hold, for instance. I don't view that as fair to those cadets (or prospective ones), and I want to avoid harming my squadron. It seems pretty horrible to have to think that way, and perhaps I shouldn't be so forgiving of the horrid behaviors of others, but it is what it is. Maybe someday in the future it'll all work out, but sadly I think our generation is going to have to be the trailblazers on this one.

One of the reasons I became a senior member rather than remaining a cadet is, in fact, grooming standards. The corporate uniforms provide a neat way to dodge grooming standards.. but what I didn't realize, and what might be your saving grace, is that the corporate style uniforms are technically permitted for use by cadets. It's obviously something that you're going to have to work out with your squadron - and, as you doubtless know, a tough conversation to have. It's a conversation I'm not looking forward to having with my commanders, but one I'm sure will have to come up sooner rather than later.

If I had any advice for you, it would be to definitely see a psychologist who is experienced in gender identity issues. It has nothing to do with "diagnosing" you with a disorder - in fact, the new DSM-5 takes a bit of a different stance (http://"http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/04/gender-dysphoria-dsm-5_n_3385287.html") on the topic - and everything to do with helping you figure yourself out. If you decide that transitioning is what you want, they can help you along the path. It's a hard one, to be sure .. and the earlier you figure yourself out, the better off you'll be. Finally, if the psychologist seems like he has an objective or agenda - to convince you that you are or are not really transgender - run away. Like any other medical professional, they work for you .. and you have the right to fire them. There are other fish in the sea, and this is an important aspect of your life. In a situation that's already terrifying and requires immense amounts of bravery to confront, the last thing you want is yet another person attempting to influence you. You'll probably get enough of that from your parents and peers. It's not a very safe world out there for trans people at the moment, either, and violence and murder happen to us at an astronomically higher rate than the general population. Just be careful and keep your head up. "Semper Vigilans" are good watchwords to live by.

Unfortunately, unlike more enlightened NATO militaries like that of Canada and the United Kingdom, the U.S. military doesn't permit transgender people to serve. You can pretend you're cisgender and get in, but stop and think for a second how bad that dysphoria might be - if you're experiencing it getting haircuts right now, for CAP, for example .. and think very carefully about whether or not it's worth it to you. Personally, I've resolved to dedicate my life to service, and I've found that there are other ways to do so and make just as much of an impact.

Here's an interesting book written by a female-to-male transgender CAP cadet. It's a bit of a different perspective than what you and I will face, since CAP's culture encourages masculinity (obviously), but it's still a good read. (http://books.google.com/books?id=0oMNAwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false (http://books.google.com/books?id=0oMNAwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false)) Ultimately, and sadly however, his decision is to quit CAP. I've heard a story or two of other trans people choosing the same thing, and it breaks my heart, because I love CAP and don't want to leave. I don't see too many other options though, unless there's some changes made to make it easier to stick around - or I work up the courage and get exceedingly lucky with my squadron. Depending on where you live, how big your squadron is, and what your commanders are like .. you might have better (or worse) luck. It's something of a grab bag, I think.

On an unrelated comment, I'm pretty pleased thus far at the reaction to this thread .. it's not at all as harsh as I was expecting from such a topic. Thank you all for that.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Private Investigator on October 22, 2014, 08:43:06 AM
Wispin, welcome to CAP Talk and thank you for sharing.  8)
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Eclipse on October 22, 2014, 11:55:40 AM
Quote from: Wispin on October 22, 2014, 07:19:07 AMOne of the reasons I became a senior member rather than remaining a cadet is, in fact, grooming standards. The corporate uniforms provide a neat way to dodge grooming standards.. but what I didn't realize, and what might be your saving grace, is that the corporate style uniforms are technically permitted for use by cadets.

The corporate uniforms do not provide an avenue to "dodge" grooming standards - the standards are different.

Absent a waiver or other accommodation, cadets must be over 18 and ineligible for the USAF style uniforms due to
being unable to meet weight standards, not simply as a personal option.

Further, regardless of uniform choice, cadets are required to meet the USAF standards of grooming.

CAPM 39-1 Page 6
1.2.3.2. Cadets will wear the USAF-style uniforms as outlined in this manual as a key
component of their cadet experience. However, cadets over age 18 who are not eligible to wear the
USAF-style uniforms due to not meeting weight standards
are authorized to wear all Corporate-style
uniform combinations, except the Corporate Working Uniform since it does not allow for wear of rank
insignia.


CAPM 39-1 Page 20

3.3. Corporate-style Uniform and Member's Wearing Civilian Attire at CAP Events Grooming
Standards. Members must comply with the requirements of this paragraph and sub-paragraphs to wear
the Corporate-style uniform. Additionally, even if not in Corporate-style uniform and wearing civilian
attire, members are expected to comply with these guidelines when at CAP events or on official CAP
duty. Cadets wearing Corporate-style uniforms are required to meet USAF-style uniform grooming standards.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: NIN on October 22, 2014, 12:37:00 PM
Quote from: Wispin on October 22, 2014, 07:19:07 AM
On an unrelated comment, I'm pretty pleased thus far at the reaction to this thread .. it's not at all as harsh as I was expecting from such a topic. Thank you all for that.

Occasionally, we have the ability to be smart, funny, respectful, factual and informative.. and all in the same thread. :)

Its only when people lose sight of the overarching core values of the organization we ostensibly belong to , respect being the biggie, that the mods & the community rise up... LOL.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: MajorM on October 22, 2014, 06:55:50 PM
Our school district is working through this issue right now. Much of the legal discussion is not settled. The challenge, legally, is that DOE's Office of Civil Rights (who sets guidance for Title IX) has issued dear colleague letters on the issue. OCR has said they will consider transgender discrimination claims under the purview of gender discrimination. This is significant. Homosexuality is not a protected federal class and thus is not applicable to Title IX. But by treating it as a gender issue it does potentially become a Title IX concern. This does not mean the law is settled. Far from it... It simply means that OCR will not dismiss complaints and will consider investigation.

Federal funding brings with it many strings, and one is gender parity under Title IX. There may be other potential avenues, but IX seems the most likely.

Note that there is little case law on this at present. Only the Ninth Circuit has issued anything on it, but that guidance is only applicable to its circuit.

Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: PHall on October 22, 2014, 08:31:44 PM
The Ninth is the only circuit to rule on it because the other circuits haven't had a case reach them to rule on yet.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Майор Хаткевич on October 22, 2014, 09:10:16 PM
Quote from: PHall on October 22, 2014, 08:31:44 PM
The Ninth is the only circuit to rule on it because the other circuits haven't had a case reach them to rule on yet.


I was under the impression that circuit courts take into consideration other circuit court rulings? Guess I'll have to study up on my civics again.


Edit: So I'm not completely insane: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circuit_split (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circuit_split)
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: PHall on October 22, 2014, 09:16:16 PM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 22, 2014, 09:10:16 PM
Quote from: PHall on October 22, 2014, 08:31:44 PM
The Ninth is the only circuit to rule on it because the other circuits haven't had a case reach them to rule on yet.


I was under the impression that circuit courts take into consideration other circuit court rulings? Guess I'll have to study up on my civics again.


Edit: So I'm not completely insane: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circuit_split (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circuit_split)

A court can't rule on a case that is not before it. i.e. The 2nd Circuit can not rule on a case that is before the 4th Circuit.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Майор Хаткевич on October 22, 2014, 10:18:29 PM
Obviously. But they can take it into account.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: PHall on October 23, 2014, 12:14:07 AM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 22, 2014, 10:18:29 PM
Obviously. But they can take it into account.

And a court can't rule on a case until that case is before it. Then they can use all the legal precedant they want.
But until the case is before them they can do nada.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Wispin on October 23, 2014, 09:26:14 AM
We can discuss legal issues here all day long and play armchair lawyer, but the question is not "What is legal?" but "What is right?".

One of our core values is volunteer service, and another is respect. The bottom line is .. if there is an individual that wants to serve, shouldn't they have an environment that respects them as individuals, and doesn't exclude them needlessly because a core facet of their existence doesn't jive with our (arbitrary!) ideas of grooming and uniformity? Yes, it's a "military" organization .. but I don't have to wear AF-styled BDUs to contribute meaningfully to a SAR mission, nor do I have to wear dress blues to look sharp at a promotion ceremony.

It might not work in the "normal" way of doing things .. but that's why there should be a policy about it, so that the "normal" way of doing things reflects reality.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Storm Chaser on October 24, 2014, 03:44:51 AM
Quote from: Wispin on October 23, 2014, 09:26:14 AM
Yes, it's a "military" organization .. but I don't have to wear AF-styled BDUs to contribute meaningfully to a SAR mission, nor do I have to wear dress blues to look sharp at a promotion ceremony.

You also don't have to be a member of CAP or participate in the Cadet Programs. But if you choose to do so, then you need to comply with the appropriate regulations and standards.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: MSG Mac on October 24, 2014, 02:56:07 PM
No matter your opinion(s) regarding this cadet's sexual status, he did ask a legitimate question regarding how CAP will respond to his possible transgender status. This is a situation which, as Wispin alluded to, may be a little bit less rare than we want to believe. CAP is not the Air Force, and doesn't have the restriction on membership that the Armed Forces do, nor the legal protections against discrimination which the DOD has.

Cadet Faith this this matter should be referred to NHQ for some kind of relief to your situation. Seeing you're from Maryland, you may want to attend the Wing Conference Nov 7-8, where MG Vasquez will be visiting and present your concerns to him, if only to get the ball rolling (You too, Wispin).
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: SARDOC on October 25, 2014, 02:36:26 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on October 20, 2014, 07:55:30 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on October 20, 2014, 04:51:46 PMThe USAF can limit a lot of things while CAP cannot due to our civilian status.

Cannot?  CAP is a private organization with "at will" membership.  It can, and does, limit anything it wants.

Further, the USAF determines the wear standards for all of CAP's uniforms, and therefore has the final word on who can where which
styles and the manner in which they will be worn, including any grooming issues.

Also to caveat, that the membership in Civil Air Patrol is a Privilege and not a Right, the Organization has a lot of say over who can and can't be a member.  Protected Classes can't be discriminated against but if there are issues with maintaining good order that is another argument all together.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: spaatzmom on October 26, 2014, 01:39:05 AM
Quote from: Tim Medeiros on October 21, 2014, 10:24:10 AM
Quote from: NIN on October 21, 2014, 10:04:08 AM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 20, 2014, 10:18:29 PM
How do we address members whose religions prohibit women from wearing pants? I knew some cadets with bdu skirts. Also some religions that don't allow males to cut beards or hair?

Did you KNOW cadets with BDU skirts, or did you HEAR about it?  The number of people who swear they've seen "BDU skirts" makes it sound pretty prevalent. I've seen one world's fair, a picnic and a rodeo, and I've never seen a BDU skirt.  Its like Bigfoot, or a $1000 bill....

<snip>

If I had a female cadet who couldn't wear pants for some religious reason (can anybody point me at a specific religion that disallows pants on women, BTW? I keep hearing about this religion in a very non specific way. I'd be curious to understand more.), when it came time to wear BDUs, I would probably coordinate some kind of policy exception that put her in a polo shirt & grey skirt or something like that.

Can't wait for the flight-skirt option, in Nomex.
Two young ladies (sisters) from ALWG at the time attended an NCSA I was at, I can't remember if I was staffing it or a participant at the time.  At least one of them has since changed her religious views, unfortunately I cannot recall off the top of my head what the former religion was.


It was an extreme interpretation held by this branch of Pentecostals.  The issue was brought up well before the event and was determined by legal at NHQ that the girls did not have to were pants, but did have to find the correct and matching material to make their skirts out of if they could not find a pre made skirt.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Майор Хаткевич on October 26, 2014, 04:17:53 AM
Thank you ma'am!
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Johnny Yuma on October 26, 2014, 04:28:38 AM
Quote from: CadetFaith on October 20, 2014, 02:58:05 PM
(Apologies if this isn't in the best fitting board)

So, I'm a male Cadet Airman Basic in the Maryland Wing that's been in Civil Air Patrol for roughly 5 months or so (going off the top of my head). I love the activities, comradery, and wearing the uniform. However, (and it's kind of strange to explain on this forum) I'm very unhappy with myself, and, for several reasons, believe I may be potentially happier as a male-to-female transgender. As I've developed these feelings, getting haircuts to fit Civil Air Patrol has become more and more uncomfortable and anxious.
Are there any past cases of, or validity to, requesting something like permission to abide by female grooming standards desite being biologically male? I understand the importance of respecting the Air Force uniforms we've been allowed to wear; I just don't want to have to either wait until I'm 21 or prematurily leave the cadet program to even begin growing out my hair like, y'know, a girl.

Sorry for the somewhat uncomfortable topic!

You're not going to like hearing this, but its the truth...

You were born a male or a female. It is literally engrained in your DNA and nothing will ever change this. No amount of believing, funny dressing,  counseling, drug therapy and disfiguring surgery will ever change a man into a woman or vice versa. You are who you are and I'd suggest you work on finding out how to be happy with you and your life living in your own skin, as it were.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: lordmonar on October 26, 2014, 04:42:43 AM
I'm at a loss for words Johnny.....
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: stillamarine on October 26, 2014, 03:49:58 PM
Well there went the civil conversation.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Johnny Yuma on October 26, 2014, 03:52:19 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on October 26, 2014, 04:42:43 AM
I'm at a loss for words Johnny.....

I'm calling it as I've seen it.

At my employ, we've had several male employees decide they were actually women, 2 of them in my department. Then there's the ones I know of from within our circle of friends and acquaintances that were at all different stages from dressing female to the full "reassignment" surgery farce. Despite all their efforts very few of them ended up living happy lives and of all the ones I know of only 1 lived beyond 60 thanks to the suicides, victims of homicide at the hands of their lover, drug addiction, acute and long term complications from surgery, etc. All too often there are additional underlying issues going on that this doesn't fix.

Once he's 18, or 21, depending on the doctors, he can do what he wants to except violate CAP regs. However from everything I've seen this path hasn't been a happy one for many I've seen take it.   
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Garibaldi on October 26, 2014, 05:13:07 PM
Someone please lock the thread before someone really goes off.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: LSThiker on October 26, 2014, 05:29:10 PM
Quote from: Johnny Yuma on October 26, 2014, 03:52:19 PM
Despite all their efforts very few of them ended up living happy lives and of all the ones I know of only 1 lived beyond 60 thanks to the suicides, victims of homicide at the hands of their lover, drug addiction, acute and long term complications from surgery, etc.

Maybe because transgender persons are told things like this:

Quote from: Johnny Yuma on October 26, 2014, 04:28:38 AMNo amount of believing, funny dressing,  counseling, drug therapy and disfiguring surgery will ever change a man into a woman or vice versa. You are who you are and I'd suggest you work on finding out how to be happy with you and your life living in your own skin, as it were.

Now I am not transgender, but I remeber how hard it was dropping my christianity and accepting atheism. The first time I publically said it, I was beaten up by Christians. In following days, I received death threats. For years, I was a closet atheist And living an unhappy life. It was until I found support groups I finally became comfortable to publically say I was an atheist. Since that time, I have lived a more happy life.

Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: NIN on October 26, 2014, 06:04:02 PM
Quote from: spaatzmom on October 26, 2014, 01:39:05 AM
It was an extreme interpretation held by this branch of Pentecostals.  The issue was brought up well before the event and was determined by legal at NHQ that the girls did not have to were pants, but did have to find the correct and matching material to make their skirts out of if they could not find a pre made skirt.

Wow. I'm stunned that NHQ would have come up with that particular solution, unless it was well coordinated thru the USAF side of the house.  its not like we can just go making major mods to the USAF-style uniforms on our own.

Imagine being on a base and having to explain yourself to the Base Commander or similar.  Falls under my "if it looks wrong, it is wrong" concept with the USAF uniforms and the USAF.   We might think its "right" but to big momma Blue, its not.

I saw this today, reminded me of the BDU skirt discussion.. LOL
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpf1/v/t1.0-9/64245_868439373195496_7524885051289482445_n.jpg?oh=e4c419d4cdd66afa58b1746beeb71d24&oe=54F7C80B&__gda__=1423967456_034e80ae7a7a19a409e9976c3f36acde)
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Eclipse on October 26, 2014, 06:23:11 PM
Quote from: spaatzmom on October 26, 2014, 01:39:05 AMIt was an extreme interpretation held by this branch of Pentecostals.  The issue was brought up well before the event and was determined by legal at NHQ that the girls did not have to were pants, but did have to find the correct and matching material to make their skirts out of if they could not find a pre made skirt.

This was something you personally were involved in and / or saw, or something you "heard".

Sounds apocryphal to me, and well outside NHQ's authority.  As NIN says, good luck on a base or interacting with other military agencies.
Not to mention how would you inspect them as compared to their peers?  etc., etc.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Storm Chaser on October 26, 2014, 06:53:15 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on October 26, 2014, 06:23:11 PM
Quote from: spaatzmom on October 26, 2014, 01:39:05 AMIt was an extreme interpretation held by this branch of Pentecostals.  The issue was brought up well before the event and was determined by legal at NHQ that the girls did not have to were pants, but did have to find the correct and matching material to make their skirts out of if they could not find a pre made skirt.

This was something you personally were involved in and / or saw, or something you "heard".

Sounds apocryphal to me, and well outside NHQ's authority.  As NIN says, good luck on a base or interacting with other military agencies.
Not to mention how would you inspect them as compared to their peers?  etc., etc.

+1. According to CAPM 39-1, only the CAP/CC can grant uniform waivers. And even then, he or she is restricted by the authority that CAP-USAF has over the AF-style uniform. One thing would be to grant a waiver for a cadet to wear the corporate uniform and another all together to modify the AF-style uniform without express authorization of CAP-USAF. Neither NHQ nor the CAP/CC have the authority to do the latter.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: a2capt on October 26, 2014, 07:07:35 PM
Has it always been that way, that only the CAP/CC can grant uniform waivers?

...how far back was this, maybe it wasn't on the level all the way up, maybe it wasn't on a base and that's why someone might have bent a little to provide an opportunity for some cadets in a way that wasn't likely to cause any foundations to crumble, rather than shoving regulations at them?
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: NIN on October 26, 2014, 07:22:17 PM
Quote from: a2capt on October 26, 2014, 07:07:35 PM
Has it always been that way, that only the CAP/CC can grant uniform waivers?

...how far back was this, maybe it wasn't on the level all the way up, maybe it wasn't on a base and that's why someone might have bent a little to provide an opportunity for some cadets in a way that wasn't likely to cause any foundations to crumble, rather than shoving regulations at them?

Well, it pretty much always (to my lame remembery) has been that modifications to the uniform outside the bounds of that which has been published in 39-1 has to come from NHQ (usually /DP, the OPR).

I'm not much one to shove regs at anybody, but there is a difference between "providing cadets an opportunity to participate" and "making things up as we go along."

"Gee, cadet, I understand your parents are hippies who have a real serious problem with the military-industrial complex, so we'll just allow you to not participate in the cadet portions of the cadet program. Why, yes, you can wear that nehru jacket..."

The program, for the most part, is the program.  Participate under the auspices of the program, or don't.   There are mechanisms and precedents that allow members with religious restrictions (ie. grooming, clothing wear) to be accommodated within the framework of our existing uniforms without going to a length to actually create a uniform that doesn't exist.

Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: rustyjeeper on October 26, 2014, 07:25:26 PM
Quote from: Garibaldi on October 26, 2014, 05:13:07 PM
Someone please lock the thread before someone really goes off.


+1
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Storm Chaser on October 26, 2014, 07:44:57 PM
I for one think we've been discussing this matter in a civil way. Just because someone expressed a differing opinion doesn't mean that we're not being civil anymore. That's the problem with today's society. If we can't agree on the things that matter most to us at the core or that are a sensitive subject to some, then we prefer not to discuss them at all. Well, that's not how the real world works.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: a2capt on October 26, 2014, 07:57:01 PM
Quote from: Storm Chaser on October 26, 2014, 07:44:57 PM... Well, that's not how the real world works.
+1
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: spaatzmom on October 26, 2014, 08:53:34 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on October 26, 2014, 06:23:11 PM
Quote from: spaatzmom on October 26, 2014, 01:39:05 AMIt was an extreme interpretation held by this branch of Pentecostals.  The issue was brought up well before the event and was determined by legal at NHQ that the girls did not have to wear pants, but did have to find the correct and matching material to make their skirts out of if they could not find a pre made skirt.

This was something you personally were involved in and / or saw, or something you "heard".

Sounds apocryphal to me, and well outside NHQ's authority.  As NIN says, good luck on a base or interacting with other military agencies.
Not to mention how would you inspect them as compared to their peers?  etc., etc.

Personally was involved in and / or saw.  I would not post anything to do with hearsay without such a disclaimer. 
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Johnny Yuma on October 26, 2014, 10:30:57 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on October 26, 2014, 05:29:10 PM
Quote from: Johnny Yuma on October 26, 2014, 03:52:19 PM
Despite all their efforts very few of them ended up living happy lives and of all the ones I know of only 1 lived beyond 60 thanks to the suicides, victims of homicide at the hands of their lover, drug addiction, acute and long term complications from surgery, etc.

Maybe because transgender persons are told things like this:

Quote from: Johnny Yuma on October 26, 2014, 04:28:38 AMNo amount of believing, funny dressing,  counseling, drug therapy and disfiguring surgery will ever change a man into a woman or vice versa. You are who you are and I'd suggest you work on finding out how to be happy with you and your life living in your own skin, as it were.

Now I am not transgender, but I remeber how hard it was dropping my christianity and accepting atheism. The first time I publically said it, I was beaten up by Christians. In following days, I received death threats. For years, I was a closet atheist And living an unhappy life. It was until I found support groups I finally became comfortable to publically say I was an atheist. Since that time, I have lived a more happy life.


Gender assignment is fundamental within your DNA, period. No procedure, hormone, drug or surgery will ever change that. You can have procedures done that will help you pretend you're something you're not, but your genetic makeup remains and bottom line means that that person will never fully function as their "new" gender.   

How anyone can interpret this as hatred or bias for anyone I dunno. That's YOUR hangup, not mine.

I'm agnostic, but I've never, EVER heard of anyone leaving the christian faith getting beaten up for it anywhere. Lots of examples of the opposite, however. That said, I cannot believe that anyone would try to equivocate going through the whole transgender thing to leaving your church. It's like comparing apples to jackhammers. You leave your faith you can always change your stance or go back if you desire, once you start down the transgender reassignment path, that's GONE.

Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: sarmed1 on October 26, 2014, 11:41:27 PM
For all intents and purposes; its about whats legally represented on which ever documents you use to establish identity (if you have them legally changed from Male to Female) thats what you are.  So along that same context, for CAP whichever is recorded for you thats how you have to dress and be while you are at CAP.  Get that changed to match the legal document; thats who you are then.

MK
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: LSThiker on October 26, 2014, 11:58:53 PM
Quote from: Johnny Yuma on October 26, 2014, 10:30:57 PM
Gender assignment is fundamental within your DNA, period. No procedure, hormone, drug or surgery will ever change that. You can have procedures done that will help you pretend you're something you're not, but your genetic makeup remains and bottom line means that that person will never fully function as their "new" gender.

Your genital are assigned in the DNA, your psychological gender is not as clear cut.  Are there reasons in epigenetic, miRNA, post-transcriptional, or post-translational processes that explain gender dysphoria?  It is unknown to definitively say one way or the other.  There are biological hermaphrodites. 

I am reminded of a seminar I attended two years ago on neuroscience.  A neuroscientist, cannot recall the name without really digging back into my files, mentioned an interesting case he worked on and published.  A patient was convicted of child rape.  According to the patient, he had never once had any sexual desire for children until a specific period of time (this was supported by family, internet files, and his wife).  While in jail, it was discovered that he had a brain tumor.  The brain tumor was removed and he reported having no sexual desire for children.  A few years after the removal (and still in jail), he reported having sexual desires for children again.  A scan showed that the tumor had returned.  It was removed and he reported having no desires.  Yearly, he gets a scan to look for the tumor.  It has yet returned and he has yet to have any sexual desires.

While this is not directly the same as epigenetics, the point is to demonstrate that psychology is not disconnected from biological processes.  So it is not as simple as saying you are a male because you have the Y chromosome.  Your genetics play a role into your psychology as well as your experiences. 

QuoteI'm agnostic,

Okay, so are you agnostic christian or agnostic atheist?  Theism addresses belief while gnostic addresses knowledge.  There are gnostic atheists, gnostic christians, agnostic atheists, and agnostic christians. 

Quotebut I've never, EVER heard of anyone leaving the christian faith getting beaten up for it anywhere.

Well now you have.  I have met others that have been thrown out of their family house and suffered other consequences.

QuoteThat said, I cannot believe that anyone would try to equivocate going through the whole transgender thing to leaving your church. It's like comparing apples to jackhammers. You leave your faith you can always change your stance or go back if you desire, once you start down the transgender reassignment path, that's GONE.

I am not.  What I am saying is that having support while going through major life changes is instrumental to your "happiness".  I had no support after dropping a significant portion of my life.  I was a fundamentalist Catholic prior.  Having to pretend to believe and preach God was hard on me as I no longer believed.  My family refused associate with any non-believers.  So by admitting that I no longer believed in God meant losing my family.  I was pretending to be a person I was not and was not allowed to live my life the way I wanted too.  It is a tough part of my life.  A person making the decision to go through transgender therapy will also face a tough path if he/she does not have the support.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: thebeggerpie on October 27, 2014, 12:24:37 AM
Quote from: sarmed1 on October 26, 2014, 11:41:27 PM
For all intents and purposes; its about whats legally represented on which ever documents you use to establish identity (if you have them legally changed from Male to Female) thats what you are.  So along that same context, for CAP whichever is recorded for you thats how you have to dress and be while you are at CAP.  Get that changed to match the legal document; thats who you are then.

MK

But doesn't that bring up the sticky issue of bedding for overnight? If what's in my pants is still male, but my legal paperwork is female, who would I stay with for overnight activities?

And because bedding isn't split up by age, do you think the parents of a 13-year old girl would be happy to know that she spend the week with a 17-year old male-that-identifies-as-a-female as a bunk mate?

I'm more partial to say if they have gone through all of the surgery and everything, than treat them like their desired gender(including uniforms and all that.).

But, really, I'm not an expert of any of this and that's just my gut feeling.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Johnny Yuma on October 27, 2014, 12:51:39 AM
Quote from: LSThiker on October 26, 2014, 11:58:53 PM


SNIPPED FOR BREVITY


You're not the only person who's lost their entire family over your principles. BTDT and got the false arrest record and $10K in legal bills to clear my name to prove it.

A person looking to transgender therapy may not find an easy path nor even happiness even with support of family and friends. The ones that I knew and worked with didn't.

Oh well, forget it. i guess the next time a cadet posts on here that he's exhibiting signs of a serious psychological disorder I'll just cite CAP regulations to him. Seems all too often they've replaced common sense on here...
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Eclipse on October 27, 2014, 01:37:41 AM
Quote from: Johnny Yuma on October 27, 2014, 12:51:39 AMI'll just cite CAP regulations to him. Seems all too often they've replaced common sense on here...

Good, because that's all you're allowed or qualified to do.

Any opinion, advice, suggestions, or ideation that this situation is "wrong, right, or otherwise" is outside the purview and expertise of CAP as an
organization, and should be treated as such.

Part of the intent of CAP membership is surrendering the individual to be part of something larger, and that includes in regards to dress and appearance.
If you are not capable of participating, in some fashion, with the approval of NHQ or otherwise, within that relatively loose definition, then
CAP is literally not for you and you should move on.

NHQ needs to address this directly and with short sentences, and the end result should be that whatever your legal gender is, that's the uniform you wear.

Beyond that, MYOB.  CAP is absolutely not the place anyone should seek counsel, advice, or redress in regards to this and related issues.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: LSThiker on October 27, 2014, 02:28:49 AM
Quote from: Johnny Yuma on October 27, 2014, 12:51:39 AM
Oh well, forget it. i guess the next time a cadet posts on here that he's exhibiting signs of a serious psychological disorder I'll just cite CAP regulations to him. Seems all too often they've replaced common sense on here...

Considering you are not a mental health specialist, gender therapy specialist, physician, or psychologist, that might be for the better. 

After all, saying "you are who you are and I'd suggest you work on finding out how to be happy with you and your life living in your own skin, as it were." is not the proper way to address a "serious psychological disorder".
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Майор Хаткевич on October 27, 2014, 02:41:51 AM
That's sort of like telling a lesbian cadet that she was born a female, and meant to like boys, isn't it?
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Johnny Yuma on October 27, 2014, 03:31:47 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on October 27, 2014, 01:37:41 AM
Quote from: Johnny Yuma on October 27, 2014, 12:51:39 AMI'll just cite CAP regulations to him. Seems all too often they've replaced common sense on here...

Good, because that's all you're allowed or qualified to do.

Any opinion, advice, suggestions, or ideation that this situation is "wrong, right, or otherwise" is outside the purview and expertise of CAP as an
organization, and should be treated as such.

Part of the intent of CAP membership is surrendering the individual to be part of something larger, and that includes in regards to dress and appearance.
If you are not capable of participating, in some fashion, with the approval of NHQ or otherwise, within that relatively loose definition, then
CAP is literally not for you and you should move on.

NHQ needs to address this directly and with short sentences, and the end result should be that whatever your legal gender is, that's the uniform you wear.

Beyond that, MYOB.  CAP is absolutely not the place anyone should seek counsel, advice, or redress in regards to this and related issues.

Super!

So lemme ask, if a cadet next week posts on here he's thinking about blowing his brains out because he didn't pass his Mitchell, what reg do I cite?

Sheesh.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Johnny Yuma on October 27, 2014, 03:33:49 AM
Quote from: LSThiker on October 27, 2014, 02:28:49 AM
Quote from: Johnny Yuma on October 27, 2014, 12:51:39 AM
Oh well, forget it. i guess the next time a cadet posts on here that he's exhibiting signs of a serious psychological disorder I'll just cite CAP regulations to him. Seems all too often they've replaced common sense on here...

Considering you are not a mental health specialist, gender therapy specialist, physician, or psychologist, that might be for the better. 

After all, saying "you are who you are and I'd suggest you work on finding out how to be happy with you and your life living in your own skin, as it were." is not the proper way to address a "serious psychological disorder".

You know about as much of my credentials as I do yours.

You're right, next time I'll tell him he's super screwed in the head and to seek therapy. That would be so much nicer.

[/sarcasm]
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Johnny Yuma on October 27, 2014, 03:34:27 AM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 27, 2014, 02:41:51 AM
That's sort of like telling a lesbian cadet that she was born a female, and meant to like boys, isn't it?

Ummm, No.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: CadetFaith on October 27, 2014, 03:35:12 AM
Quote from: Johnny Yuma on October 27, 2014, 12:51:39 AM
Oh well, forget it. i guess the next time a cadet posts on here that he's exhibiting signs of a serious psychological disorder I'll just cite CAP regulations to him. Seems all too often they've replaced common sense on here...

I, uh, don't think that the acceptable treatment for any psychological disorder is "Suck it up and be normal". It's an awful lot like how folks tell people suffering from chronic depression to "cheer up". I understand that you're trying to help, but giving advice like that is probably not-so-productive. I don't know if you're familiar with gender dysphoria, and I wasn't actually sure if I experience it, but, your post very much hurt me. I'm not trying to attack you or anything, just maybe give better understanding.

Honestly, though I've very much appreciated the advice given to me on this thread (since the original post, I've joined my school's gay-straight alliance and started looking at my options regarding mental health professionals), this topic was made only to clear up any options available to transgender cadets regarding grooming standards. Direct advice to myself on this thread might not be entirely appropriate, though I guess that folks are welcome to contact me privately if they really have anything to offer.

EDIT:
Quote from: Johnny Yuma on October 27, 2014, 03:33:49 AMYou're right, next time I'll tell him he's super screwed in the head and to seek therapy. That would be so much nicer.

I already did get a message of "you're super screwed in the head" from your comments, so I think that at least recommending the help of a professional is a positive change from "go fix yourself".
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Майор Хаткевич on October 27, 2014, 03:42:00 AM
Quote from: Johnny Yuma on October 27, 2014, 03:34:27 AM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 27, 2014, 02:41:51 AM
That's sort of like telling a lesbian cadet that she was born a female, and meant to like boys, isn't it?

Ummm, No.

Oh right...unlike gender reassignment, a gay cadet can choose to change, right?
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Eclipse on October 27, 2014, 03:44:13 AM
Quote from: Johnny Yuma on October 27, 2014, 03:31:47 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on October 27, 2014, 01:37:41 AM
Quote from: Johnny Yuma on October 27, 2014, 12:51:39 AMI'll just cite CAP regulations to him. Seems all too often they've replaced common sense on here...

Good, because that's all you're allowed or qualified to do.

Any opinion, advice, suggestions, or ideation that this situation is "wrong, right, or otherwise" is outside the purview and expertise of CAP as an
organization, and should be treated as such.

Part of the intent of CAP membership is surrendering the individual to be part of something larger, and that includes in regards to dress and appearance.
If you are not capable of participating, in some fashion, with the approval of NHQ or otherwise, within that relatively loose definition, then
CAP is literally not for you and you should move on.

NHQ needs to address this directly and with short sentences, and the end result should be that whatever your legal gender is, that's the uniform you wear.

Beyond that, MYOB.  CAP is absolutely not the place anyone should seek counsel, advice, or redress in regards to this and related issues.

Super!

So lemme ask, if a cadet next week posts on here he's thinking about blowing his brains out because he didn't pass his Mitchell, what reg do I cite?

There is no response when people pose ridiculous questions on the internet other then not to respond.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Eclipse on October 27, 2014, 03:46:04 AM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 27, 2014, 03:42:00 AM
Quote from: Johnny Yuma on October 27, 2014, 03:34:27 AM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 27, 2014, 02:41:51 AM
That's sort of like telling a lesbian cadet that she was born a female, and meant to like boys, isn't it?

Ummm, No.

Oh right...unlike gender reassignment, a gay cadet can choose to change, right?

Gay cadets don't have to change, nor does anyone need to know.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: LSThiker on October 27, 2014, 04:34:14 AM
Quote from: Johnny Yuma on October 27, 2014, 03:33:49 AM
You know about as much of my credentials as I do yours.

I would not say that Maj Jonathan A.....  We may have gone to an activity together, but then again we may not and I just figured it out.  How is your farm and your horses?
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Майор Хаткевич on October 27, 2014, 04:54:50 AM
Quote from: Eclipse on October 27, 2014, 03:46:04 AM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 27, 2014, 03:42:00 AM
Quote from: Johnny Yuma on October 27, 2014, 03:34:27 AM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 27, 2014, 02:41:51 AM
That's sort of like telling a lesbian cadet that she was born a female, and meant to like boys, isn't it?

Ummm, No.

Oh right...unlike gender reassignment, a gay cadet can choose to change, right?

Gay cadets don't have to change, nor does anyone need to know.

Agreed. I'm just going with the majors reasoning here.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: NIN on October 27, 2014, 09:29:19 AM
Well, this was a nice reasoned discussion for awhile that had a couple rough patches.

Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: LSThiker on October 27, 2014, 01:28:00 PM
Quote from: NIN on October 27, 2014, 09:29:19 AM
Well, this was a nice reasoned discussion for awhile that had a couple rough patches.

Well overall, I would say this has been a fairly nice and civil discussion considering just how polarizing people can be on this topic. 
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on October 27, 2014, 08:53:13 PM
Quote from: LSThiker on October 27, 2014, 01:28:00 PM
Quote from: NIN on October 27, 2014, 09:29:19 AM
Well, this was a nice reasoned discussion for awhile that had a couple rough patches.

Well overall, I would say this has been a fairly nice and civil discussion considering just how polarizing people can be on this topic.

Usually, as with many topics, such polarisation too often comes from a lack of empirical knowledge of the subject being discussed.

No-one is able to completely divorce themselves from their emotions and opinions, but it is good to be able to do so to the limits of your ability to be more objective in a discussion.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: sarmed1 on October 28, 2014, 02:44:50 AM
Interestingly, I was looking at a couple of school district sites regarding transgender-esque rules.  Most it seemed, regardless of any hormone or surgical interventions (or lack there of) have the policy that administrators have to refer to them by the gender they choose to identify with and have to allow them to use the bathrooms and locker rooms that also coincide with their choose of gender identity.  They also can not force them to dress according to their birth gender.

Now there is a big difference between the legal standing of a school district and the private corporation of CAP.  But the point is that the same concern is out there everyday in the schools (transgender boy in the girls locker room) as has been addressed here (transgender boy in overnight activity in the "girl" sleeping area.)... and it doesnt seem that the world has ended, the school districts havent been sued for endangering other kids (in fact I usually see the opposite, sued for not allowing transgender students into the bathrooms & locker rooms of their identified gender)

Interesting question here:  What will you do with openly gay cadets or transgender cadets at overnight activities?  refuse to let them participate? make them sleep with the opposite sex? same sex?  make a special sleeping area for "other".... there is a pretty big can of worms lurking under the surface here, just waiting to be opened.

MK
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Майор Хаткевич on October 28, 2014, 02:57:48 AM
Quote from: sarmed1 on October 28, 2014, 02:44:50 AM
Interesting question here:  What will you do with openly gay cadets or transgender cadets at overnight activities?  refuse to let them participate? make them sleep with the opposite sex? same sex?  make a special sleeping area for "other".... there is a pretty big can of worms lurking under the surface here, just waiting to be opened.

MK

It's not a big can of worms at all. What do the schools do with gay students? How often do gay students rape straight students?
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: lordmonar on October 28, 2014, 03:09:12 AM
Quote from: sarmed1 on October 28, 2014, 02:44:50 AM
Interesting question here:  What will you do with openly gay cadets or transgender cadets at overnight activities?  refuse to let them participate? make them sleep with the opposite sex? same sex?  make a special sleeping area for "other".... there is a pretty big can of worms lurking under the surface here, just waiting to be opened.
It is not waiting to be opened....it is opened.

As of right now......from the guidance I have gotten from NHQ.....we treat them as the gender presented on the offical ID.

Boys with boys, girls with girls....two deep leadership in separate quarters. 
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: LSThiker on October 28, 2014, 03:22:46 AM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 28, 2014, 02:57:48 AM

It's not a big can of worms at all. What do the schools do with gay students? How often do gay students rape straight students?

How often do schools have overnight activities.  CAP probably outnumbers those types of activities when compared to a school.  Granted, I did stay a few times in a hotel for a school activity.

But basically, males with males and females with females, even the gay and lesbian cadets.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: sarmed1 on October 28, 2014, 03:46:57 AM
My point being if people hide in the sand on this one, when transgender or gay cadets show up at encampment or some other such activity and someone tries to make a snap decision, thats the can of worms I was referring to.


mk
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: lordmonar on October 28, 2014, 03:58:31 AM
No one is hiding in the sand.

CAP NHQ types are busy working it out.

The problem is that there is zero guidance from the real world on how to handle it. 

If you got some guidance.....I'm sure the guys at NHQ would love your input.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Ned on October 28, 2014, 04:02:05 AM
Quote from: sarmed1 on October 28, 2014, 03:46:57 AM
My point being if people hide in the sand on this one, when transgender or gay cadets show up at encampment or some other such activity [ . . . ]

mk

LGBT cadets ( and seniors) have showing up at encampment and other activities for over 70 years so far without major problems.

Probably because they are there to train, not socialize.

All are welcome.

Ned Lee
National Cadet Programs Officer
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Майор Хаткевич on October 28, 2014, 06:04:07 AM
Quote from: Ned on October 28, 2014, 04:02:05 AM
Quote from: sarmed1 on October 28, 2014, 03:46:57 AM
My point being if people hide in the sand on this one, when transgender or gay cadets show up at encampment or some other such activity [ . . . ]

mk

LGBT cadets ( and seniors) have showing up at encampment and other activities for over 70 years so far without major problems.

Probably because they are there to train, not socialize.

All are welcome.

Ned Lee
National Cadet Programs Officer

Exactly. If you think that there were no gay cadets in previous encampments....
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: a2capt on October 28, 2014, 06:51:51 AM
Quote from: Ned on October 28, 2014, 04:02:05 AM... so far without major problems.
Any chief problems? :P
Quote from: Ned on October 28, 2014, 04:02:05 AMProbably because they are there to train, not socialize.
Imagine that!  >:D
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: The CyBorg is destroyed on October 28, 2014, 05:09:50 PM
Quote from: sarmed1 on October 28, 2014, 02:44:50 AM
Now there is a big difference between the legal standing of a school district and the private corporation of CAP.

Albeit a private corporation that receives Federal funding and has a stated nondiscrimination policy.
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Chappie on October 28, 2014, 06:11:11 PM
Concur with the posts of Patrick Harris and Ned Lee (and having participated as a Staff member of encampments since 1997...have never seen any problems and my head is not in the sand, either  :) )
Title: Re: Exceptions to Gender-Based Grooming Standards?
Post by: Luis R. Ramos on October 28, 2014, 11:02:58 PM
Quote from: a2capt on October 28, 2014, 06:51:51 AM
Quote from: Ned on October 28, 2014, 04:02:05 AM... so far without major problems.
Any chief problems? :P


Or general problems...

:angel: