A military role for transgenders

For Trump and the military, as well as for militant feminists and LGBT activists, this would be a win-win.

Fantasists (feminists and LGBT) want transgenders in the military and women on the front line.

Realists (Trump and military) don't want women in combat and don't want transgenders anywhere in the military.

Therefore, why not let the transgenders (man > "woman") fill out one single, small combat unit and store them on the shelf?  Station them stateside, always available for press interviews, demonstrations, and photo ops.  As men, they have a significant physical advantage over women*, so they can exceed the military's physical requirements for women.  That would allow the military to maintain a higher minimum physical standard for women in all combat units – using the transgenders as their baseline – and thereby keep women out of combat units.  And that single transgender unit, certified as "women" by the activist left, would enable the Pentagon to check the box for the feminists who insist that women serve in "combat."  (Though they'll never see actual combat.  Again, they would be used for public relations only.)

So feminists get "women" in "combat," LGBT get transgenders in the military (though Trump will never actually consent to this), and the realists keep them all the hell away from real combat.

*Kingsley Browne wrote in his book Co-ed Combat: The New Evidence That Women Should Not Fight the Nation's Wars (quoted in Military Review):

Sex differences in physical performance are here to stay. As Constance Holden observed in Science magazine, the male advantage in athletics will endure, due to men's "steady supply of a performance-enhancing drug that will never be banned: endogenous testosterone."

 

For Trump and the military, as well as for militant feminists and LGBT activists, this would be a win-win.

Fantasists (feminists and LGBT) want transgenders in the military and women on the front line.

Realists (Trump and military) don't want women in combat and don't want transgenders anywhere in the military.

Therefore, why not let the transgenders (man > "woman") fill out one single, small combat unit and store them on the shelf?  Station them stateside, always available for press interviews, demonstrations, and photo ops.  As men, they have a significant physical advantage over women*, so they can exceed the military's physical requirements for women.  That would allow the military to maintain a higher minimum physical standard for women in all combat units – using the transgenders as their baseline – and thereby keep women out of combat units.  And that single transgender unit, certified as "women" by the activist left, would enable the Pentagon to check the box for the feminists who insist that women serve in "combat."  (Though they'll never see actual combat.  Again, they would be used for public relations only.)

So feminists get "women" in "combat," LGBT get transgenders in the military (though Trump will never actually consent to this), and the realists keep them all the hell away from real combat.

*Kingsley Browne wrote in his book Co-ed Combat: The New Evidence That Women Should Not Fight the Nation's Wars (quoted in Military Review):

Sex differences in physical performance are here to stay. As Constance Holden observed in Science magazine, the male advantage in athletics will endure, due to men's "steady supply of a performance-enhancing drug that will never be banned: endogenous testosterone."

 

RECENT VIDEOS