Transgender in the CF (merged)

[BeyondTheNow]

I'm leaving for BMOQ in July. I was wondering that if I'm enrolled as female but I usually wear masculine clothing and would rather wear masculine clothing, would I be able to wear the male DEUs? I know there's not much difference (really just the button closing tbh) but do I need to acquire special permission? Or would I just specify that I would like to wear the male DEUs to the supply staff on course? Thanks for any advice

I’m female. Take into consideration that a DEU blazer/tunic is designed to be tapered and/or wider where it needs to be. You may think you want something that hangs straight from edge of shoulder to bottom of hip area with no curvature in hip or chest area, and for some females, that’s not a problem. But for others, sometimes the shoulders aren’t broad enough in order for the tunic to hang un-impeded. You might unintentionally end up looking like an ill-proportioned football player like I do if I throw on a man’s blazer that is loose enough in the hips.

As it stands right now, you won’t have a lot of time to sit and customize your DEU measurements when they’re fitting you at basic. They measure you decently thoroughly for how the uniform is supposed to fit on each person, but it’s an assembly line and they want you done and out quickly. As well, there’s still a significant amount of time left in course AFTER the fitting, so when you eventually put on those DEUs, they’re quite roomy as it is. (The fun part is keeping yourself the same size so your DEUs continue to fit nicely later on In my opinion, I’d let them do their thing in terms of sizing you for the purposes of basic. When you’re done and trained and whatnot, then look into getting whatever you need altered and/or finding out if you need special permission to wear male-specific DEU and what would be entailed. That’s the most pain/headache-free way, as I see it. (But I’m basing that strictly on how chaotic/hectic the period of time was on basic when we got all our kit and got our measurements taken.)

 

[jollyjacktar]

Sage advice.  BTN

 

[Navy_Pete]

To be fair, I know of more than a few women that wore the mens DEU pants for years because they were better tailored.  Not sure if that is still the case, as they all seem to be equally poorly fitted on just about any human form out of the box after some recent changes.  Somewhere there may be someone with big shoulders, a small chest, massive gut, small thighs and huge calves, but haven't seen one yet.

The only item that was ever really noticeably different was the navy dress cap; the male version is the peak cap with the female one having the bowler.  They recently authorized women to wear the peak cap as well (if they want) so, aside from the basic fit, there isn't necessarily any real difference with the uniforms. They don't really fit anyone well, so your best bang for the buck might be finding something that is reasonably close to fitting and taking it to a good tailor. Mileage may vary at the on base ones (recently got a new tunic properly fitted in Ottawa and they did a great job), but there are usually one or two in the area that are used to tweaking the uniform shirts and pants, if you want to invest in having at least one fully fitted set.

 

[BeyondTheNow]

To be fair, I know of more than a few women that wore the mens DEU pants for years because they were better tailored.  Not sure if that is still the case, as they all seem to be equally poorly fitted on just about any human form out of the box after some recent changes.  Somewhere there may be someone with big shoulders, a small chest, massive gut, small thighs and huge calves, but haven't seen one yet...

Yes, a main issue was the pleats. Pleats are not a female’s friend if she’s not shaped like a 2x4.

 

[quadrapiper]

Yes, a main issue was the pleats. Pleats are not a female’s friend if she’s not shaped like a 2x4.

Don't think I ever saw anyone wearing those and looking as if they fitted, without really obvious, major, tailoring - unless the intended fit was bulging like Elizabethan breeches.

 

[Strike]

They have pants available for women now that are a mix between the male (belt loops, straighter cut and butt pockets) and female (roomier in the rear end and a bit of room in the front, enough to be able to use the pockets).  They're actually not that bad, especially as they have a strip of elastic-type material inside the waist that will grip the shirt and keep it from untucking when you lift your arms.

 

[waningcrows]

Another question, does the new trans policy from last year or so posted/linked anywhere? Does it cover enrollment?

I haven't heard about a new policy being released, apart from 'Military Personnel Instruction 01/11, ‘‘Management of CF Transsexual Members”' which is from 2012 (https://www.scribd.com/document/354809378/Canadian-Forces-policy-on-transgender-service-members). That is still what is actively listed on the forces website as part of DAOD 5012-0, 'Harassment Prevention and Resolution'. Of course, that may not be up-to-date. It does not specifically cover enrollment.

I have a handful of friends who are transgender, and it has so far been a non-issue for them with the CF. Some began transitioning before joining, others after joining. In one case, a friend of mine has been with the forces for 10 years and transitioned largely without issue.

That said, in relation to the CBC article, FtM's require medication on a weekly or biweekly basis, not on a daily basis (which MtF's usually do). That may be why the CF decided not to accept that individual (nevermind that she called it a "passion" enrollment). The term "fully transitioned" is also interesting, though, because HRT is a constant if one chooses that path. A solution for FtMs, that would take the stress off them and the military if they were deployed, is available in other countries, in the form of an injection that lasts for 3 months - it has not been approved by Health Canada, yet. Despite this, are there not CF members who are on daily medications?

 

[ModlrMike]

Despite this, are there not CF members who are on daily medications?

Yes, but that's only part of the question. The other part is what risk does the member incur if the medication is abruptly discontinued?

 

[RogueSig]

Yes, but that's only part of the question. The other part is what risk does the member incur if the medication is abruptly discontinued?

That depends ALOT on what varriation of transgender you are dealing with. A non-op MTF who goes off their meds will resume having Testosterone, and should physically be fine. Where as a post-op MTF who goes off meds, will get sick and die from not having horomones. I imagine the same is true for FTM.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

A friend of mine who is pregnant is not looking forward to wearing the CF "tent" as she calls it. Another area where the female uniforms are lacking.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Sad


Reaction to Edmonton Pride decision to ban police, military from parade
https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/reaction-to-edmonton-pride-decision-to-ban-police-military-from-parade-1.3967696

The Edmonton Pride Festival Society is under scrutiny after it decided to ban police and military members from future parades.

Edmonton Pride Festival Society banned the Edmonton Police Service, RCMP and the military after a group that included trans people and people of colour protested their presence at Saturday’s parade on Whyte Avenue.
Related Stories


EPS, RCMP, and the military were have been banned from future pride parades by the Edmonton Pride Festival Society.

The protesters demanded that police and military members would not be invited to future parades, that Edmonton Pride hired and included more trans people and people of colour in the festival, and that the history of police oppression against the LGBTQ community be more acknowledged.

Edmonton Pride agreed to their demands, and the parade resumed shortly after.

 

[serenamorrow]

How does the article relate to this thread?

 

[kratz]

LGBTQ2SIA

The Pride parade includes Transgender people, some who are in the military and might be in the EPS.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Hi Serenamorrowind,

I think it has a lot to do with this topic.

In the past around 22 or 24 years ago it used to be illegal to be gay in the military (and I assume transgendered would fall in that category?). Not just Don't Ask Don't Tell kind of gay but military police investigators would go through suspected homosexual's garbage looking for some sort of proof of being gay.

Fast forward to today.
-We actively target Transgendered people in recruiting and have a military wide policy on it. 
-Macleans suggests experts say there is a higher proportion of transgender people in the military than the general population.
-One of the first requirements for deploying on a mission is being qualified in a course that discusses gender.
-I'm sure we have Trans awareness days and fly pride flags for certain events.

All this to say as an employer we're pretty progressive when it comes to transgendered employees, wouldn't you agree?


By using Black Lives Matter terrorist tactics to force the ban the military members (in uniform) from Pride those people are, if you ask me, putting transgendered military members in a crappy situation where they can't partake in the pride parade and be proud members of the military at the same time. It's a garbage move by them and they're part of the problem that turn an event supposedly about tolerance into a SJW political pissing context.  Who are they going to ban next in the name of tolerance? If I was a trans CAF member I'd be livid.

 

[serenamorrow]

https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadianForces/comments/8nuusj/a_canadian_first_trans_flag_flies_at_cfs_alert/

I agree, certainly makes it an awkward position for a trans member of CF.  Also makes it an awkward position for persons of color in the CF. Including women in the CF.  Gay, lesbian, bi, etc.

I was in women's studies in university the first time I applied, I got into a class discussion about women in war. The expressed logic was, because women suffered by the military in nearly all conflicts and past sexual assaults and harassment issues...also anti-war sentiments... women should not be in a the military as that would supporting and in turn anti-feminist. I respectfully disagreed, and debated, citing the changes and gradual open support. Nope, they still keep to their preconceptions. I ended up writing a paper on it even in response.

So, should we put articles of protests against the military that includes women, even specifically mentioning them, into the 'Women in the CF' superthread?

I understand why it is in this thread and how it relates, I am just questioning the subtext while trying to avoid making assumptions. Creates the impression that trans members should be indirectly held responsible for the actions and decisions of some individuals in their category group.

I apologize if this sounds like I am arguing or starting one. I have a thing about critical thinking and logical form.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Thanks for the thoughtful reply Serena

[quote author=serenamorrowind]

So, should we put articles of protests against the military that includes women, even specifically mentioning them, into the 'Women in the CF' superthread?[/quote]

I don't think so, no.

[quote author=article] that included trans people and people of colour[/quote]
[quote author=article] that Edmonton Pride hired and included more trans people and people of colour[/quote]

The article I posted actually didn't specifically single out women, but it does mention Trans and PoC specifically.

I understand why it is in this thread and how it relates, I am just questioning the subtext while trying to avoid making assumptions. Creates the impression that trans members should be indirectly held responsible for the actions and decisions of some individuals in their category group.

Given the nature of the demands I would deduce that trans and POC were the actual driving force behind the ban. That said I'm guessing most here would sympathize what position it puts our own trans members in and see it more as selfish politically motivated behavior, which anyone can be guilty of, rather that "trans people are bad".

 

[BeyondTheNow]

Fast forward to today.
-We actively target Transgendered people in recruiting and have a military wide policy on it. 
-Macleans suggests experts say there is a higher proportion of transgender people in the military than the general population.
-One of the first requirements for deploying on a mission is being qualified in a course that discusses gender.
-I'm sure we have Trans awareness days and fly pride flags for certain events.

All this to say as an employer we're pretty progressive when it comes to transgendered employees, wouldn't you agree?

Side note: Perhaps so. Don’t make us sound too perfect yet though. Remember, CAF still has an incredibly long way to go in weeding out members who still openly voice their disapproval for anything outside heterosexuality and/or their version of what should or shouldn’t be considered “normal” in terms of sexuality, gender identification, etc etc. and their ability/suitability to serve. We can keep making GBA courses and bystander training and whatever else mantadory all we like, but it doesn’t stop some people from being ignorant a-holes with no filters between brain and mouth. We’re on the right track, but we have a lot of work to do.

 

[Jarnhamar]

More side notes: So what happens when a very religious member openly states homosexuality is a sin,  per their religious teachings? Would you weed those members out too?

Could *I* not have an opinion transgenderisim  is weird and not normal?  As long as I'm not an asshole about it?

I feel weeding people out for voicing disproval about X seems harsh.  Maybe it's a matter of personal opinion in private vice self-identifying as military. Except the proud boys were outted on personal time.  Big side note

But back to the recent posts yea we're not perfect but we as an institution came really far, which is why the call to ban military members (and the cowardly acceptance of demands) seems so strange.

 

[BeyondTheNow]

More side notes: So what happens when a very religious member openly states homosexuality is a sin,  per their religious teachings? Would you weed those members out too?

Could *I* not have an opinion transgenderisim  is weird and not normal?  As long as I'm not an asshole about it?

I feel weeding people out for voicing disproval about X seems harsh.  Maybe it's a matter of personal opinion in private vice self-identifying as military. Except the proud boys were outted on personal time.  Big side note

But back to the recent posts yea we're not perfect but we as an institution came really far, which is why the call to ban military members (and the cowardly acceptance of demands) seems so strange.

“Weeding out” meaning that given the cross-section of the military (and public in general, of course) it’s reasonable, and expected, that there will be conflicting thoughts/opinions/feelings about a wide variety of subject matter. But as it’s clear that CAF is moving towards a certain expectation/direction towards inclusion, and especially given the present-day ‘Respect in CAF’ initiative/ethos, there are certain thoughts/opinions/feelings that are not suitable to be expressed/discussed in the workplace. Mostly common sense remarks that any reasonable person should understand shouldn’t be aired as common knowledge. Save that stuff for one’s friends behind closed doors or after hours or whatever.

 

[Jarnhamar]

[quote author=BeyondTheNow] thoughts/opinions/feelings that are not suitable to be expressed/discussed in the workplace. [/QUOTE]
[quote author=Beyond The Now]
Save that stuff for one’s friends behind closed doors or after hours or whatever.
[/quote]

Good post, totally agree with you. My concern would be the CAF turning into a Salem - esk environment. Going through people's electronic garbage cans, so to speak.

Saving one's beliefs for after hours didn't work well in the example I gave from out east.