Trans in UK Armed Forces

>>8229481
The armed forces are for protecting the country, not inclusion. If including women, gays or trannies makes it function worse, then that shouldn't happen. To hell with political correctness.

>>8229578
Gays objectively wouldn't make things worse. Women and trans is debatable if we're talking about the front lines but there are plenty of roles in the military they could fill without any notable difference.

>>8229578

To be honest, if it means additional forces (rather than potentially replacing candidates who could prove to be exceptionally good), then surely all assistance would be welcome? They wouldn't necessarily have to adopt combat roles if they weren't physically equipped either.

>>8229578
Lmao this guy was talking about a situation where it worked but you couldn't help but be edgy bout dem fags, huh?

>>8229616
>Gays objectively wouldn't make things worse.
I'm sure you're about to tell me exactly why there would be no change to unit cohesion with gay soldiers and why romantic and sexual tensions between soldiers would have absolutely no consequences.

>but there are plenty of roles in the military they could fill without any notable difference.
It's possible, not guaranteed. Remember even medic do end up on the front lines as part of their work.

The military has been a traditional sludgehole of extremely insecure men acting hypermasculine because they can't function without being violent apes, on every side of every war, bar those defending themselves (NOT you, American military), so including someone who doesn't fit the mold would ruin their little fag club.

Truly the gayest shit on the planet, not even the LGBT community

>>8229639
There's communication, transportation, drone control, paperwork intel, etc.
Vast majority of military don't fight on the front lines.

>>8229639
When I was talking about other roles I meant things like artillery operators, pilots, logistical roles, and the plethora of non combat roles the military needs back home.

Also it's insulting to the entire human population to say humans can't keep it in their pants in desperate times. Do you think that when the Titanic was sinking the male passengers had a hard on for all the ladies in the lifeboats?

>>8229662
That's a good example of the kind of male chivalry that shouldn't be involved on the battlefield, superseding orders and conflicting officers' emotions.

>>8229670
I don't know how my example shows any chivalry.

I'm simply saying that sex isn't the only thing on everyone's mind and you're only projecting if you actually believe that.

File: oiuoe7b.jpg (47KB, 621x628px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 621x628px

>>8229655

This is how I perceive US military. I feel like it's so fucked up in the US.

>>8229716
What exactly do you think women and children first is if not chivalry?

>>8229731
That wasn't the point of the example. I simply said I don't think sex was going through the minds of those men. You completely missed my point.

>>8229770
>You completely missed my point.
Welcome to my world, now re-read >>8229670

>>8229481

To be honest, it's nice to see a confident transperson.

>>8229794
...

BUMPING for interest.

>>8229639
>romantic and sexual tensions between soldiers would have absolutely no consequences.
Companies have policies regarding co-workers dating and shit. It's just the same as any other job, m8.

>unit cohesion
There are gays in the US's military, but they're losing thousands of soldiers in their war that their superiors ignore the gays in their ranks, until they eventually removed the DADT policy. If they really believed that the gays can't coordinate with the straights, they would've sacked the gays.

File: article-2087023-0F73696400000578-836_964x642.jpg (141KB, 964x642px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 964x642px

>>8229670
>officers trying to save their men is bad
pic related. These ww2 vets are all fags. Probably sucked each others' cocks. Acting as a group is also gay. Should've saved their own skin and ran away, amirite?

>>8232533
>>8232499
>It's just the same as any other job, m8.
Sure, because in the office lives are on the line.

A soldier has to decide between following orders or trying to keep his lover alive. Do you think having to make that decision is an appropriate decision for the military to have him make?

An officer has to decide whether the unit containing his lover or the unit without him is put in the most risk. Do you think having to make that decision is an appropriate decision for the military to have him make?

File: 1396015598694.gif (2MB, 236x224px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 236x224px

>>8232577
Guys save each others' asses all the time, but if gays does it, it's suddenly bad.

Everyone expects their team to save them if they were caught as pow, because they need to trust each other that they have their backs. It's the unit cohesion that you were complaining gays will ruin.

No one's going to trust you with that attitude, and I hope you'll only be assigned in a desk job if ww3 comes.

>>8232733
>can't answer the questions
>resorts to strawmen

>>8232741
It's moral and expected. I was just saying that saving your unit is not exclusively for gays. You're retarded if you didn't get that.

>>8232777
>You're retarded
Pot, there's somebody I'm dying to introduce you to.

>>8232792
>no more arguments
>uses "no u"
I guess we're done here. I just hope you learned something from this. I hate to see your countrymen die because you went mia.

>>8232887
From the start you never made an argument.