I present to you, the first woman to fight on the frontline.
 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...the-front-line

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/179920...ng-born-a-boy/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016...gender-soldie/

Sorry for the sun link but it seems the only rag willing to put the full story.

Basically 'Chloe' joined the army 4 years ago. Completed training and such as a man. Changed her name last month. Recently started taking hormones. Came 'out' as transgender when caught crossdressing. And is now celebrated as the first female on the front line.

Now, I know this is a touchy subject on here, but is this really right? What I mean by this is that the actual first woman on the frontline will have overcome huge obstacles to do so and is not expected until 2018 due to training and physicals required to do so. Chloe completed all of the training and such whilst male, whilst benefiting from testosterone levels and the strength of a man, and without having to deal with the discrimination women in the army face based on their sex.

This reporting, to me, is absurd. It is taking away REAL achievements by women before they have even happened? What will the news say now? 'More' women join Chloe on the frontline? Or will it just blow over quietly as we have already had a 'woman' in the role?

In the rush to fall over ourselves to be seen as 'progressive' we seem to be going backwards in another area...women rights and womens achievements.

Honestly, does anyone actually see someone who trained for 4 years as a man, passed physicals as a man, and now decides to be a woman..stays in the same frontline position as before and still benefits from everything being a male offers (ie. physical strength required for such a role) as an achievement for women?

I could get behind this being lauded as the 'first transwoman' on the front line. But its not even that as transwomen have fought on the front line for years now? So where exactly is the news here? I find the entire thing so ****ing wrong. Good on Chloe and good on the army for allowing her to identify as the gender she decides without discrimination. But this is NOT a step forward for women in the military as it is being hailed as. The law changed to allow women to be able to do this, but...Women are not expected to complete training and examinations required to be on the frontline until 2018. A transwoman who was a man until recently remaining in the same post he trained for and passed examinations for..is in no way 'the first female on the front line'.

The news and such is taking the piss here.

Fantastic way to take away womens achievements, eh...


History...made.

This is a touchy kind of a subject but yeah I agree that it's kind of unfair to women who were born women and wouldn't have the advantage of the male biology when doing their training

I don't even know where to start.I think i'll just not bother.This is infraction territory for me:laugh:

Yes it is rather difficult to talk about anywhere as such conversations tend to end in bans. Personally I feel if we can talk about it all respectfully and without purposely insulting anyone then it should be fine. Not totally sure what the 'official' forum definition of transphobia is though (/bad mod) so I may have broken rules by pointing out biology tbh :S

Honestly I'm not sure where the line is drawn either :worry: I think in the debates forum we should be allowed speak about things like this, whilst trying to be respectful at the same time?

Pretty much yeah, might need to clarify with James though. All I know if deliberate misgendering is classed as transphobia..but we have only ever had to define the rule for BB previously.

its all about pendering to womens rights, absolute joke

Yeah but that was people being disrespectful cos they didn't like the HM or whatever so that's understandably classed as transphobia I think

What on earth is pandering to womens rights about this article truth? Its the total opposite?

What do you mean?

Oh I must have missed where she wasn't born a woman. I thought you were posting about about a woman, woman going into a male employment/danger field at first. Then I read comments and went back to reread.

I struggle with the gender reassignment issues because I think it's extremely confusing. If you have had your penis removed but still have the internals of a man and physiology and strength I struggle to see how you can be a woman. If you have had a penis built but still have a womb I struggle to see how you are a man. It's complicated.

I don't think it's entirely fair for anyone/press to nail this as the achievement of a woman or the first woman to do the job.

However it's a great stride for the transexual community.

Ok.With respect.Imo.A man can never and will never be a woman no matter how much estrogen they inject or how much chopping and tucking they get.
This title should have been given to a woman who has earned it doing the same training as all her male peers.Just as the ridiculous idea of putting post op transsexuals competing against women in the olympics is unfair.So is this.
I'm thinking that this maybe just The Suns spin on it though to make a story.In 2018 they'll now have to have the headline 'First real woman on the frontline'.
Imo.

Good for her, and really good for the forces.
About time we have real equality in this country. Equality for all.

Its not just the sun. BBC and a few others reporting the same. Its apparently some major breakthrough :umm2:

Very bad reporting :S

im not allowed to expand the mods keep taking it down

what does equality mean in reality? some people are more equal than others and get special treatment, starting with mothers. as for real equal opportunities , the disabled the sick the elderly the vulnerable have been pushed to the back of the queue because womens rights and gay rights have taken a disproportionate share of the public money and media attention

I took down your offtopic post that seemed very much like spam. You can expand on why you think this is 'pandering to womens rights' given the person in receipt of this title is a trans woman (biologically male) though? Do you believe a man who changed his name a month ago is a woman and as such this is pandering to 'women'? Otherwise I can make no sense of your opinion?

I am guessing you saw woman/womens rights and saw red? The story is actually about womens achievements and such being taken away by men :S

Yes.Very bad 'media' spin.There is a definate clash in this country and the world infact between womens rights and trans rights.Two worlds(causes) have collided.

Thats your interpretation not mine, youre trying to control everything I say so theres no point me expanding

Im not trying to control anything you say. I deleted a post that had NOTHING to do with the OP. You then reposted acknowledging the OP which was fine.

But if you don't want to reply, thats up to you. I find it odd that you class a man being the first 'female' front line soldier as a 'pandering to women' thing though...very weird.

how is some group getting media attention they need is a problem?

I think elder people should get the attention as well just because we are talking about an issue it doesnt mean other topic doesnt get anything

theres only so much public money and public and media attention to go around, womens issues and gay issues get an absurdly disproportionate share

not really.

Media gets TONS of money so they can cover up every single topic, the reason they dont get much attention is that people are not speaking about this issue much.

I am supporting to give more attention to elder care because they have worked their entire life, they deserve to have their last years happy but that doesnt mean we have to take away from other movements that still need attention

Not being Rude
but she looks like a Fella

https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/...8681.jpg?w=960

people are talking but it isnt salacious enough for the media to spend as much time talking about the neglect of the disabled the sick the elderly the oaps in care homes ...as Ive stated here before 25000 people a year die in nhs hospitals from undiagnosed blood clots, but you wont see people marching over that because its simply not sexy enough. oh but the ban trump from the uk campaign gets half a million. what an idiocracy

250,000 people a year dying from undiagnosed blood clots won't be solved by complaining about how much media attention the gays get, either

Arista have you read the story or the OP? :p

Yes I am aware of the story.
I hope the next one is a Fit Women.

25000 and its not a laughing matter:nono:

I don't think the army should be segregated by male or female in the first place, I think the person who is most able to handle it should be on the frontlines, I'm sure there are lots of buff women who could outshine a scrawny dude in the army.

I don't get why people are so outraged and saying that she has an advantage, obviously they're not letting women out there so it's not as if she's holding other women back. She worked as hard as all of the men around her to get where she is so she deserves to be there no matter what her gender is.

Yes, it has changed to allow this BUT females have to be trained up more and pass physicals, something that is not going to happen for a year or so.

Therefor, with this 'Chloe' apparently being the first woman, when the real first woman makes it through the extensive training, its not a 'first' for actual women as its been claimed already by someone who 'was' a bloke until a few months ago.

The issue is they are allowing women out there (which should always have been allowed) but the whole thing has been turned into a bit of a joke by a guy who completed his training and such as a guy, who has physical advantages that women have to overcome to get this title..being lauded the first female. Its just wrong...

And yes, I agree she has worked as hard as the men around her. That does not make her the first female soldier though, far from it.

I am 100% certain that the next woman who is allowed in will get well deserved recognition as the first woman to complete the rigorous training etc.. This isn't diminishing anyone's achievements at all, it's just telling the story of one person, not even praising her, but they wanted to make it into news, so they are going to use flashy titles. I still don't see why anyone cares in the first place, she's just doing the same job she always did, the only thing that changed is her personal life. :shrug:

It is though really when you claim that this makes history and such?

Chloe is not even the first transwoman on the front line either, so this reporting is ****ing horrific.

:joker: If that's the case then this isn't even a debate. It's just the media distorting things so they can get more people reading.

So all of the media outlets just randomly decide to distort this at the same time...to get people reading? A bit odd, don't you think?

I get what your saying, and it's true that having trained as a man, her experience of it and ability etc will have been very different for someone born as a female going through it, and I can see the argument for it being more impressive and deserving of acknowledgement for someone born as a female. However, none of that is hidden from the story so what is the alternative to the way it has been put across? You suggest that perhaps she should be lauded as a trans-woman (and not be referred to as a woman?), but if she is a woman, then there is nothing incorrect in how it's been reported. Should transgender women have to be prefixed with 'trans' every time they are mentioned? Personally I don't think they should have to be. She is technically the first woman on the front line, and nothing in the story is hiding her past or that she was a man when she went through training, so even though they refer to her as a woman, they also refer to her as a transsexual, and everything about her past has been made clear, so I don't see the story as being irresponsible in any way. It's mentioned numerous times as well as being in the headline that this story is about a transsexual. So what is being distorted, the story is correct?
If the issue is that celebrating this woman is taking away from women's rights and achievements, I don't see that either to be honest. When the first woman who was born as a female biologically makes it to the front line, it will be just as much of an achievement for her. The story that gets published about her might be slightly different had this not happened, but that's just a reflection of the fact society recognises trans-women as women, it's not taking anything away from anyone and both stories and successes will be able to coexist. This just happens to be something that has come before that, and should this story not be reported because it's potentially stealing someone else's thunder? Would that not be diminishing to the rights and achievements of transgender people?
(I'm just going off the guardian link and the OP, I'm not sure and don't care how The Sun are reporting it lol :p)

Just gunna leave this here...Chloe is playing along with this 'first woman' bollocks. Its not just how its reported. (that quote is not from the sun article btw :p )

She is not even the first transwoman on the front line. Just the first to run to the press stating she is the first female...its pathetic

And no, in the senses of 'first achievement' for women in any scneario, I do not think 'trans' women should be classed as women. Or else, whats the point in having firsts? When the first 'woman' can be a man?! :laugh:

I don't mean that to be sneery or anything, but the self-identification rubbish kind of does mean any guy can claim to be the first 'woman' anything.

She's a woman so whether she trained as a man or not is totally irrelevant

She's a woman and fighting as a woman

Her journey as a trans woman is an incredible story but she should be referred to as a woman and applauded for that whether she is trans or not

It really is relevant when she is trying to claim she is the first female frontline soldier though. Given female frontline soldiers do not exist due to training issues and the first lot will only be qualified to do so in a year or so. Really, to be a woman, Chloe should be retaking her training along with the others, to make it official.

Yes the whole trans thing is incredible and such...and good on the army for not trying to block her dressing as she wishes... but that does not mean that this person is the first woman on the frontline.

Also should maybe point out again, there have been transwomen fighting on the front line for years and years...this is nothing new. So quite why this person thinks they are any different to those before them..I don't get.