MOTHER JONES BY E-MAIL
MoJo Blog Home

«--Previous Post | Blog Index | Next Post--»

Missing a Testicle? Say Goodbye to That Tour in Iraq You Were Hoping For

Hey, guess what? The Army isn't just intolerant of gays and transgendered Americans. It appears to object to anyone who has any sexual abnormality, no matter how large or small or completely unrelated to job performance. Here are examples of people who do not meet the official standards in the Army's Standards of Medical Fitness (available here):

Women who experience unusually heavy menstrual bleeding, or bleeding at irregular intervals, or no periods at all.
Women born without a uterus.
In men, "Current absence of one or both testicles, either congenital (752.89) or undescended (752.51) is disqualifying."
And, for both men and women: "History of major abnormalities or defects of the genitalia such as change of sex (P64.5), hermaphroditism, pseudohermaphroditism, or pure gonadal dysgenesis (752.7) or dysfunctional residuals from surgical correction of these conditions is disqualifying."

As Obsidian Wings puts it, "Unless I am very, very wrong about what exactly service in the military involves, I can't see that an undescended testicle would affect a soldier's ability to perform his duties."

Leave a Comment »

Posted by Jonathan Stein on 12/21/07 at 9:59 PM | E-mail | Print | Digg | de.licio.us | Reddit | Newsvine | Yahoo! MyWeb | StumbleUpon | Netscape | Google |



Comments

What if you have 3 testicles? Does that put you in the fast track for promotions in the military?

Posted by: Bennett A. Hammer on 12/22/07 at 4:47 AM  Respond

Weird.

Posted by: Paul Miller on 12/22/07 at 4:49 AM  Respond

So let me get this straight ... The Commander in Chief of our military can be a complete nut-less wonder, but if just ONE of yours 'nads hasn't descended into your sack, you can't enlist to help him invade and occupy? Watch for nut-removal surgery rates to SURGE.

With regards to unusually heavy menstural bleeding, that condition can actually be a problem during extended operations in areas with poor sanitation and poor logistical support. A woman who is unable to regularly change out her feminine hygiene products is running a serious risk to her health. There may be a good reason the Army is looking at that one.

Posted by: Christian on 12/22/07 at 10:24 AM  Respond

"If combat means living in a ditch, females have biological problems staying in a ditch for thirty days because they get infections and they don't have upper body strength. I mean, some do, but they're relatively rare. On the other hand, men are basically little piglets, you drop them in the ditch, they roll around in it, doesn't matter, you know. These things are very real. On the other hand, if combat means being on an Aegis-class cruiser managing the computer controls for twelve ships and their rockets, a female may be again dramatically better than a male who gets very, very frustrated sitting in a chair all the time because males are biologically driven to go out and hunt giraffes."

~ Newt Gingrich

Posted by: capt on 12/22/07 at 10:45 AM  Respond

Now that's a real kick in the balls.

Posted by: ww on 12/22/07 at 10:47 AM  Respond

Speaking as a guy who served with, commanded, and was commanded by women throughout my twelve year career in the US Army, I can tell you that excessive menstural flow in field settings is not a joke. When I was a platoon leader I actually had to add female sanitary items add to the list of PCC/PCI items in my female soldiers' rucksacks. Fortunately my female squad leaders were already running that check on an informal basis, but it had never even occured to my male squad leaders. Not long after I made that change, we got a female first sergeant and a female commander who made sure that male squad leaders and platoon sergeants were paying attention to ensuring female soldiers were carrying enough hygiene products to last out the field problems.

It's a no-shit issue at the tactical level.

Posted by: Christian on 12/22/07 at 11:28 AM  Respond

It's a good thing the army doesn't test your testes during or shortly after combat because I'm pretty sure that the lumps everyone feels in their throat are the balls you thought you had hanging before the fight began.

Posted by: Tom on 12/22/07 at 2:23 PM  Respond

"As Obsidian Wings puts it"

Actually, as Hilzoy puts it at Obsidian Wings.

ObWi being a group blog of people with differing views, it's not so helpful to not identify the actual writer.

As a former soldier I can attest to the strength and determination of the females who serve in our (Australian) military. Having been the platoon member who has been frequently tasked to "retrieve and secure the honey-pot" on operations, I can honestly say that female hygiene requirements are not fundamentally different from us men. Stop being critical of females in the military. I've served alongside many talented and devoted women who have earned the right to serve. Why aren't the shortcomings of serving male soldiers' highlighted for a change? Most of the blokes I served with would drink themselves stupid and end up in all sorts of predicaments, legally, morally and ethically. By and large, having women in the ranks was good for both morale and work efficiency. Ignore the bullshit artist's and keep up the good work, ladies. Cheers.

Posted by: Glenn Brandham on 12/25/07 at 8:55 PM  Respond

I know of quite a few individuals that have told me about their single testicle, I've served with them in Iraq. I'm pretty sure this, though it may be true, is not enforced.

Posted by: Shane on 12/25/07 at 9:13 PM  Respond

Ah yes - genetic screening. Sounds familiar. There was a political party in the 40's that was doing quite a lot of genetic screening as I recall. The Nazis. And now the US is doing this...? Why doesn't that surprise me?

Posted by: Dorey on 12/26/07 at 9:07 AM  Respond

Post a comment





 

RECENT COMMENTS

Missing a Testicle? Say Goodbye to That Tour in Iraq You Were Hoping For (12)
Dorey wrote: Ah yes - genetic screening. Sounds familiar. There w... [more]

Merry Christmas From the U.S. Military (16)
San Lorenzo wrote: Trust me, fellow MJ readers: In the USAF, Christian Zealo... [more]

Why Not Smoke 'Em Since you Got 'Em?: The "Boys of Satire" Returning to Work Much, Much Too Soon (3)
Strannix wrote: Stewart & Colbert (and Leno & O'Brien, for that matter) ar... [more]

Coming Soon to Texas: A Master's Degree in Creation Science (28)
Don Schneider wrote: I read as many comments as I could stomach. Spelling,gramm... [more]

Kucinich Wins Debate Poll, ABC Covers Up Results (28)
Jeremy D. wrote: Posted by TarGator: "I am not a Kucinich fan given the who... [more]

Rotenberg Center Blasted By Gov. Eliot Spitzer and Media After A Prankster Gets Employees to "Accidentally" Shock Kids 100 Times: Will The "School of Shock" Finally Be Closed Down? (20)
Sheryl Skoglund wrote: MS. Hillary Clinton believes in torture also. Most of the ... [more]

Thanks to Bush, America is Both Rubber and Glue (5)
jimp1947 wrote: Who are we? We are what we accused the "Godless Communists... [more]

Another Baad, Baad Santa (4)
Pete Eyre wrote: Fellow lovers of liberty, Due to your interest in the mes... [more]

Ron Paul Refuses to Divest of Donations from Neo-Nazis (120)
capt wrote: Wowser, you could have quoted the ARG poll that has Paul u... [more]

Ron Paul's Legislative Record Must Be Considered (55)
Joe Mauriello wrote: It is time that the people wake up and vote for a non-medi... [more]

XML RSS Feed

Powered by
Movable Type 3.33

Jail.org - Inmate Search
Criminal records, instant public records & people search & current court records. www.jail.org

U.S. Public Records Search
Search County & State Court Records, Criminal records, Vital and Adoption Records www.PublicRecordsInfo.com

Records.com - People Search
Public Records and Background Checks. Instantly Search Criminal Records, Addresses and Court Records www.Records.com

Court Records & County Records
Find Instant Public Records, Criminal Records as Well as County Property Records Search. www.PublicRecordsIndex.com

















bookIN PRINT

CLICK HERE
for more great reading

headphones IN TUNE
New music every issue

CLICK TO LISTEN


This article has been made possible by the Foundation for National Progress, the Investigative Fund of Mother Jones, and gifts from generous readers like you.

© 2007 The Foundation for National Progress

About Us   Support Us   Advertise   Ad Policy   Privacy Policy   Contact Us   Subscribe   RSS