Barriers to serve: Social policy and the transgendered military
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Militaries around the world have recently reassessed their policies concerning transgender personnel. A wave of integration has swept across the English-speaking world, with transgender troops serving openly in Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. Currently, the United States Department of Defense is embarking on its own reassessment. We offer here overlapping perspectives on the future directions of transgender policies in the American military. First, we provide an overview of the transgender policies of other English-speaking democratic militaries. We then discuss survey findings that provide insights into current transgender military populations. Finally, we focus on a key policy (DD Form 214/215, which regulates name changes) and discuss its effects on transgender personnel. Given the global trend-lines and considering the lived experiences of American transgender personnel, we argue that American policy-makers should take care to avoid the conservative biases of the organization when formulating its future transgender policy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it