r/MensLib • u/mathcriminalrecord • 16d ago
Why don’t we see things like mandatory testosterone testing for troops as policing/controlling men’s bodies?
I feel like a lot of pro choice rhetoric could apply here but it seems like nobody is exactly up in arms in that way.
179
u/lochiel 16d ago
I agree that a Pro-Choice informed lens is a great way to look at this. However, I think the typical pro-choice advocate is going to stay focused on their cause, and rightfully so. And for the rest of us, there are plenty of other issues that need our attention.
If this is an important issue for you, I'd encourage you to be active in raising awareness and even use the pro-choice lens. Write about it and it's impact, etc. Don't wait for others to do so
66
u/Mono_Aural 15d ago
I don't think this issue needs to be conflated with the issues we normally cluster under the "pro-choice" label (ie, abortion and a patient's medical freedom from the religious beliefs of others).
This is something different and altogether dumber.
This is unnecessary and forced medication and one that will actually disrupt these servicemen's long-term hormone regulation.
24
u/travistravis 14d ago
What you'd be arguing for though is bodily autonomy. That's what the pro-choice label is. Taking away a man's right to choose, for no reason beyond authoritarianism and control.
94
u/FullPruneNight 16d ago
So, I really have having to get people to care about things happening to (cis) men by talking about other groups, but pro-choice advocates should actually be quite concerned by this.
Normalized governmental mass hormone testing? And very probably attempts at mandatory supplemental hormones for those who fall outside a government specified range? Btw, there’s every possibility they do something similar to women servicemembers, which is bad for so many very obvious reasons.
When you look at this in the larger context of what they’re doing with reproductive rights and healthcare, and especially trans healthcare, this should very much be a canary in the coal mine for pro-choice activists. Don’t think for a second that this is actually about T-obsessed podcasts or influencers. It’s about medically enforced gender roles.
24
u/bunnypaste 16d ago
I've been wondering why they're not offering hormonal support for women in the service, too. Birth control, abortions, perimenopause care, menopause care, and putting funds into developing hormonal tests for women so we can finally detect anomalies. There aren't any, really.
If they're imposing this on men and offering to pump them full of testosterone, I just wonder why the same isn't happening for women.
68
30
u/Four_beastlings 15d ago
The proposal for women was even worse: women suspected of having low T for reasons such as low sex drive (they used a pseudomedical term I don't remember) would be put on T. They wanted to turn the women into sex toys. It was rejected two days ago.
12
127
u/GnarlyNarwhalNoms 16d ago
I heard an interesting perspective on this from a servicemember. He said that the stress of military life exacerbates any existing low-testosterone conditions, and clinically low-T leads to fatigue and brain fog. He said that currently it's nearly impossible for men with low-T to get testing or testosterone therapy from military doctors, to the point where it's ended careers.
It sounds very much like this legitimate issue got passed through the Trump administration fever swamp, and they blew right past "fix actual problem" all the way to "mandatory testing for everyone, juice 'em up, oorah!"
51
u/ThestorytellingDemon 16d ago
That sounds like something they would do. High stress jobs in general and the complications that come from them: mental, cardiac, hormonal. It's been a big killer of men for basically ever at this point, and the solution is obviously not to just " juice them up ! oorah !"
6
u/lowbatteries 14d ago
Can you imagine being a person who advocated for this issue and you're so glad it's making it up the ranks to be addressed, only for it to turn out this way? Must be frustrating.
66
u/statscaptain 16d ago
You're right that the same framework applies. The language I would use for it is bodily autonomy (the right to decide what happens to your own body), which underpins pro-choice thinking as well as things like trans healthcare.
However, there is a wrinkle in that being in the military inherently involves giving up your bodily autonomy to the state. It's hard to make a principled argument against the state controlling men's bodies when that's already part and parcel of being in the military. So I think it needs to be coupled with arguments about the practicality, i.e. that T is not the "make warrior good hormone" and that mandatory testing is unnecessary and ineffective.
37
u/FullPruneNight 16d ago
I agree that (legally) enlistment means you give your body over to the state, but I find this argument really disengenuous. We can still very easily oppose completely unnecessary and ideology-driven denials of bodily autonomy by the state on servicemembers.
We readily condemn things like the testing of hallucinogenic compounds on soldiers without their knowledge or consent like happened with MKULTRA. We don’t just write it off as “part and parcel of being in the military,” we acknowledge it as injustice.
17
u/ThestorytellingDemon 16d ago
Not so fun fact, MKULTRA, was not tested exclusively on soldiers, most of it was tested on normal people with a variety of shady means such as planting fake college professors in classes to test theories regarding enforcing compliance and see if they could get people to change their political ideology by having someone with authority over then bully then out of it.
Another not so fun fact, Ted Kaczynski was most likely an MKULTRA subject, we don’t know for sure but one of the experiments i described above with the college professors happened in the college old Ted K attended around the time he was attending.
14
u/statscaptain 16d ago
Yeah, I agree. I just wanted OP to know that an argument from pure principle is probably not going to be persuasive in this case.
77
u/PhasmaFelis 16d ago
Oh, it's absolutely stupid and terrible. But since (for now) the US military is strictly voluntary, it's at least not being forced on everyone indiscriminately, the way birth control/abortion laws are.
30
u/Mono_Aural 15d ago
I have serious problems with any discussion that dismisses abuse of employees because employment is "voluntary."
It's not OK if Wal-Mart does it. It's not OK if the US DoD does it. Workers' rights matter across the board.
(It's worse in the military too since you're trapped in your contract, so you can't just quit even in theory)
11
u/DrNogoodNewman 15d ago
I agree with you, but also the US military forces people to do A LOT of things that would be abusive and exploitative in any other job. So I can understand why forced testosterone testing feels like less of a big deal in the context of the military.
11
u/Mono_Aural 15d ago
The military requires its servicemembers to be able to perform in absolutely inhuman conditions, and that forces wild tests of resilience, no question.
The flip side of that coin is that the members should only be asked to handle those conditions in order to maintain readiness or in order to successfully execute their missions.
Mandatory uniform testosterone injections don't really benefit anyone except the testosterone product who paid off this administration to get s juicy government contract.
4
u/DrNogoodNewman 15d ago edited 15d ago
I absolutely agree with you. It’s a stupid thing to do. I was just explaining why some people might not make the issue a priority and the comparison to Wal-mart might not be very convincing. If Wal-Mart were forcing its employees to kill and die for the store, we would rightfully be horrified but we more or less accept that when it comes to the military. Workers rights absolutely do matter. But does a member of the military have the right not to obey an order that puts them at risk of harm? And if so are they protected from punishment? I personally think the answer should be yes but that would also require a complete change in how the military is run.
3
u/Mono_Aural 15d ago
You know the answer to your rhetorical question, though. The answer is not yes.
That means it's the voting civilians have a higher moral imperative to speak up against unnecessary exploitation of our military members, as our military is ultimately civilian-led. We give a lot of trust to our generals for good reason, but there have been cases in lovong memory where civilian protest mattered for servicemen, such as when the military instituted more safeguards against command rape.
1
u/CurvySexretLady 12d ago
Mandatory uniform testosterone injections don't really benefit anyone except the testosterone product who paid off this administration to get s juicy government contract.
Doesn't it benefit the men who receive them? They aren't just injecting everyone, presumably only the men who test low? And Low-T is typically not a desirable condition and leads to poor quality of life issues.
0
13
u/SoMuchMoreEagle 16d ago
But since (for now) the US military is strictly voluntary,
Right, but most of them volunteered before this administration was in power, and thus before these new policies were put in place.
3
u/Weird_Bluebird_3293 16d ago
The military may be voluntary but that doesn’t mean they should be subjected to unethical and unnecessary hormone testing.
-12
u/lochiel 16d ago
I have an issue with the way you phrased this. It centers women in a discussion about men. This implies that the only time we can care about men's issues is when women don't have issues. Or, to phrase it in a more patriarchal way, "It's okay for men to suffer for the benifit of others".
I believe that u/Aberrant_Ermite is saying the same thing in a much more constructive way
56
u/Logan_Composer 16d ago
I think they more meant that, because the post is clearly drawing comparison between pro-life laws and mandatory testosterone testing, that one is not as bad because it is technically voluntary and not enforced on the entire population.
1
u/kestrelesque 16d ago
And: laws restricting or criminalizing abortion and birth control absolutely affect men. Someone participated in creating that baby, and is the father, whether he wanted to be or not. Men have every reason to care about reproductive legislation. It's their issue, too.
38
u/Defensoria 16d ago
The OP presented the issue as appropriate for "pro choice rhetoric" so naturally the comments are following that line of thinking.
18
u/PhasmaFelis 16d ago
OP specifically compared this to the way anti-choice people police women's bodies. I'm responding to that statement, not speaking in a vacuum.
4
u/shampot 16d ago
The good news is that abortion laws affect pregnant men too. Typically worse than pregnant women, since whenever trans dudes come up people tend to get brain worms and forget we even exist - leading to a lot of aggression, medical erasure/abuse, etc. I really wish so many seemingly progressive people would stop calling abortion a women's health issue. Please don't leave trans men behind in your discussions of threats on bodily autonomy.
0
u/Sleambean 16d ago
I don't think so, I think it's just a comparison. If you want a male example you could go for circumcision.
18
u/FailingItUp 16d ago
You want the in-depth reason?
Because all it takes is one convincing loudmouth inbred sandwich of a person to convince a group of people who have trauma-induced compliance responses to go along with them because they want to be big strong guy nobody messes with.
Look at who is president.
48
u/BearlyDraconic01 16d ago
Uhhh, the secretary of War Crimes Pete KegsBreath just mandated testosterone testing in the amerikkkan military, but there is so much other bullshit that Epstein's best friend is up to that it's hard to focus on just one thing.
As a non-american, I think everything that your government does should result in the imprisonment of all involved for life. They really do have the mindset of rapists.
1
10
u/GreatBigBagOfNope 16d ago
Because men haven't had a coordinated liberation movement highly active for the last century which made this kind of messaging prominent
1
25
u/FullPruneNight 16d ago
I agree that it’s partially because so many other things are going on, but also, we are not nearly as upset about it as we should be.
We see unnecessary checks of the same sort for trans people as invasive and agency-denying. It should be the same here.
Especially because these checks almost certainly aren’t just for “data.” Bet your ass they’re going to attempt to force servicemen to go on supplemental testosterone if they fall below a certain threshold, even though there’s no solid single level for “low T” and plenty of people at the lower end of the range function fine and don’t need any supplemental testosterone, which I believe can carry (some) health risk.
20
u/FullPruneNight 16d ago
Also, it’s certainly a very dark thing to find funny, but I can’t help but roll my eyes that they’re kicking trans people out of the military and trying to legislate gender affirming care for us out of existence, while essentially instituting mandatory “gender-affirming” medical treatment for cis guys.
15
u/ZealousOatmeal 16d ago
One of the main risks of testosterone supplementation for younger men is that it can cause the body to produce less testosterone as it becomes dependent on the supplemental stuff. It can produce testicular atrophy! IOW, treatment for low T can cause even lower T, and it's often permanent. (It also can cause heart, liver, and prostate problems, as well as a bunch of less important things like baldness and acne.)
And yes, low T in and of itself doesn't matter, it's only important if there is some other issue that seems to be caused by the low testosterone. And usually low T in younger men is a symptom of something else -- stress, poor sleep, alcohol abuse, and obesity being the big ones.
5
u/gvarsity 16d ago
It's also all performative bullshit that is specific to this nightmare administration. This is something so stupid and inane that no one else ever even thought about the concept let alone implementing it. The policing and controlling of women's body's has a lot of cross political spectrum and across time periods history for very specific and damaging purposes and as I said this is stupid.
9
u/HenriEttaTheVoid 15d ago
I think we do, actually...but it's so low on the totem pole of things to be upset about. Women, POC and Queer people are already being pushed out of every institution and position of authority already...with absolutely no cause. Instead of focusing on the way things affect the most privileged, most progressives attack the root cause, because that helps everyone below those on the top tier of hierarchy...and therefor those at the top reap the benefits. Focusing on the way things affect those on top rarely (if ever) trickles down to those beneath.
5
9
u/MyFiteSong 16d ago
Because they haven't tried forcibly injecting anyone yet. That's when it'll get real.
3
u/Ms74k_ten_c 16d ago
It absolutely is! The problem is that armed forces are extremely insular. How would one protest this? Congress exists to correct this (via impeachment) but Johnson sent everyone home.
2
u/ThatOneComrade 16d ago
Most normal people are pretty much against this though, the only reason it doesn't come up as often is because there's unfortunately a lot more shit that rightly deserves to be talked about more involving this administration.
4
1
u/ZealousOatmeal 16d ago
I mean, Hesgeth is a war criminal who has been systematically removing women and minorities from important positions as be babbles about wanting manly (white) man "warfighters". The testosterone thing is just more of the same. He has that balance of evil, ignorance, stupidity, and narcissism that the Trump administration has perfected. I don't see why I should get especially outraged about this when the guy has already expressed a love of killing fishermen with missiles. My outrage level is pretty much maxed out.
1
u/Nihil_esque 14d ago edited 14d ago
Because we already treat troops as if their bodies belong to the state. It's basically not a deviation from existing societal norms around them. When someone tries to dose someone against their will, that will be a bigger issue I think.
1
u/Chiriteer11 14d ago
Wait theres no one to call out if men can be castrated by administered too much exogenous testosterone?
Having too much testosterone can ruin men body and mental health
too much outside testosterone can weaken fsh and lh weakening body capability to produce their own T
Having too much T can destroy sperms too. Everything should be in the right amount just like motor oil.
1
1
u/Razorbladekandyfan "" 9d ago
99 percent of people don't see forced conscription as controlling men's bodies. Let alone this. Keep in mind, in countries with conscription the men are supposed to undergo himiliating forced medical examinations.
1
u/TheoCaro 5d ago
The military controls men's bodies already. The training, the dress, the just absolutely everything is intensely physical. The bullshit of this is that T levels don't actually matter. Like there is huge normal range. Testosterone isn't a measure of how manly you are. That's not how that works!
1
u/Prestigious_Try_5396 16d ago
When you're a troop, you have no rights ! The government Owns Your Body !
1
u/Parking_Reputation17 16d ago
It's the military, you sign a contract and they own you. The pb shot is way worse than any blood test.
-3
u/_Svankensen_ 16d ago
While I intellectually understand they are often exploited youths with few options or heavily propagandized, I can't bring myself to care for anyone that voluntarily joined the US military after a couple decades since WW 2 had ended. The information about the horrors the US inflicts in others is widely available. It only makes sense they would turn a minute part of that inwards. No, having female, gay or trans professional brown people murderers is not progress.
1
u/snake944 9d ago
Yes but counterpoint, sob stories about lads from the US trashing a foreign country and making themselves very very sad in the process sell really well. Can't have those without the army. It's a cycle. Pointless foreigners war deplete morale, heartbreaking stories about how it made them incredibly sad restores morale. The cycle of life.
-3
u/ThestorytellingDemon 16d ago
You are correct but unfortunately “choice rhetorics” largely don’t apply to men in the eyes of a lot of people.
Under patriarchy, some men are patriarchs, most others are beast of burden and you gotta make sure your donkeys and horses are in working shape even if it means invasive medical procedures.
-1
u/Unhappy_Heat_7148 15d ago
Why would people react the same way as abortion being made illegal? Do you think most men in the military want low T levels? Do you think most men in the military would not accept TRT? I would assume that most men in the military would fall into the camp of listening to influencers who push TRT onto men.
Do I think men should be forced onto TRT? No. I think the T level panic is insane and stupid. However, I don't think testing for something is bad. I think forcing someone to go on a treatment plan that isn't medically necessary is bad.
Are there forced injections or treatment plans that these troops can't back out of?
0
-1
u/Legitimate-Article50 15d ago
Military service members have to receive anual physicals to remain deployable. There is no choice.
541
u/Aberrant_Eremite 16d ago
We do. But the Trump administration gives us so much to be outraged at that we're all exhausted.