[quote=@Penny]
I had noticed that the US military crumbled into ineffectiveness since trans people were allowed to serve openly. Lucky this totally non transphobic policy came along to reverse the complete collapse of American Military Power!
[/quote]

I expected nothing less in comment or reaction, but to the legitimate point rather than "humor".

It is an absolutely non-transphobic policy, so let us try not to read more into it than exists; let us attempt to stay in the realm of "reals" not the "feels". No less, it is only an issue of what people propose the military should allow despite numerous other disqualifying criteria, a great number of which are listed in Department of Defense Instruction 6130, some examples being found on pages ten and eleven of the memorandum. Is the military "hermaphriphobic" because they are disqualified? Does the military have "suicide phobia" because people with depression or suicidal tendencies are barred? Is the military discriminating against people who are HIV positive by preventing them from joining because they are afraid of it?

Round and round could we go, but the ultimate answer is, is that people are not obligated to serve and the Department of Defense has the right to screen potential concern candidates whenever and wherever they can. This business about "transphobia" is only given any attention because it is socially relevant and people, [i]especially[/i] civilians, are utterly willing to sacrifice even more effectiveness for inclusiveness. The machine is already a rumbling, rolling disaster of bureaucracy and needless red tape, the last thing it needs is more fine tuned rules, "Gender Sensitivity" briefings on PowerPoint slides, responses by security forces to suicides, or more airmen, marines, soldiers, or sailors missing out on their duty because they are attending therapy of some sort that could have been avoided in the first place.