From the out that argument can be debunked here, [@Penny], but they are wonderful examples of erosion of standards. Why are there exceptions to the rules for those who cannot meet the standards? The most infamous one that tends to drive people mad is that the female fitness standards, in virtually all cases, do not remotely match those of males, yet you can have both in the same career field. That is, by definition, not meeting the bare minimum expectations of the service. For homosexuality, where was the issue with "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" as a standard? No one needs to know if you are a homosexual and you do not need to tell anyone you are. Of course we could get into the mental health side as well, but we both know the answer why there was aversion to it there.

Carrying on, anyone who meets the physical standards should be able to serve? Are we ableists now too as a current military? Why not just fling the doors open and let anyone and everyone sign on the line? I would love to hear your rationale why anyone with mental health issues should not be screened out, let alone removed from service if need be when they do arise. Service is a system of willing sacrifice and as I noted, while a great many of us appreciate the willingness to commit, up to giving one's own life, the Department of Defense isn't about to regularly make case by case exemptions, especially not for every new prospective recruit walking through their door. They are banking on the majority of people, apparently some 71%, to fail their criteria; this is also ignoring the amount of washouts or less than one year served enlisted and officers who are then administratively or medically discharged. I would risk saying that closer to 80% of the population in that age bracket get disqualified somehow or some way.

Just how large do you believe the proposed "transphobic base" is? We have had this conversation before, but the general field of people who are transgender [i]is a measly .6% of the entire population[/i] in the United States, totaling to around 4% of the adult population who are some sex or gender other than typical. Even if there were ten times more transphobic people than actual transgender people, that is still a nothing 6%. It would take around one hundred times more to be relevant in any real matter and I am going to go out on a limb and say that some 60% of the population isn't transphobic. This is essentially a non-argument and sounds good in theory if it were not totally irrational.