The point, actually points, I am nodding to [@SleepingSilence] is in part addressing. In essence it is a matter of people getting added or preferential treatment at the cost of others because they are somehow "marginalized" or subject to a phobia fixture to their title or status. I gave ample argument how this advocacy makes zero sense in context, see the seemingly offensive practice of noting gender dysphoria is a mental illness and how I compared other disqualifying mental illnesses to it. It is very much a trendy, politically correct thing to do all while willingly ignoring all the others because they don't feel good in concept, [@POOHEAD189].

I still would love to see someone attempt to argue those, that I admit. After all there is truly no realistic rebuttal to the fact they are, in essence, not all different for why they are disqualifying factors or how people treat some mental illnesses favorably over others because it just seems easier, rather is more politically convenient. Looking back, this all started in conversation that this move is somehow "trash" despite the recommendation being that the Department of Defense is willing to review potential candidates who meet their criteria, but reserve their right to decline them, as they do with others who might be promising avenues.

As an edit in address to the following quote;

[quote]
Stick to the narrative that transgendered people are mentally ill, which means they should be allowed special privileges.

Or they are not mentally ill, which means all genders are fluid and validated.[/quote]
They deserve no such special treatment or privileges - see people with chronic depression or suicidal behavior. What they need is medical treatment or resolution of some sort for themselves, not special treatment at the expense of everyone else. The military is one of the places this belongs not at all, especially for those crying "but muh unit coheziun" crowd against this decision. One of the very last things the military needs is more special needs trainees or service members - it really does make achieving the mission more difficult.

The second is more or less just outlandish on its own in the context of psychology and psychiatry. When you represent roughly .6% of the adult population of the country and are not following the standards of being neuronormative, to borrow a loanword but related to one of my earlier examples, that is not [i]normal[/i]. That is not how the system operates, especially not the military, and demanding the military play nice just so people feel included is stupid and how you end up with more bodies, be them at home or away.