British Army colonel claims trans personnel unlikely to be able to serve beyond 2026

The pack weight in the Annual Fitness Test varies by arm, from 25kg for infantry to 15kg for REME, AGC etc. In deployment, you carry what you need to carry - might be more, might be less, and kit will be distributed around a unit as required. For example in an infantry section, you might have one soldier who is an absolute ox and will therefore take more gear, whereas smaller and lighter soldiers will carry less. Soldiers, particularly while on deployment, have a very large degree of autonomy in how they organise themselves and how they use, organise, and even customise their kit - this is one of the defining characteristics of the British Army.

I was not referring to chefs and mechanics. If that is what your friends are doing, fine. But there are roles which have requirements that do have peak fitness standards higher than a chef. Can you please confirm that even there there is no difference at all in fitness assessment?

And you have then just jumped to 'deployment' as to temporary camp. I was not referring to those but to barracks or are you about to tell us there are no longer shared single sex accommodations for military personnel anywhere in the world that military personnel from the UK would be deployed to? Is that correct? That no where that UK military personnel will be deployed to will have shared single sex accommodations? Brilliant news!

Of course people will use pronouns for people, including in written correspondence and briefs. But are you saying that those using correct sex pronouns are not adversely impacted in anyway? That is great to hear.

Male, happy to work in a war environment has trouble navigating the male toilets because its traumatic or something?

Did I get that right?

I think he's in the wrong career, especially given what actual women have to deal with in the military.

Absolutely that.

Not to mention, at a time when stability in Europe and internationally is low, wtaf was he thinking to broadcast to the world that the British Army is led by people looking and behaving like this?

Mess kit can be worn at any black tie event, whether or not you are there in an official capacity. It's completely normal to see officers (including retired ones) in mess kit at wedding receptions, formal dinners etc. As this was an award ceremony then mess kit would be appropriate for a serving officer.

(not condoning the stunt btw)

At least the message on the crop top is honest : ‘Politicise’. The question is ,how much politicising should be carried out by a serving officer, especially one in a discipliniary role

BTW I urge anyone to listen to the clip, it’s fascinating.

Oh God, do I have to?

Does this mean with there are new requirements around maximum pack weight? And that female personnel are expected to carry the same pack weight as male people for long distance treks - not just the PT annual check and entry checks?

How does this work in deployment? Or is the expectation that there will be no more military action requiring these previous fitness requirements?

I didn’t guess wrong, I said most of.

’Normal Barracks’ as you put it are now primarily SLAM (single living accommodation) so self contained bedroom/bathroom. Lockable door and mixed sex corridors. Why would having someone who is trans have any impact on that setup? The main places to consider are phase 1 and phase 2 training establishments which are segregated by sex and transit accommodation.

I confess I haven't been following this thread in detail, so it was quite a while into leafing through the posts that it suddenly clicked -
Good grief, that half-dressed person in that photo in the OP is... a colonel in the British Army! addressing a public event!
A picture is worth a thousand words.

Or one word, 'inappropriate', written thousand times.

lol, no there are not female and male facilities out in the desert for example. Very much an adult and respectful approach to using the toilet, having a wash, having a period etc.

Use of language is much less of an issue when using rank, which is what is expected. They/them is used a lot when receiving an email from ‘Capt Bloggs’ for example as the rank does not indicate gender (obviously if it’s an email from someone you don’t know). If you do know someone, you would still generally use rank as a sign of respect and out of politeness.

There aren’t gendered fitness tests in the british army, they’re job specific. You want to be a chef? Great do the chef fitness tests. You want to be a mechanic? Great, do the REME fitness test.

It’s much less of a significant issue in my lived experience than this thread reads.

Well you guessed wrong in my case. And I think you’ll find it’s only in very extenuating circumstances that mixed sex sleeping and bathing spaces are used. Normal barracks are still sex segregated. I’m sure your trans friends are lovely. (Everyone’s trans friends are always lovely) but they still have to follow the law.

So, if that’s the case for junior ranks as well as commissioned and non-commissioned officers (it’s certainly not in training) in the Army, what threat to their (trans-IDd personnel) careers do you think this guy’s referencing?!

If we ignore what’s happening in the States, as I don’t see how it would directly impact UKLF, then the ‘threat’ (I would assume) is the recent SC ruling. If single sex spaces are not something that the Army needs to worry about, as you assert, what’s the issue he’s highlighting?

As I said before, bloody hyperbole.

So, on deployment there is single accommodation available at all times? On ships? On exercise? On active service out of the country?

And do your trans colleagues demand and expect to have their language demands accepted?

Are your colleagues recognised as the sex they are or the sex they want to be recognised as? Could you please confirm what physical fitness requirements are they assessed by when they are tested? The sex they are or the sex they say they are?

The Colonel is just being dramatic like all the male athletes who say they've been "banned" from sport because they can't compete in the women's category any more. Everything has to be on their terms or they are being erased. Their trans identity is a religion that other people have to perform, even when the trans person isn't present. If others do not comply, the trans person has nothing.

I recognise that just as in sport, there are some trans people who just get on with it in the right category, but I still suspect that the reasons people claim a trans identity as well as the fact of claiming it would disqualify them from membership on mental health grounds as well as sometimes on physical grounds.

ETA: Sort of cross-posted with Helleofabore

This is the thing

The outcry about the EA was usually from people who have no idea about what military requirements are for employment and did not read the EA at all. They just read all the biased media reporting.

Then there comes the issue of whether serving personnel and civilian staff are expected to using the demanded language of someone else and what the consequences are for those refusing or making an error.

Frankly, having a military police officer in a position where they might have a significant power advantage that can be misused is concerning.

The Armed Forces are not held to employment laws in the same way companies etc are. There are multiple situations where there are not single sex spaces available. Most accommodation is self contained so bedroom and own bathroom/toilet. There are multiple trans colleagues I have and continue to work with who are well liked, well respected and brilliant at their job. It’s very interesting to read the opinions on here, I am guessing most haven’t served.

No one is discriminating. Trans people are perfectly welcome to serve they will just be required to use the facilities corresponding to their sex. The only problem I can see is those who have had surgery recentlyor are taking hormones not being allowed in frontline roles.

Lol, of course the whole show starts with him removing his clothing! As always, the opportunity to get their histrionics on is really what this community is all about I'm honestly not the least bit shocked or surprised.

I'm in the US and I don't believe there needs to be a "ban" on service members who identify as trans bc it is completely irrelevant. As with anyone who wishes to serve in the military, you need to meet a certain physical criteria of combat readiness. Heck even having flat feet can disqualify you from serving. So if you're coming into the military with some "condition" that "requires" a ton of medical interventions that should automatically disqualify you anyway as it impacts your combat readiness.

Additionally, we're all pretty much accepting at this point that when it comes to physical activity biological sex matters. And serving in the armed forces is primarily about physical activity and about physical bodies. So if you're a male and you're doing things to your body that decreases your combat readiness obviously that would disqualify you. If you're a female and you're taking medication that can have a negative impact on your physical and mental health obviously that would disqualify you. And certainly the armed forces should not be required to provide unnecessary, voluntarily medical treatments to anyone - especially ones that DECREASE combat readiness.

There's no need to ban anyone simply state that when it comes to military service you will be identified, housed, classified, etc according to your biological sex and if you have medical requirements or demands that negatively impact your combat readiness you're simply not fit to serve. Otherwise what you do, call yourself, etc out of uniform is your prerogative.

WandaSiri. :
Removal of mess dress - reasons given are baffling - it looks like exhibitionism to me.

I assume its so he can not be charged under the Regs of an offence of doing X (political statements etc.) while on duty or without permission from a senior officer?

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Edw8and1Geo6/1/6
And new learning for today the use of a uniform can be subject to a public order offence.🤷‍♀️

But.....

He did a " she got her tits out " strip in public at a professional fourm with a boob tube not a T-shirt while making the point that he is making a non-official private personal statement.

How many ( senior or not) women would or could choose a boob tube style protest to make a personal statement about their professional career in the armed forces??

https://centreformilitaryjustice.org.uk/guide/sexual-violence-and-sexual-harassment-in-the-armed-forces/

https://news.sky.com/story/army-women-reveal-abuse-as-former-minister-admits-colossal-failure-13325673

So, why were they in military dress to start with? It is not a costume to be worn to an event where the person was not representing the military.

They are not being 'banned' from the military here though. And from memory, they are not 'banned' from the militarily in the USA.

In the USA, they are expected to act in accordance with their sex and to not have medically transitioned requiring a lifetime of medical treatment when the military requires its personnel to meet the standards of health for their sex and to be ready for deployment. This is the same requirement as any other military personnel.

https://archive.ph/4zC91

Here is the relevant EO.

I mean, can you imagine you're in your bunk dilating and the Sergeant yells 'Wilson! What are you doing back here! Get your ass out there NOW!!' at you that you're needed in the trenches and you yell back,
"sorry sir, I've got a dildo up my neo-c*nt and I need half an hour longer or will close up" what sort of reception that would get in the middle of an active war zone?

Yeah.

Just think about it.