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

Sorry double post.

Still looking for the video, but I came across this in my twitter bookmarks, from a (female) US cop (now works in homocide/DV/sex abuse cases) who served in the US military:

"The main reason why trans people have no business in the military or in law enforcement is the prevalence of suicide attempts in gender dysphorics, but it’s not the only reason. Integrity is an essential part of both soldiering and police work.

Your buddies/colleagues have to be able to trust you with their lives, and no one who is willing to lie about such a basic and obvious fact as their own gender deserves that kind of trust.

It’s way more important for cops and soldiers to go home in one piece the end of the day than it is to pander to and placate a group of people who all seem to have the worst case of main character syndrome the world has ever seen."

Imagine what would happen if a woman colonel stripped to her underwear in order to deliver a speech? The idea of wearing mufti evidently didn't occur to him.

This is just another example of a trans extremist trying to coerce his workplace to meet his personal niche demands of access to women's spaces. As others have said, given the awful record the Army has of sexual bullying and harassment of women soldiers, removing all single sex protections is mad.

Perhaps, as Provost General, (ie usually the most senior officer concerned with ‘policing’ within the Army), he could concentrate less on his activism and rather more on things like driving down sexual assaults and rape within the Army.

Or getting to grips with the bullying of recruits (look up Deepcut if you want examples). You know - what he’s actually employed to do.

And nothing shouts professionalism more than stripping down to a sports vest in that situation. I wonder why he’s not had the bump to Brigadier yet… 🧐

There are reasons for them being banned from the military. Reasons that have nothing to do with transphobia or discrimination. Medical reasons, the time they need to dilate (which they need to do for at least an hour each day, etc. Not just taking hormones. When they're in active war, they can't do those things. They have the same rules regarding other medical conditions, too. It's not discrimination, it's about balancing medical conditions against a fit active participant abiding by a schedule and abandoning everything and getting into the trenches. I saw a very good US video by someone military explaining it and how those with medical conditions, including hormone using and/or post surgical aren't for or conducive to active duty. If I find it I'll post it.

They took off their dress to make clear that they weren't representing the military. Although a t-shirt underneath would have made more sense.
I like to think our country wouldn't discriminate against trans people by banning them from the military, as Trump has done.

Either the UK military will be ensuring the SC ruling applies to living and working conditions on base and on deployment which they should have been doing in any case or this person is aiming to have a political activist career and will be soon retiring.

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

Yes. Particularly if the person was also there representing the military.

I am inclined to think this would be sensible. For many people who claim special identities, especially those who are activists, validating their identity is like an addiction which gradually takes over and warps all their interactions with other people. It's not about you, Colonel. We're talking about the defence of the realm. Serious stuff. Fellow soldiers and subordinates are under enough stress without having to think about pronouns. There is enough sexual harassment and abuse of women in the armed forces without putting men in women's facilities or sleeping quarters.

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

And as for this...
"But in the same way that there was no evidence to justify the ban on LGBT+ volunteers in the 50s and 60s..."
Nah. Homosexuals were banned. L and G. The T+ wasn't born nor thought of.

Edited for clarity

So the usual evidence-free hyperbole then?

What he means is that the Forces will be obliged to stop allowing men like him into Female soldiers’ accommodation, shower blocks or toilets.

He will still be able to serve - he just has to use correctly sexed facilities.