Isn’t it cuz they aren’t “mentally fit”?
Which still isnt a good excuse to be a bigot, you can be non trans and less mentally fit than a trans person yet allowed in the military. I hate this country sometimes
this post was submitted on 13 May 2025
759 points (96.7% liked)
196
5164 readers
942 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
Other rules
Behavior rules:
- No bigotry (transphobia, racism, etc…)
- No genocide denial
- No support for authoritarian behaviour (incl. Tankies)
- No namecalling
- Accounts from lemmygrad.ml, threads.net, or hexbear.net are held to higher standards
- Other things seen as cleary bad
Posting rules:
- No AI generated content (DALL-E etc…)
- No advertisements
- No gore / violence
- Mutual aid posts are not allowed
NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.
Also, when sharing art (comics etc.) please credit the creators.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.
Other 196's:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
If you're "mentally fit" then the military will fix that.
It seems that their imagined enemy is both too strong and too weak... Jeez, where have I heard that before?
The quantum immigrant that is both stealing jobs from Americans while simultaneously nothing more than a drain on welfare?
TBF, Pete Hegseth also doesn't want cis-women in the military.
Imagine being at war for literally over 90% of your societies existence and you don't want half your population to have the ability to become combatants.
F tier warrior race
load more comments
(2 replies)
Excellent point
Fascism always has enemies that are simultaneously so weak that they will be easily defeated by fascist superiority ... while also being terribly oppressive that it will take a great battle to overthrow the powerful enemies of fascism
Umberto Eco - Ur-Fascism
I've heard something similar for conspiracy theories also.
NASA is at the same time an agency with enough advanced technology and resources that they were able to fool the entire world for a several-day-long broadcast of a fake moon landing, while also being too feeble and pathetic to have actually gone to the moon.
Then they snuck all the stuff they said they had on the moon to the moon before the other nations got there to look.
Well put. Also works with the classic trope of lazy but simultaneously job stealing immigrants
If you want to keep the fiction up, you need to keep imagining additional things: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RequiredSecondaryPowers.
That list was way too short
There's no coming back once I click on that link
"The enemy is massing their military near our border, which is a threat to us! We can defeat their military easily of course, they are disorganised and weak. But their movements are hostile and threatening to us! So we must preemptively attack them! Not because we need the element of surprise, but because we want to demonstrate our superior military tactics! This will be a quick 3-day special military operation. Because they are weak and we are strong but they are an existential threat to us."
if ex military trans want to kick off the revolution, they will have earned my respect.
Respect shouldn't have to be earned, it should be the default to respect everyone. It is reasonable for trust or admiration to be earned, but not respect.
There are two distinct kinds of respect: for the human being (respect the human rights) and for the person (respect what that person does).
Agreed. But too often the two are conflated and individuals rights are lost not for what they do, but for what demographic group they are a member of.
Thank you, I agree completly with you.
I respect that ;)
Respect can be revoked though.
If you are talking about respect for actions (see above) then yes. Respect for the human being should be constant.
Just to be clear, would you also say this about hitler or similiar people? Just hypothetically, there could be no reason at all that you say you would revoke it?
A main reason for the existence of society should be to protect individuals and their rights. The accused individual, no matter how horrific the crime, must have their rights respected. Right to a just trial, right to humane treatment, etc. Other rights may be revoked or restricted, such as right to freedom, property etc.
Respect shouldn’t have to be earned
speak for yourself.
I shouldn't have to be earned.
Fascism requires a group of others to persecute. Ideally, that group would be very small (as a percentage of the overall population) and already somewhat marginalized/"different".
So here we are.
Proving that it's all just about hate. We're strong though, we've been through so much, though not many of us made it. But we can keep going and we will win. Never forget. 💙🩷🤍🩷💙
Bigots are too weak to participate in society. They should be banned.
That's a pretty bigoted stance though. Same mindset that's led to the US prison system re: criminals, which is exactly what banning people from society is in function. I'm more on the structural rehabilitative side when it comes to addressing harmful anti-social behaviour.
Being bigoted is literally a skill issue. People with less money, status, or loved ones are more likely to hold bigoted views. Even in competitive online games higher ranks is less bigots
I agree with the sentiment being discussed here, but the argument being peddled isn't that they are too strong for sports, it's that they are too strong for womens sports, like women are so weak and their sports are a joke. The current right wing arseholes in the US are also claiming that women shouldn't be in the military. This nonsense is layers of bigotry deep.
You aren't really refuting the conundrum presented by the woman. She is pointing out the same thing you are, but I feel like you're not getting the point.
Trans women are too strong to be in women's sports, implying they are stronger than cis women. Yet simultaneously being told they are too weak to be in the army, something that they aren't even saying of cis women, implying that trans women are weaker than cis women.
The woman in the interview is correctly pointing out the hypocrisy here to highlight that it's not logical, it's just bigotry.
I feel like their hypocrisy and transphobia can be pointed out even simpler by:
"No!! You can't be in women's sports, because you are a man!!"
and
"No!! You can't be in the military, because you're not... a... man...?"
It’s like how Imane Khalif is a man because she has a vagina and higher testosterone levels, but I am not a man because I have a vagina and higher testosterone levels.
When you argue with TERFs, it’s very easy to get them to contradict themselves like this. It’s not a consistent ideology - it’s “ewww yucky trans people.” Which is why we have an epidemic of alt right weirdos who are all of a sudden very committed radical feminists (despite having basically no knowledge of radical feminist theory - if you press them, they’ll claim Andrea fucking Dworkin wasn’t a radical feminist because she wasn’t a TERF!)
You can’t expect what they say to make sense. It’s the game of the alt right - they don’t believe anything they say, they just know that people have to respond to their words and not the meaning.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(18 replies)
view more: next ›