Men who insist that they are women (or vice versa) and then demand that everyone else accommodate this false belief is a good enough reason for the military to say no to their recruitment, as it is detrimental to unit cohesion.

Back in the 60s homosexuals were insisting that their sexuality was legitimate and demanding that everyone else accommodate this belief. Many at the time viewed it as a false belief contrary to biological law. That was wrong then, and this is wrong now.

And acceptance of homosexuality went so well because it turned out that accommodating it was effortless for almost everyone, and the impact upon others was minimal.

This is of course not the case with the demands of men who desire to be women and women who want to be men.

I've met plenty of trans men and women that I wouldn't have known they were trans if they didn't tell me. What kind of effort are you thinking about in this case?

What about the women who are really butch? Or the effeminate men? Would you want them excluded too, or would a genital inspection be considered sufficient to qualify them?

The broadest one is that new definitions of woman and man have been imposed which not just accommodate people who sometimes manage to successfully masquerade as the opposite sex (like some of the people you've met) but the ones who do not do so at all. According to these new definitions, merely stating that you're a woman or man (or somehow, neither) is enough to make it real.

This has been used to rewrite law and policy so that any man who claims he's a woman can, with impunity, impose himself upon spaces that were only ever intended for women and girls.

That's a huge change and has significant impact on the female half of the population, wouldn't you agree?

> any man who claims he's a woman can, with impunity, impose himself upon spaces that were only ever intended for women and girls

The military policy (that I assume you're defending) is to ban anyone with a "history of gender dysphoria". Your points would have a little more weight if the situation was like in 2018 when individuals could serve under the condition of being stable for 18 months in their identified or assigned gender. But not much more weight, since that is still a lot weaker than what you describe.