This is interesting because I can tell you that - being a retired military servicemember - I've encountered some of the same discrimination and labeling within the EA community that EAs claim to experience from non-EAs. To use Alix Pham's verbiage in an earlier post in a separate context "'people don't talk to you' (because they project some beliefs on you you actually don't have)". Thankfully, engaging with the EA community (at least those with whom I've engaged) over the last several years have changed their minds (e.g. that I don't come here to infiltrate the EA community or to arm the EA community, etc). In my Defense community, it is generally inadvisable to claim the EA moniker, while ironically it seemed inadvisable to claim being a former servicemember in my EA community. (It was a challenge being PNG'ed* in both communities that one wants to represent and bridge together, but I digress.)

Additionally, I believe that the term "soldier bias" creates the very confirmation bias within the EA community that EAs generally try to avoid; by automatically claiming that all soldiers have this particularly zealous bias. See the irony there? I know that there are several former servicemembers within the EA community who are proud and outstanding EAs (though many of them have been hesitant to openly divulge their previous profession, as they have told me). I think the "soldier bias" term would be unacceptable as a professional and formal naming convention if you replaced "soldier" with any other profession's name when it is meant in a negative context.

*Persona non grata