According to AI, it is common for animals to engage in sexual behaviors with the same sex member of the group. I don't think we call them homosexual, and that could mean we do not have the language we need to discuss human rights and our sexuality. Our language and minds are shaped by a Christian perspective, even if we are not Christians. It is just part of our culture, and we mostly take it for granted. Animals do what they do without questioning if they have the right to do it. If it were not for the religious perspective, perhaps our sexuality would not become an issue of rights.

I like my grandmother's rules, because they give me a baseline for decisions that handle every situation requiring my judgment.

1. We respect everyone because we are respectful people.
2. We protect the dignity of others.
3. We do everything with integrity.

What you do is none of my business. I have all I can do to make myself behave well. That might not be good philosophy, but it seems to work for me. I have read that Socrates' group assumed moral means knowing the laws of nature and having good manners. They also saw nothing wrong with an older man and a younger man enjoying each other's company. Sparta assumed the men would like each other more than a man would like a woman. That was an important factor in their military success.

According to AI, it is common for animals to engage in sexual behaviors with the same sex member of the group. — Athena

Hello Athena, I want to be clear that trans gender does not mean gay. Gays are not the topic of this OP.

What you do is none of my business. I have all I can do to make myself behave well. — Athena

Correct. Do you believe then that trans gender people have, as a human right, the right to make you call them their preferred pronouns? Is it a human right for a straight man who has not had any surgery to go into a woman's changing room because they claim they are a trans woman? Should someone's gender take priority of someone's sex?

I regret that I brought in the subject of civil versus human rights. That really confused things. Beyond that, I suspect neither of us thinks the other is arguing in good faith. So we should probably leave it at that.

And I will try to keep my responses less antagonistic in the future.

from HR RIGHTS CAREERS website: Sex refers to a person’s physical and biological characteristics. The most common are male and female, but there are variations.

I don't agree that there are variations. There are two sexes: male (xy) and female (xx). Period. Evolution invented these two sexes about a billion years ago, and has stuck with early success. Genetic or developmental defects may occur which produce hermaphroditism, for example, but these defects are not a different sex.

from HR RIGHTS CAREERS website: Transgender people identify with a gender identity that’s different from what they were assigned at birth.

This is a persistent and annoying untruth. Children are not "assigned" a sex; their sex is recognized on the basis of physical characteristics. A trans person may not like it, but in 99.9% of births, sex is not ambiguous at first (or second) Dglance.

Cis sexual rights concern the right of the sexual identity of one’s sex. Trans sexual rights concern the right to the sexual identity of the opposite of one’s own sex. — Philosophim

Was there such a thing as "cis sexual rights" prior to the trans movement claiming "trans sexual rights"? For instance, did men and women have a "right" to a male only / female only toilet? Or was it a cultural given, backed up by laws against indecent exposure and the like, that men and women used separate toilets? I think it was a given.

A person who was born as a male or female may not claim rights that are unique to the opposite sex, in my opinion. Any person may claim rights based on their personhood, which specify numerous specific rights. The numerous subdivisions of humanity (intelligence, height, left handedness, etc.) generally do not have specific rights attached to them, do they? Inequality if endemic and it is up to the individual to deal with it. Individuals are burdened by all sorts of disadvantages (just as they benefit from all sorts advantages. Life does not distribute good and bad outcomes in life evenly. There is no "right" to have a great outcome.

A person may believe they will be happier if they can live like a person of the opposite sex. They can make the attempt, and may succeed. But they must do so within quite reasonable limitations. The limitation is that they are still the sex they were born as.

A person may believe they will be happier if they can live like a person of the opposite sex. They can make the attempt, and may succeed. But they must do so within quite reasonable limitations. The limitation is that they are still the sex they were born as. — BC

I’m surprised you have this attitude, which isn’t the same as saying I disagree with you.

I regret that I brought in the subject of civil versus human rights. That really confused things. Beyond that, I suspect neither of us thinks the other is arguing in good faith. — T Clark

Not a worry, and I don't think you're not arguing in good faith at this point.

And I will try to keep my responses less antagonistic in the future. — T Clark

Also not a worry, I often enjoy your posts here and view you as one of the better people to discuss with. This is an emotional subject for many, and as such its going to bring that out in people sometimes. You are quite welcome in this or any other thread.

I don't agree that there are variations. There are two sexes: male (xy) and female (xx). Period. Evolution invented these two sexes about a billion years ago, and has stuck with early success. Genetic or developmental defects may occur which produce hermaphroditism, for example, but these defects are not a different sex. — BC

True. I think slang gets mixed up with the scientific definition of sex. Many in the community think that 'sex isn't binary'. They don't understand that sex is only about reproduction. It requires a male and a female to reproduce, that's why its binary. A third sex would require a male, a female, and a lemale to reproduce. That would be trinary.

To their point a bit though, some of the variations in chromosomes and bodily changes seem variant enough to be 'a variant of female' or a 'variant of male'. Does this make sex any less biological, objective, or unchangeable? No.

from HR RIGHTS CAREERS website: Transgender people identify with a gender identity that’s different from what they were assigned at birth.

This is a persistent and annoying untruth. Children are not "assigned" a sex; their sex is recognized on the basis of physical characteristics. — BC

To be fair, they didn't use the word 'sex' here. Sex is yes, observed at birth. Its an objective category that you either identify correctly or incorrectly. A 'gender identity' if going by the proper definition, is a cultural expectation that people place upon the sexes. So for example, if you are born male, society might expect you to go hunting. You as a male might be interested in writing, which that society sees as a cultural expectation for females. As such, you were born with 'a gender identity' of a female (only in wanting to write), and thus aren't able to live as you wish.

The problem with this is obvious. Gender identity is simply culturally backed prejudice and/or sexism. It has no bearing on what your personality is in relation to your sex. If you hold a gender identity, you're just holding onto another form of prejudice and/or sexism. The goal is to realize that society is going to want you to do things you don't want to do regardless of sex, and navigating through life is figuring out which of those things you should or should not du despite societal pressure. There is nothing special about gender in the least.

Was there such a thing as "cis sexual rights" prior to the trans movement claiming "trans sexual rights"? — BC

It wasn't called as such, but the battles for sex rights was done with women's suffrage. Since there is a battle for trans sexual rights, we can contrast this with the default of 'sex rights', by putting the term cis in front of it for clarity. Does society default to 'cis' for sex rights? Yes. So this is more of an academic use for clarity in more focused discussion.

A person who was born as a male or female may not claim rights that are unique to the opposite sex, in my opinion. — BC

If one has not attempted to change one's sex, 100%. Gender is irrelevant subjective prejudice. "Women should make sandwiches in the kitchen" is gender. And we worked it out decades ago that its wrong. A working theory I have is that sexist people didn't go away, they just avoided the term sexist directly by latching onto gender. Still the same crappy people we had back then.

What I think is open for conversation is trans sexual rights. If a man has had the surgery and has lived with all intentions of being female, is that a case to say that is enough to enter some cross sex spaces? To be clear, trans gender is right out. But an actual trans sexual? I could see discussing it.

The numerous subdivisions of humanity (intelligence, height, left handedness, etc.) generally do not have specific rights attached to them, do they? — BC

Sexual differences do. These are based on biological realities and not cultural ones. The trans gender attempt has always been to cross into opposite sex rights without having to alter one's body to be the opposite sex. The trans sexual alters their body to do so.

A person may believe they will be happier if they can live like a person of the opposite sex. They can make the attempt, and may succeed. — BC

Correct. I have zero objection to someone paying their own money to cosmetically change themselves to resemble the other sex. Does that mean the rest of society has to believe that you deserve the rights of that opposite sex now? I think that's a little out of scope of the topic which is targeting trans gender rights specifically.

It's a "new" attitude for me. I used to accept many aspects of transgender / transsexual rhetoric, but over the last decade and a half, I've gradually changed my mind.

One reason for changing my mind has been reading a number of articles in places like Quillette which reject some of the claims of trans people as pseudo-science. I never thought there were more than 2 sexes, (I don't know of any species that are anything other than M and F. True, some fish can switch back and forth between the TWO sexes, and it works for their species. Fine. Unfortunately Jack, now Mary, is not a fish. Sorry Jack. You look great in those heels, hairdo, and all, but what you are doing is basically an elaborate drag act. Some drag queens seem a bit crazy, but they have enough sense not to get their balls and dick chopped off.

I am not sure what came first: the surge in numbers of trans individuals deciding to go beyond costuming to surgery and hormones, or the rhetoric of the trans movement. Like as not, there were men and women around before the trans movement picked up steam who wanted to BE the opposite sex. Christine Jorgensen, b 1926 in the Bronx, WWII vet, received gender surgery in 1952 in Denmark.

On the other hand, using drugs to suspend puberty in children who claim to be transgender seems like reckless medical practice, if not worse. Have clinics been too eager to aggressively gender dysphoria? I suspect they have.

Everyone has to work out their personal meshugganah. Lots of people manage to do so gracefully -- whatever their situation, and more power to them. And some people don't.

Everyone has to work out their personal meshugganah. Lots of people manage to do so gracefully -- whatever their situation, and more power to them. And some people don't. — BC

For me, it all comes down to choice. As I understand it, some people don’t have that choice. That’s called gender dysphoria. Strikes me as a little dangerous to deny them their understanding of who and what they are. I, as a straight man, didn’t choose what I am. You, as a gay man, didn’t choose either. It doesn’t seem unreasonable to me to at least consider using the same standard for these transgender people.

Which brings us to the subject of those who do choose to identify as trans. My sister has three kids, one of them identifies as non-binary, another as a transgender male. I would never say this to them, and I will call them whatever they want, but I will always suspect this is a lifestyle choice rather than a fundamental question of identity. For people like them, I agree with what you’ve written above.

This looks to me like four (including myself) people roughly agreeing that all people, unless they give us reason otherwise, deserve respect and acquiescing to request that take no skin off our backs is polite.

But that requiring rather than requesting removes all semblance of politeness from one end of the agreement, resulting in a rescinding of politeness in the other. Usually in the form of simply not participating.

There seems nothing wrong with this.

Sorry, @Philosophim I just saw your other comment to me in the the other thread.

To expand a bit more, then, I do not htink "trans rights are human rights" makes any practical sense. Its makes semantic sense insofar as trans people are people (i.e humans). However, "trans right", if there were/are any, cannot be said to be synonymous. If a trans people has a right specific to them, it has nothing to do with other groups of humans by definition. In this way, the phrase itself is senseless. It tells us, gives us, explains or illustrates nothing whatsoever.

This might sound as if I think that's the end of it. It isn't. There are no 'trans rights'. No one can enumerate any, and no one can adequately decide to whom they would be owed. Human rights are cool, though. I am just of the camp that 'rights' are non-existent without the authority which grants them (in a backward way...restrict first, then permit). I believe 'man' and 'woman' should more than likely refer to unimportant clusters of sex-derived behaviours. Male and female should be the only categories in public policy (although, intersex would be needed for public health).

If a trans people has a right specific to them, it has nothing to do with other groups of humans by definition. In this way, the phrase itself is senseless. It tells us, gives us, explains or illustrates nothing whatsoever. — AmadeusD

I think you are basically right, but I also think that, "Trans rights are human rights," is a rhetorical way of implying that trans people are being denied human rights, and that this needs to stop.

Yet this immediately raises the substantive issue of precisely what human right trans people are being denied. According to the ACLU from page 1, they are being denied the "right to be themselves." I suppose that's a start, but the putative human "right to be oneself" is going to require a great deal of elucidation. It certainly isn't something that we find in historical enumerations of human rights. What does it mean? What does it involve?

There are no 'trans rights'. No one can enumerate any, and no one can adequately decide to whom they would be owed. — AmadeusD

The civil rights act of 1964 in the US designated certain classes of people as having protection of certain rights against discrimination. Those classes included race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. Through legislation and court interpretations, additional classes have been added including age, sexual orientation, transgender status, and some others. The inclusion of transgender rights in the list is based on a court case in 2020, so it might be considered vulnerable.

@Philosophim and I got involved in a fooferall about whether these constitute human rights or only civil rights.

For me, it all comes down to choice. As I understand it, some people don’t have that choice. That’s called gender dysphoria. — T Clark

To be clear, gender dysphoria is a mental health issue. An easy comparison is depression. The goal is not for a person to transition, its to treat gender dysphoria. Treatment can be handled in multiple ways. Sometimes therapy can discover that gender dysphoria is one of many symptoms like depression, and treating depression also helps gender dysphoria. Since the 1970's until the last paper I've read in 2021, 50-80% of kids resolve their gender dysphoria without medical transition interventions by age 18, and do not transition as adults.

Gender dysphoria sometimes cannot be cured, like depression, and its needs to be managed. Some causes of gender dysphoria are social, innate, and sexual. Gender dysphoria is not the desire to be the other sex, it is the distress that one feels when not being like or treated like the other sex (they say gender, I say they are largely interchangeable) to the point that it interferes with one's ability to function normally in life. I have seen interviewed with many of these individuals, and they all say transition was an absolutely last resort that was difficult to go through, but ultimately helped them.

This is not to be confused with 'gender euphoria'. This is the joy that one gets at presenting as or being treated as the other sex. This can be as simple as leaving behind the restrictions of one's gender, being able to do things the person did not believe they could do as their sex. This can also be sexual, leading to erotic experiences that drive a person to want to do this permanently. Excessive euphoria if not managed properly can lead to dysphoria as well. Basically the high is so great that not participating in it leaves on relatively down, almost like a withdraw.

Transition is a treatment, and a treatment that one has a choice in doing. Properly diagnosed and given, it can improve a person's life substantially. Most trans sexuals who have undergone it to treat severe gender dysphoria will tell others its something not to be encouraged, and a very difficult thing to do. This contrasts with those who want to transition through gender euphoria. These are the one's who encourage transition. They desperately, often times manically, are driven by the high of doing this and are obsessed with getting to transition at any cost.

For example, I have seen an older man who recently got their legs shaved, pull their pants up to their knees and rub their smooth legs while breathing heavily while closing their eyes as if they were looking at a porno. I confess to bias here, as I found instances like these to be viscerally disgusting. The community will vehemently deny that there is any sexual undertones for some transitioners, but if you get into the community a bit and you find a lot of these individuals.

Now, despite my emotional bias against the euphorics, I still believe they have the right to transition. The problem is the criteria for gender dysphoria has been loosened so much, that a euphoric can easily get past the hurdles by saying the right thing and get what they long for. If of course this was on their own dime, I wouldn't have a rights issue against it. But they get diagnosed as gender dysphoric and get insurance to pay for it.

What I cannot agree to, is the idea that everyone around a person with the mental health condition of gender dysphoria has to change how they interact or refer to them. It is not diagnosed as a mental disorder or handicap. It would be much like a person with depression asking for legal protection from anyone mentioning a sad story at work because it triggers their depression. Its fine to request that of people, but not fine to demand it as a right.

My research suggests that the one's pushing for the pronouns usage and forced acknowledgement in public are the euphorics. Prior to the trans push therapy was very much around working with a trans sexual to come to terms with the fact that the surgery does not change their sex, and that they have to learn to deal with this. Our mental health disorders are on us to personally resolve and deal with. We may ask for help and assistence, but this is not a right we can demand of others.

Philosophim and I got involved in a fooferall about whether these constitute human rights or only civil rights. — T Clark

Not a worry, a civil rights contrast is fine and it answers questions that have come up. I just want to make sure that my points are not focused on civil rights, but human rights.

To be clear, gender dysphoria is a mental health issue. An easy comparison is depression. The goal is not for a person to transition, its to treat gender dysphoria. — Philosophim

Not long ago homosexuality was considered a mental health issue. It no longer is.

What I cannot agree to, is the idea that everyone around a person with the mental health condition of gender dysphoria has to change how they interact or refer to them. — Philosophim

Certainly, I don’t see this as a matter of law, but one of culture. If transgender people can be accepted enough, then it might be perfectly reasonable that you would be expected to change how you interact or refer to them. I doubt you call gay people “fags” anymore, even though there’s no law that says you can’t.

:up:

Not long ago homosexuality was considered a mental health issue. It no longer is. — T Clark

It was considered a mental disorder, not a mental health issue. Once being gay was removed from the list of mental disorders, it was no longer considered a mental issue at all. Trans gender people have a mental health issue called gender dysphoria, and this will never not be a mental issue of some kind as it is a disorder between what they are and what they want to be. It is not the same as being gay, though the trans community has used the success of the gay movement to try to get what it wants.

Certainly, I don’t see this as a matter of law, but one of culture. If transgender people can be accepted enough, then it might be perfectly reasonable that you would be expected to change how you interact or refer to them. I doubt you call gay people “fags” anymore, even though there’s no law that says you can’t. — T Clark

There is a large difference between calling someone an intentional slur and 'gay'. There is also a large difference between acknowledging that someone is gay, vs asking others to pretend, "I'm not actually gay'. Once again, the trans community pretends to mirror the gay community to get support when its issue is actually very different from the gay communities.

1. Gays wanted their sexuality acknowledged as normal.
2. Gays wanted to fit into society sexually equally.
3. Gays didn't pretend they weren't gay, nor ask people to pretend they weren't gay.

Trans gender community

1. Wants their mental health issue acknowledged as normal
2. Want exceptions in sex based treatment based on their mental health issue
3. Want to pretend that they aren't members of one sex trying to present as the other, and demand as a right that others do so as well.

The trans community rode on the gay sympathy and tried to present them as equally oppressed and the same moral cause as gays. That's how they got all of us. I have always been a massive supporter of gay rights, and despite your bias against me that I know you're trying to keep under control, I have never once called a gay person a fag nor mistreated them in any way growing up, and I grew up prior to gay marriage equality. Something else you may want to know about me, I was a teacher for five years in inner city schools where I exclusively taught minorities. I have lived in all minority apartments. I care very much for the poor and disadvantaged and view them as my neighbors.

I thought trans was really about 'trans sexuals'. I was initially very behind the trans rights movement, but once I read the fine print and got into the community, I realized there were a lot of things that were very messed up, and this was not equivalent to gay rights AT ALL. The more I examined gay rights, the more I supported them. The more I've examined the trans gender community, they less I've supported them. Its telling when more knowledge about something drives you further from supporting them, and probably more telling coming form a person who has actively lived their life in support of minority and disadvantaged causes, not merely arm chairing from the philosophy boards. I have walked among the community, I have a personal friend who is becoming a trans sexual, and it is absolutely a mental health issue that requires care, love, but not acceptance of all of its demands and protests about what is unfair.

Sorry, Philosophim I just saw your other comment to me in the the other thread. — AmadeusD

Not a worry, I'm sure you have more going on in your life than the philosophy boards. :)

"trans right", if there were/are any, cannot be said to be synonymous. If a trans people has a right specific to them, it has nothing to do with other groups of humans by definition. — AmadeusD

I think I see what you're saying. If its a human right, its a right that's open to everyone, not explicitly a group of people. You're using a strict category separation, so I see where you're coming from I think. From my part I think the claims of the trans gender community can, or cannot overlap with human rights. Some of them do, and some of them don't.

I am just of the camp that 'rights' are non-existent without the authority which grants them (in a backward way...restrict first, then permit). — AmadeusD

I believe that would be civil or political rights. Human rights are seen as natural rights, or rights that if reasoned through by anyone, could be agreed upon as things that should be supported for any human being despite the law. There is a good argument that human rights' foundation is shaky because there is also the assumption of certain moral outcomes, and anytime one is positing morality there is going to be some debate and disagreement. So if you do not believe in human rights, the OP is probably moot for you.

I think you are basically right, but I also think that, "Trans rights are human rights," is a rhetorical way of implying that trans people are being denied human rights, and that this needs to stop. — Leontiskos

Well said by Leontiskos. My experience in the community is lots of slogans and assertions that are meant to be moral barriers to you asking deeper questions. Very much a "God is good because God told us so" situation. The point of the OP is to pull people out of the moral acceptance of this claim, actually examine what is explicitly being asked, and after analysis find whether its true these requests are actually all human rights we should accept.

Yet this immediately raises the substantive issue of precisely what human right trans people are being denied. According to the ACLU from page 1, they are being denied the "right to be themselves." I suppose that's a start, but the putative human "right to be oneself" is going to require a great deal of elucidation. It certainly isn't something that we find in historical enumerations of human rights. What does it mean? What does it involve? — Leontiskos

This is something that they don't want you to ask. That's 'transphobic', 'bigoted', etc. Lots of words thrown your way to stop you from asking or thinking about it. And it works for a lot of people. As a philosopher, things like that trigger a red flag in me that demands further exploration. I have not been in agreement with what I've found. It very much is a secular religion in many ways.

Trans gender people have a mental health issue called gender dysphoria, and this will never not be a mental issue — Philosophim

I don’t think you’re qualified to say that. Maybe I’m wrong.

It is not the same as being gay, — Philosophim

I think one big thing gay people and transgender people have in common is that, to a large extent, their problems are associated with rejection by society at large and not with their sexual characteristics themselves.

There is a large difference between calling someone an intentional slur and 'gay'. — Philosophim

Perhaps someday, if society moves in that direction, it might be considered a slur to use a pronoun the person does not accept.

despite your bias against me that I know you're trying to keep under control, — Philosophim

Ahem…

probably more telling coming form a person who has actively lived their life in support of minority and disadvantaged causes, not merely arm chairing from the philosophy boards. — Philosophim

This is rhetoric, not philosophy.

Yet this immediately raises the substantive issue of precisely what human right trans people are being denied. According to the ACLU from page 1, they are being denied the "right to be themselves." — Leontiskos

This is disingenuous. The ACLU listing includes many concrete and specific rights that many people would consider fundamental. Yet you’ve picked out this one vague feel good statement to focus on and criticize.

- If you think there is a different human right at stake, feel free to set it out. I simply took the one that you yourself provided at the outset of your quote.

they are being denied the "right to be themselves." I suppose that's a start, but the putative human "right to be oneself" is going to require a great deal of elucidation. It certainly isn't something that we find in historical enumerations of human rights. — Leontiskos

I would go further - that claim is bare nonsense. There is an extremely small, unhinged group that exist on Earth and probably number below 10m who want Trans people to stop being trans (or, alternately, existing). Even "anti-trans" activists tend not to take either of these bents. It has to do with other people and not the trans people themselves. Same thing as keeping males from female spaces. Doesn't have a lot to do with Males or their rights or anything, but protecting females.

I don’t think you’re qualified to say that. — T Clark

It is in the DSM. And, I think any reasonable adult can recognize a break with reality when they see one. You do not strike me as someone who would defend 'trans rights' on any ground such as ones coming up here. I am somewhat taken aback. Nice!

I simply took the one that you yourself provided at the outset of your quote. — Leontiskos

You took one of the many ones I provided—the vaguest and hardest to define. Here are the others:

We’re fighting discrimination in employment, housing, and public places, including restrooms. We’re working to make sure trans people get the health care they need and we're challenging obstacles to changing the gender marker on identification documents and obtaining legal name changes. We’re fighting to protect the rights and safety of transgender people in prison, jail, and detention facilities as well as the right of trans and gender nonconforming students to be treated with respect at school. Finally, we’re working to secure the rights of transgender parents.

So if you do not believe in human rights, the OP is probably moot for you. — Philosophim

I believe they exist, but in the context I gave. There is no basis otherwise. The fact that some large group agrees (and, patently, we often dont) doesn't give me a 'right'. It comes from no where and is enforced by nothing until an authority does those things.

The inclusion of transgender rights in the list is based on a court case in 2020, so it might be considered vulnerable — T Clark

We can hope - but that's not because I don't want trans people protected from whatever boogey man is in the headlines currently - but because has been (and will continue) to be abused to decry and harm those with differing views of hte subject. Which is legitimate, as opposed to "blacks need to go" or whatever.

There is an extremely small, unhinged group that exist on Earth and probably number below 10m who want Trans people to stop being trans (or, alternately, existing). Even "anti-trans" activists tend not to take either of the — AmadeusD

This strikes me as complete baloney. Where did you get your numbers from? I speculate the true number is in the hundreds of millions or billions worldwide.

Pew surveys indicate about 35% of the people in the US consider homosexuality a sin with a similar number for transgender people.

It is in the DSM. — AmadeusD

As I noted in the previous post, DSM in the not too distant past classified homosexuality as a mental illness.

You do not strike me as someone who would defend 'trans rights' on any ground such as ones coming up here. — AmadeusD

As I noted, protection of rights identified in the ACLU summary strike me as reasonable for people in general, including transgender people.

I don’t think you’re qualified to say that. Maybe I’m wrong. — T Clark

Insurance pays for physical and mental health issues. Gender dysphoria is the mental health disorder of distress in not being the other gender. Transition is a treatment paid for by insurance. If it were not a mental health issue, medical insurance would not pay for it. Once you transition, you're a life long patient on hormones for the rest of your life.

I think one big thing gay people and transgender people have in common is that, to a large extent, their problems are associated with rejection by society at large and not with their sexual characteristics themselves. — T Clark

There are tons of groups that are rejected by society at large. That doesn't mean all of them should have all of what they want from society accepted. And it doesn't mean that its innately good or moral in everything the trans community is seeking from society. That requires carefully understanding who they are, what they want, and whether its actually an imposition and abuse of societies good graces or an actual oppressed people who are fairly demanding equal treatment.

Perhaps someday, if society moves in that direction, it might be considered a slur to use a pronoun the person does not accept. — T Clark

By fact, no. A slur is an intentional insult and demeaning term for someone. A slur for a trans sexual would be 'trannie' for example. I have never, nor will ever call a person a 'trannie' because it has nothing but an intent to demean behind it.

You cannot simply pick a word out that describes reality, not like it, then claim its a slur. Most of the population, myself included, uses pronouns as a non-naming placeholder that references a person's sex, not their gender. That is not a slur. That is a neutral descriptor. If someone has a problem noting what they are with neutral intent, that's their problem. That would be like a 6 foot 11 person saying, "When you describe me as tall to other people, I feel that's a term to keep me down" That's ridiculous. By statistical breakdown, a person of that height is tall. If they are uncomfortable with that fact, that is on them, and other people describing a neutral fact is not an intent to demean in any way.

This is rhetoric, not philosophy. — T Clark

It was quite clear from the passive aggressive implication that I have called gays 'faggots' in the past, which I have not, that you still have a bias against me in this conversation. I'm trying to get you past that part of yourself and understand that I'm a good person who's open to talking with you about this topic. No, I am not trash, transphobic, a bigot, backwards, or any other terms that dehumanize other people so we don't have to have a good conversation with them. Dehumanizing the other person is bias. If you notice, I only call out malintent towards me, then its right back to discussing. Its completely normal to have bias, but I have a belief in your ability to not be bound by it, and simply discuss an issue without attempts to disparage each other.

And that is part of philosophy too. If it were only logic and numbers it would be so easy. But its also confronting our humanity which is often messy too.

Speaking of philosophy:

We’re fighting discrimination in employment, housing, and public places, including restrooms.

I addressed that in the OP. What do you think about it?

challenging obstacles to changing the gender marker on identification documents

I've brought this up in the OP. What do you think about it?

If you think I'm wrong, please point out why. I would love to discuss that instead of rhetoric.

I’m all done.