Most people don't see the full underlying logical endgame, because you have to be really immersed in the conversation to have a sense for it. Here's how I under

Most people don't see the full underlying logical endgame, because you have to be really immersed in the conversation to have a sense for it. Here's how I understand the logic: Sex doesn't exist, at all, we are each a kind of random assortment of things associated with "sex" in the past, and The Experts are just starting to realize this after centuries of transphobic/intersex-phobic blindness. Gender identity is something most people have, and most aren't aware of. It is a soul-level attribute that just happens to stay the same for most people since birth, but for some, it changes on its own or maybe in response to outside events. If you say you are trans/identify as trans, you are. Trans has nothing to do with "transitioning" inherently (and "transitioning" means something different for each person, whether operations are involved or not.) Same with pronouns: they can stay the same as they've always been or change every single day, and that's just part of being trans, because that's your true self. “Woman” “man” and “non-binary” mean something unique for each and every person who identifies with those labels. Ideas like "born in the wrong body" or that trans means switching sex or gender were just public-facing stepping stones so that cis people can eventually understand all trans people, not just the ones that are binary. Cis people are those who don't identify as trans. They inherently benefit from gender roles -- even the poorest, most abused women have advantage over any trans woman, because they are is cis (and there is currently a genocide against assigned-male-at-birth trans people, as The Experts say.) Of subtle importance is the fact that assigned-female-at-birth trans people sit at the top of the trans community privilege food chain, because they are transmisogyny-exempt, or tme. To say the large majority have "mental illness" feels reductive and dismissive to me, I wouldn't say that personally but I am glad to hear about anyone talking about this. You are right about gender roles. I'll add: The problem is that “trans” doesn’t mean anything, but it also doesn’t just mean gender-nonconforming. This can hold in general progressive spheres, because other identities like Jewish or Black also don't mean anything specific, so what’s the issue? Add to this that the definition of oppression (resource extraction by one group from another) doesn’t matter anymore – the understandings of Whites exploiting Blacks for slavery, rich exploiting poor for wealth, and men exploiting women for their bodies have been eschewed for the simplistic disease models of “racism” “classism” and “sexism.” So we end up with the result that women don’t really need the word “women” anymore. Oppression isn’t class-based, it’s an individual deficiency, usually in education, resolved through affordable training and mindfulness.