I used a made up but analogous example to see how the anti-trans rhetoric is intrinsically closed up to discussion. It is a group of people deciding unilateral

I used a made up but analogous example to see how the anti-trans rhetoric is intrinsically closed up to discussion. It is a group of people deciding unilaterally what other people are without room for any alternatives. Say what you want against trans people, but at least they only identify themselves and ask to be allowed to exist. Do you want to make an argument about bathrooms or sports whatever? Fine. But don't start it by de facto invalidating their existence, because that eliminates any room for a productive conversation.