Would love to know what you're implying here, because you seem to subscribe to this utterly stupid notion that I'm some morally corrupt person when, in reality, my political views just differ from yours and it strains your wittle feels.
Per my definition of "being," I'd say both proclivity and the undertaking of reassigning your own gender through procedures. And to clarify, for both, not just male to female since you only provided one gender for some reason (apparently, not to mock).
I think the biggest issue that affects the most people are the conflicts of sporting events. In that respect, I agree with most on here and additionally I think, as with most of these cases, the guilt falls on politically charged legal action groups and not so much on the trans community itself. I'm not a fan of anecdotal evidence or "I have a friend" arguments but I will tell you that a female->male trans friend of mine and their partner both think the gender crossover problem in athletics is both detrimental to trans activism as well as competitive sports. I completely agree. It's abuse and, as evidenced on here, does nothing but take them two steps back in terms of trying to normalize for the more... morally superior folks like yourself.
The bathroom situation is a mixed bag. I think forcing an institution or establishment to do it is inherently wrong, as I'm a big free market guy. On the other side of that coin, let a private entity do what it wants. If you need to go crap out one of Tern Club's delicious sandwiches, but the gender neutral single use restrooms bother you, go **** in the street if you want and never return to give them your money. As far as state run entities, the government shouldn't be forcing students to share locker rooms with the other sex, trans issues aside. I think, however, there's more of an argument there against non-binary culture and that it's bigger than just trans.
Lastly, I was on a date this evening and I almost always use my phone to post on here so your response was the only one I wanted to take time to give a reply and, sorry, I'm not going to say "Apologies, I'm having a really good time but I have to author a response to some assho*e on the internet because he's impatient."
As per the others, they weren't answering my question, so don't presume to accuse me of avoiding their response when, in reality, they weren't even making a remote attempt at answering what I was asking. They were just citing *very isolated* examples of child exploitation. Furthermore, given their posting history, I don't really entertain long responses with kooky conspiracy nuts. It's an even bigger waste of time than arguing with one as pure and holy as you.
Good morning, sunshine.
) answered an entirely different question and provided those examples for those made up questions!