Forget science. It's nothing to do with science. If you don't get that transgender rights and people's free choice is social progression , just as the abolishment of slavery and de-criminalisng of being gay in 1st world countries was, because of your own naivety or intolerance, then that's on you and not for me to educate you.
And you are certainly not in the majority, by the way. You are just hearing people shout louder and are clearly too narrow in your information gathering.
My point was that human civilization progresses, despite people wishing it not to. Using the two examples in my first paragraph, do you believe that is a good or bad thing?
In one post here you've engaged in the motte and bailey fallacy, a strawman and then gone full ad hominem so not particularly persuasive to people trying to have a good faith discussion on an issue as fraught as this one
(which I think HSWR was)
Moral progress might look linear from a distance but it's not in reality, its bumpy and we get things wrong along the way and we should try and learn from that experience, particularly when there are ethical considerations. (some make persuasive arguments moral progress a myth, see Geordie philosopher John Gray)
The point being made/question asked, was how affording rights to a group may negatively affect another group, you can try and conflate it with gay rights but they are not really the same thing and homosexual people are likely to be the most affected (internalised homophobia is very common among gay people brought up in strict religions leading to perceptions of gender dysphoria) along with cis-women, particular the group that have suffered domestic violence or sexual assault at the hands of men, everyone especially trans folk should be concerned with these issues.
You can be pro trans rights while safeguarding the rights of others, that's real moral progress.
news.sky.com
