I also believe the evidence shows that race is a social construct, but that’s beside the point. The state does not get to demand what you ought to believe and still remain on the moral high ground, but we get to demand what the state believes about us, at least our socially-constructed, albeit biologically-informed identities. I was arguing that the law and the government should affirm gender identity in their language and practices, not that the government should coerce people to affirm gender identity. My driver’s license should show that I’m genderfluid and if my physical sex is important, it should read male-bodied. It does not mean I get to use the ladies restroom when I’m experiencing my femme side in a private establishment where bathroom usage is codified to be separated by physical sex. I should not have to follow rules and regulations about my clothing in spaces maintained by the government using my taxes. That doesn’t mean the state should be able to take custody of trans children whose parents deny them sexual reassignment surgery. The government should protect trans children from being abused by their parents with conversion therapy. That doesn’t mean I can force pastors to call transwomen “her” and “she”. Any government coercion that goes beyond what I have specifically mentioned probably does not have my support. Gender rights are about expanding freedom, not restricting the freedom of others.
The debate has already been derailed several times because we were under the impression our counterparts were supportive of government coercion to mandate our views… this is not the case. We are all quite libertarian it seems. Let’s not muddy the waters more please. I believe we are arguing about mainly social acceptance at this point, but perhaps some disagreements remain about the proper approach government should take towards gender expression. Just please try not to jump to conclusions as myself and others have already done.