If you are not familiar with the local/state laws going into effect which legislate official identification and presentation in ways that impact trans people, they're particularly easy to Google. The differences between the positions of cannot exist in public view and cannot exist at all are insignificant in practice.

Shifting the goalpost.

No. In practice they are the same.

Yes. They are not the same, and you know this. These social pressure tactics do little but turn people against your cause at this point. The difference is in intent. While it is possible they look the same from the outside, one intends to protect what they love, while the other intends to hurt what it hates.

Making these people out to be the same serves to turn people who might be convinced to help you into your worst enemies instead. No one likes being made out to be a bad person simply for seeking to protect what is important to them. The two are not the same, and too many people screeching that they are, and that conservatives all hate trans people is the issue in the first place. It's weird.

Can you restate? Are you saying "cannot exist in public view" and "cannot exist in practice" are not really the same?

Which one intends to protect what they love, and what is "what they love?"

> conservatives all hate trans people

Not all conservatives, but lots of them don't want trans people to exist.

I'm saying that they have different motivations behind their views, and should therefore be argued against in different ways. Lumping them together like that is not helpful, it is shameful.

I know all about not being allowed to exist, just for being who you are, trust me, I do. I also know a lot about convincing people to LET you exist, rather than choosing between crushing your enemy, subjugating yourself to them, or running away. There is usually a better way. That seems to have been forgotten in modern days, but it certainly still exists.

It starts with following the site guidelines of arguing in good faith and assuming the best out of your opponents. In your view, "cannot exist in public view" and "cannot exist in practice" are one and the same. In their view it is not.

What you are doing is ASSERTING your reality over someone else. That's not a very nice thing to do, whether you're right or not. You WILL have pushback. If you want to convince people of the veracity of your views, you cannot hold that pushback against them. Certainly react to it, certainly defend yourself, but don't hold a grudge against people just for daring to fight you in the first place.

They might be wrong and you might be wrong. In this case, I'm inclined to agree with your view here, but that doesn't mean that people who don't are bad people. Just misguided.

If you want people to show compassion for you and your plight, start by showing compassion for them and theirs. Anything else is quite frankly a waste of time.

I'm not familiar with that, give me a link or Google search term to use so I can see for myself.

Easy to search for "anti-trans laws US" and do your research here.

Newsflash, trans people have always been a thing. Since like, recorded history. Some people in the US just decided to start caring about this now.

Thanks for asking me to clarify. I mean it in the literal sense: they want a world without trans people. I'm not interested really in getting into my subjective views on the harm I believe that leads to, but Ill answer and say no, I don't believe very many people want direct violence against trans people.

I don't know if you can group trans people into a political category where you can say they all don't want conservatives to exist??? I literally know trans conservatives who voted for trump (you'd not be able to tell they are trans).

> they may not agree with different life choices

I don't know what you intended, but phrasing it that way is a literal denial of the existence of trans people. Transitioning is a realization of who the person has always been, not a "life choice" to suddenly be someone different.

Denying the existence of something and not wanting something to exist are not exactly the same thing, but there is a lot of overlap. Again, I don't know what you intended, but many people pointedly use the word "choice" around this topic. Your phrase would be more accurate if it said "they may not agree with different life experiences" or "they may not agree with different lived realities". Those are decidedly more cutting than the phrasing you used.

Phrasing it the way you are is a literal denial of the existence of conservative people, because having conservative viewpoints is a realization of who the person has always been, not a life choice.

The person has always been a trans person. Like a gay person has always been gay. If conservatives don't believe that, them being wrong isn't a denial that conservatives exist.