So, the Canadian link agrees with me except it makes a caveat that gender can change how it's expressed depending on different factors, again true. That's completely different from saying it doesn't exist. It doesn't mean they are arbitrary and can be changed at will to whatever you want. All it ends up meaning is that you are swimming against a torrential waterfall of evidence against you so you can try to convince society that men and women aren't different. Good luck with that.

​

The UK link you sent me is utopian dogma. I mean seriously? "SDGs are a universal call to action to end poverty, protect the planet and ensure that all people enjoy peace and prosperity by 2030". They got 7 years to establish world peace, destroy capitalism, end climate change, and destroy observable reality. I guess I wish them luck?

​

As for the third link from the council of Europe... it specifically states that the new usage of the word gender is meant to fight against biological determinism. While I disagree with what some proponents of biological determinism state (in the same way I disagree on the trans issue, people drawing causation from correlation), you would be incredibly ignorant on these topics to think genetics doesn't play a role in literally everything about you. Your lack of ANY biological knowledge is actually mind blowing to me.

I know I won't change your mind, and I don't intend to respond again to a militant ideologue. I just want to suggest you really think about your actions and read The Art of War. The way you activist types are going about this is at best a 50/50 shot of self destruction, but more than likely you're just going to radicalize people to the point that whatever imagined violence you see now is going to turn much more real and much more harsh. Your dogmatic attitude is going to hurt untold numbers of uninvolved and very real people, and I intend to fight it so long as it exists.

False equivocation doesn't work on me. If you want to try being manipulative, go do it to someone else. It doesn't help your argument nor provide any evidence. Sex and gender being separate is true, but just means guys can be feminine and girls can be masculine. It does not mean that these things are arbitrary categorizations.
I mean if you actually are trans, you should know better than anyone that we call these "treatments" feminizing and masculinizing for a reason. You aren't changing your sex, you are changing how you appear to others. You don't get to destroy other peoples protected categories without reprisal just because of your feelings.

Sure, we can just forget the literal mountain of evidence showing how men are not women /s. It's one thing to say that these scholarships are discriminating based off sex/race/whatever, but when you start trying to ignore the obvious reality then you're off your rocker. I just want to be clear that what you are pretending is true is completely and totally baseless. It's progress for sure, but more in the sense that cancer progresses.
I'm not going to waste time arguing with your ideological foundation, but I highly recommend you don't speak on these subjects until you have ANY proof of theory.
This pageant is a private affair I believe. They can run it how they want, but they can't control how people react to it, nor the actual reality. I can hold a competition to say blue is the best shade of red, but it doesn't change the fact that these are different wavelengths.

A lot of the data we have is either slanted, misrepresented, or just factually incorrect. The trans suicide rate constantly repeated for instance is actually just suicidal thoughts. If the suicide rate was actually as high as they say then even despite the extremely small number of trans people the annual suicide rate would be many times higher and completely dominated by trans people. So much of this has become a horrible game of telephone. We need to forget this group identity nonsense and stop letting uneducated activists disseminate scientific studies for the public.
As far as this being a beauty competition so it doesn't matter... I mean, a lot goes into this and I don't want to write an actual essay. I'll just say that when one of the things you take pride in is intruded upon that most people feel threatened. I think these competitions are dumb and even potentially harmful to women's image in general, but letting an obese man in a dress win it is even more harmful because it says that women don't even have that beauty to begin with.
Is that harm good or bad? I tend to think bad because it denies the basic human experience, but the real answer is that we don't know the result of attempting to tweak these cultural levers. I will say you shouldn't ever feel bad for whatever you are naturally attracted to, we know now that it's just another inalienable characteristic. The point of a beauty contest though is to show what the plurality of people (at least within a sub group) find attractive. I can't imagine the target audience of this pageant is a group that finds him more attractive than these women, but I've been surprised before.

It's one thing to see someone as just another human who is trans. It's quite another to pretend a man is actually a woman to the point of giving them money meant for women's scholarships. I'm not scholar of Orwell, but I'm pretty certain he's be against calling things what they obviously aren't.

Just imagine how it feels for those girls to be basically told they are less attractive than an obese man in a dress? It's not that long ago that this would have been a gigantic insult to women, now I guess it's seen as "progress".