People need a shared narrative of eg. a problem to solve, to come together. The right wing narrative today is deliberatetly targeted against any imaginary enemy, that does not subscribe to the narrative, which excludes/targets basically all left leaning people, all out groups. With this tribalistic setup in the centre, common ground is impossible.

This broad rejection without good reasons is borderline sociopathic. ... and parental control is not the gov raising anyone.

When you throw such a tool into the existing incentive structure, that already produces inhumane atrocities, i wouldnt be that optimistic.

[1]: https://www.npr.org/2016/04/18/474256366/why-americas-school...

[2]: https://www.nea.org/nea-today/all-news-articles/no-accountab...

The angle of treating transportation as regulated utility shifts the business focus away from profit onto providing services, which sometimes can cost more than your income. Similarly, would you close schools, because they didnt make enough money? Airlines are highly subsidized anyway, treating them as regulated utilities falls short of taking public ownership as public institutions, where services just cost money/subsidies.

> That said, an adult who “loves to be a kindergartener” is not an indicator of good mental health

This sentence is insane and reflects on a narrow and egocentric worldview, which is a bad prospect for further conversation.

You think i am not toying with you, because you dont fully grasp my example.

> I think you are confusing the concept of a biological category, and the concept of a cultural stereotype

The feminie kindergartener is a biological male with a female-ish brain. I added one more important dimension besides your genetics/reproductive organs angle. This alone should be enough to make you rethink your clear dichotomy of biological sex and culture/behavior.

Is the development of the brain only biological or only cultural. (This is a trick question. The nature vs nurture debate is decades old and messy but certainly non-binary.)

You can only regard the kindergartener as male, when you exempt all his female traits, including biological ones. Why is this not simplistic or ignorant? And ontop of that, calling such a person mentally ill is just evil to me.

Yes, the edges are fuzzy but biology and sociology, the 2 domains defining gender, are not one dimensional. There are many ways an individual could step out of the majority cohort with different body, brain or social perception traits. There are many gender determining factors.

Imagine a empathetic, low testosterone and muscle structure male that loves to be a kindergartener. Lets say he develops homosexual tendencies in his 30s and tries to late transition in his 40s. The role he played in society never changed, "he" has always been the same feminine guy caring for children but somewhere in is life, your perception of him changed. At what stage in his life would he fall out or into your category of "protecting of the weak"? What if the same person transotions before puberty and is indistinguishable from a 'real' woman from the outside?

I could keep toying with you by using your simplicity against you, since there are fuzzy edges everywhere.

> stop demanding the world to see you as something you aren’t.

What if its you seeing someone as something they arent?

If you dont like that transwomen want to be called and regarded as "real" women, just remind yourself about the complexity of what a "real" women is and that this person primarily just wants to fit in the role and is satisfied with that social, and not biological, definition of a "real" women.

In essence, the entire topic is about broad category mismatches, human dignity and respect and cognitive biases around out groups and disgust. And no matter how long you keep stare on ot, your dick wont give the full picture.