Subject: Re: Question for LGBTQ+++ advocates
Or is this just hypothetical and you're upset because the way you saw the world is changing and you don't like it?

This. And you should not like it either. Change is not always for the better and I want honest and fair people to acknowledge that. Those with agenda (left or right) can go to the wall.

If you go along with the forced acceptance of trans "women" (biological males) as being fully equal to women, recognize that you will need a minimum of 64 words to describe a person, instead of four - man, woman, gay, straight.

64 because the person has a tuple (biological sex, gender expression, gender identity) and may be sexually attracted to another person with a (biological sex, gender expression, gender identity).

And this is a simplification because what I am representing as a binary choice for each variable in the tuple is actually a bimodal distribution with some/many people falling in between 100% male/female/gay/straight. It's not practical and defies common sense to impose 64 categories.

All societies in all ages ("primitive" or "civilized") have recognized at least a third category besides biological males and females who identify and express as such, and sometimes more. But also had the common sense to not commingle the categories. Only the modern West seems hellbent on drowning out nature. It's irrational and wrong.