For those who are confused, Transgender and Transsexual are NOT interchangeable terms.
Transgender people are people who have a gender identity or gender expression that differs from their assigned sex. Transgender people are
sometimes called transsexual if they desire medical assistance to transition from one sex to another.
Link
Transsexual people experience a gender identity that is inconsistent with, or not culturally associated with, their assigned sex, and
desire to permanently transition to the gender with which they identify, usually seeking medical assistance (including hormone replacement therapy and
other sex reassignment therapies) to help them align their body with their identified sex or gender. Transsexual is generally considered a subset
of transgender, but some transsexual people reject the label of transgender.
Link
I don't think the vast majority of people in Western countries have a problem with those who identify as transgender when they are clear about what
the term means. The problem comes in when you want to use your beliefs to infringe upon the rights of others simply because they do not agree with
you, which isn't a valid justification.
If you are a wealthy person (having enough money to accomplish something without needing others to support you, regardless of whether you are in that
position justly or not) who wants to transition from a male into a female, you should be free to do so. Others can vehemently disagree with your
decision to do so, but they cannot actually prevent you from doing so within the law. If they do this, then they are infringing on your rights and
will be persecuted.
If you are a person who cannot afford to have transition surgery and cannot convince people who love and support your decision to aid you financially
to support your goal, you cannot then expect to force tax-payers to pay for your surgery when the evidence you are relying on to back up your claim is
not supported by strong evidence.
And this is the reason why: once the standard to establish something as real is NOT backed by strong evidence, some people will abuse it. If you claim
that you are a tree and nothing can convince you otherwise, that is not in itself a problem. What harm are you actually doing to anybody (except
questionably your own sanity) by being rigid in this belief? Nothing. What harm are you doing when you
prefer others to agree that you are a
tree? Not much, after all, you are not
forcing them to believe you are a tree, you are merely suggesting you prefer they recognise you as a
tree.
If they are a generally pleasant person, they will agree to call you a tree even if they disagree your views are wrong. An unpleasant person is more
likely to refuse your request and will not abide unless they are forced to. (Whether that be by force coming from you or the government, they are
being forced against their will to believe something for which there is no strong evidence to support that position.)
Now imagine a law is implemented
without measures that deter abusing the law for nefarious reasons. The consequences of implementing that law
would be disastrous. A society that is reasonable cannot allow such a law to be implemented if they want to remain reasonable.
edit on 3/4/2017 by Dark Ghost because: (no reason given)