I think you actually don’t like the message of the comic, because if you didn’t like it or thought it was lazy, you would probably move on.

For me, this comic represents my lived experience. I have had people in my life literally say “It’s just politics” and call trans people sexually deviant pedophiles at the same time. And if you haven’t had that happen to you, good for you. But I like the comic because it is simple, short, and pretty good at conveying that feeling.

Sorry if that feels lazy to you, art is subjective, but I think the message of this is pretty fucking obvious because of its simplicity.

That’s a fair point. I suppose that does put onus on people to prove their existence and experience. I can see that as frustrating, and I didn’t intend on making that statement.

The issue at hand, however, is how the OP can determine that trans people even exist, and using the existence of studies is one that is easily acceptable to most people. If your argument is that there should be no need to prove identities so long as no one is harmed, then I believe you are arguing with the wrong person, since that same sentiment was already expressed in my original reply.

Taking your stance is fine to anyone that accepts that these identities harm no one, but that in itself is obviously in contention with too many people. I will argue the easier logic until that is fixed.

I think you misunderstood, but I’m not presupposing otherkin isn’t a thing. I am saying it doesn’t have the same type of intellectual backing as transgender experience does, so it isn’t treated the same. I think that is unfortunate, even if there are studies done as well as expressed experiences, especially within indigenous peoples (and you could argue that is part of the reason fewer studies are done on it.)

I’m not really here to debate whether fish exist because I know fish exist and I can drive to most lakes and find fish in them and I can go to a few museums and see fish remains and I can go to pet stores and find fish for sale and I can go to a grocery store and find fish to eat. Doing that same thing with people and their personal experiences is much harder since it’s more of a personal experience and not, you know, a visible phenomenon, and so it’s going to be harder to convince people a personal experience is real if it’s not their experience and especially if it’s not a common one.

where does one determine where to draw the line?

Short answer: By what the experts say, and they say transgender people should be treated as the gender they identify as. Period.

Long answer: A lot of PhDs did a fuckload of research over a century plus and showed that, yeah, gender is super fucking complicated and doesn’t map out to male/female based on your genitals at birth (let alone for the reason that, you know, maybe you might be born with a penis AND a vagina or ovaries AND testes or female chromosomes AND male genetalia, etc.), and if people get some simple gender affirmation, they live better and happier lives, and that applies to cisgender people, as well.

Easy answer: You can claim to be fucking anything you want. Who actually gives a shit? Let people be themselves if it don’t hurt anyone. What’s the problem with being a transgirl or a transboy? Why do we even have multiple bathrooms? That just seems to punish all sorts of people for no reason.

If you WANT to say transracial or transspecies or transnational is a thing, by all means do some research and prove it through studies and peer review. Until then, it is unlikely to be recognized the same way that transgender has because it has a lot of supporting evidence.

Idk, I think it’s VERY SPECIFICALLY about trans rights, but I just can put my finger on why…

The children yearn for the mines.

LGBTQ is surprisingly unaccepting towards bigots. And I find that pretty accepting because I am not a bigot.

Russia started the war in Ukraine, so it seems like it is entirely Russia’s fault and Russia should end it, no?

Can women be in men’s sports?

What about the veterans who lost their government job?

What efficiency has been created?

What if he starts concentration camps, is that enough to compare Trump to Hitler? Or does it have to specifically be death camps? What if people in those concentrations camps just disappeared and nobody cound find them, would that count?