Nope, but keep telling yourself that. I've seen a couple of interviews with him now, and he's been anything but belligerent, quite the opposite. That's not to say he, like all of us, couldn't be belligerent.
The funny part is both you and prof Jordan Peterson are perfectly comfortable with using non-gender specific pronouns, that's what "them" is BTW, and prof Jordan Peterson did exactly the same thing when the National Post published what he said, "that if a student asked him to be referred to by a non-binary pronoun, he would not recognize their request: “I don’t recognize another person’s right to determine what pronouns I use to address them. I won’t do it.” For someone so against non-binary pronouns he's extremely adept at using them.
To be honest even if transgender people didn't exist, having a gender neutral way to refer to someone would actually be a useful language tool. Also while we're at it, an official word for the plural form "you" would also be useful.
In Dutch, German and French for instance there is a singular and plural "you" (jij/jullie, Du/Ihr, tu/vous).
From my experience it isn't a problem with transgender people (actual transgender people, not the weirdos on tumblr), because they put in an effort to make their new gender obviously recognizable, so the whole pronoun thing isn't even an issue. But yeah it certainly would be helpful, especially for Americans who are far too fond of giving their kids names that don't make the gender obvious.
Their *sex not gender. And it's transsexual not transgender. Trans = transformation. Sex (something you are born with) = either male or female, the transformation from one sex to the other. Which of course isn't biologically possible to begin with, but that's the idea. Transgender is a misnomer and have unfortunately opened up to (and to the acceptance by many) of mental disorders, currently there are around 50 such disorders with new ones being invented. You have people choosing to be what they call fluid, one day they are male, the other day they are female, and on another day they are neither male or female but something else. The issue here isn't so much transsexual people, but the lunatics who attack children from an early age, telling them that they can be either sex or something else entirely. That they can somehow choose. This is very sinister. Not just that, but that they also insist that sex, which is a biological construct, is a social construct, and that which is a social construct, is a biological construct. This is abuse on a massive level and with huge implications.
Sex is the biological state; gender is the psychosociocultural stuff that goes with it. Even then sex isn't that easily defined. We all start out as female in the womb. Androgen insenstive people have a male XY chromosome set but develop physically as mostly female (they lack a womb and ovaries, but otherwise their bodies are indistinguishable from other females), complete with the brain wiring that makes them feel female and sexually attracted to males. Hermaphrodites may have male and female sexual characteristics. And it turns out that in the womb testosterone masculinises the body but feminises the brain, and oestrogen does the opposite (the reason it all generally pans out is that the brain flips one into the other). Gender dysphoric people have been shown to have the brain wiring corresponding to the gender they feel, irrespective of the body that brain inhabits (that hormone flipping thing doesn't always pan out). I think that you misunderstand the definition of mental disorder, BTW.
Sex is the biological construct correct, and your sexual identity, when everything works as intended, will be married to your sex.
I see nothing so far that suggests fascism. Equating the rights of transgender people with fascism is a bit of a stretch, isn't it? Ninja'd by Nexxo (again), but whatever... Actually no, it is recognised that gender identity, biological sex, and - while we're in this ball park - sexual orientation are distinct concepts. As we learn more our general knowledge base expands - it's a process we generally refer to as "science". Once we might have thought that biological sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation are intrinsically linked, but we've learned more since then and collectively our understanding has changed. Based on past experience I know science isn't exactly something you're comfortable with, so I can see how you might be a bit behind in your thinking here. What did you have for breakfast, by the way?* *What? That was an ad-hominem? Psh... fine...
In nature, "works as intended" does not exist, unless you believe in a Creator. Either it works, or it doesn't. We've got to be careful about how our paradigms lead us down a certain path of thinking, no?
They are, but sometimes there's a glitch. The glitch doesn't happen very often thou. And most often it does work.
So now you've moved from transsexuals to homosexuals? In any case, both are biological glitches. Neither happens that often, not that many of the population who are either transsexual or homosexual, let alone who one day identify as male, the next day as female, and the day after that as something completely different.
No, I did that because you stated that not being heterosexual is a "glitch" - i.e., abnormal. Do try to keep up.
I'm not the one who can't keep up, as for abnormal look up the definition. Unless of course you wanna change the definition of abnormal and the definition of normal a.k.a the norm. The normal state which would be heterosexuality, correct. As I said, sometimes there's a glitch. The glitch doesn't happen very often thou. As demonstrated by numbers, biology, and by all means science.
Depends on what you call a glitch. A 'glitch' could be natural selection's next evolutionary step, no? As far as nature is concerned: anything goes, if it goes. In nature homosexuality works. Everything else is subjective opinion. Gender fluidity is not a mental disorder if it is not a problem for the person who experiences it (it being a problem for some other people doesn't count).