So what?
Okay, so you donât mind if i donât buy into their multiple gender identity game. So why are you hustling me about it?
Apparently I was right ⌠you are confusing Rights with benefits.
Relationships are a Right. Marriage is not. Marriage is a contract that opens the door to some benefits (and some penalties) but not to additional Rights.
You have to understand some people will never use the appropriate terms, in fact they will purposefully use the terms that person doesnât want used toward them to ridicule and shame them.
lol Youâre the one who replied to my response to TheRedComet. If you donât want to discuss something then donât start talking to me about it.
Itâs a right to a benefit.
Oh, so now you want to play the âI wasnât talking to you gameâ? 
True⌠my information is more aimed at those who are in general supportive of transgender rights, even if they have concerns with sports and minors, and want to use the appropriate terms. It also just helps clear up any confusion.
Youâre the one moaning about being hustled.
No. Marriage is a government issued permit for access to certain benefits (and liabilities.) One (or rather two) must qualify to meet the terms of the contract and they must get the governmentâs permission if they want out of the contract. Rights exist regardless of the governmentâs rules.
Moaning? Exposing your game is not moaning.
We have rights in our Constitution that are specific to government. For example the 6th amendment.
Where is Marriage cited as a Right?
I provided an easy way to understand which terms are appropriate for trans women and trans men and you started arguing with me about it. If anyone is trying to play a game, its you. If you donât care then, as you said, move on.
Yes you did. And I provided a reason (not an argument) why non-woke people may not follow that arbitrary explanation. The people who made that term up could have just as easily followed the same logic and come up with the opposite result.
Itâs not arbitrary at all and the logic is straight forward. Trans men donât want to be called women and vice versa. The idea that the terms could have just as easily been applied the other way around isnât logical.
The logic leads to two separate and opposite results. That makes choosing one of those arbitrary. What they want does not change that.
In many places. For example in Loving v. Virginia:
âThe freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men âŚ
To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the Stateâs citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discriminations. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.â -Chief Justice Earl Warren
Under what line of logic would a person who presents themselves as a woman be okay with being called a man or vice versa.
How am I supposed to know what they are presenting themselves as, if gender norms are outdated? Itâs ok for a man to wear a dress and lipstick right?
