system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: though people with gender dysphoria are perfectly sane people in the sense that they can and should be granted all the rights and freedoms other people have in every sense, that does not mean we should pretend that G.D. is not a mental disorder.

Thus, people should not be offended if we say, for example, that a biological male is fundamentally different than a trasgender one, that they're not the same thing.

It's an opinion I have, trying to put together the pieces I find reasonable in the two sides of the argument. It's a question of coherence more than one of consecuential value, meaning I'd like the idea could be refuted using just arguments about it's internal conherence and not by the mention of possible consecuences reaching it as conclusion may bring.
gpt
>that a biological male is fundamentally different than a trasgender one, that they're not the same thing.

I don't think that I've ever met a trans person who says they are the same thing.

The problem is when people think this "fundamental difference" means that there is no such thing as being a trans man, or that a trans man will "never be" a man, and arguments like that.

I mean, people often say lines like "they're not the same thing" or "these people are denying reality" but that isn't what trans people are doing. Trans people know the reality of their body. They know their chromosomes. They know they can't change how they were born. They know that being a trans man and a cis man are different. But that doesn't mean that they can't be trans.