You see, this is one of the main reasons, in my view, that your side is losing ground. What first convinced me that there was something problematic about this ideology (note: not trans-identifying people as a group, but the collective conviction that self-declared gender automatically overrules sex and the silencing of debate on this) was the almost complete inability of your "side" to argue its case convincingly and respectfully. By this, I don't mean forgoing the odd sharp riposte - goodness knows, we "TERFs" love that 😁 - but, instead, how rapidly posters on your side tend to sink into overt insult and empty rhetoric that, in any other context, and directed at any other demographic, would be total anathema.
Your post above above is a case in point. Unpleasantly personal and deeply disrespectful towards women. And all the while - at risk of stating the painfully obvious - you don't know me!
For example, I'm happy to share, in the face of your good ol' leap to an assumption of "dislike" (I mean, what am I, 10?!) the following. I don't feel I should have to, but do so to make the point that our respective approaches to this debate appear to be immeasurably different, and yours has the potential to drive more of people to my way of thinking - that's what happened with me.
So.
On a personal level, I know a number of trans people, and care about them. In more general terms, I have particular interest in and sympathy for trans-identifying children and, particularly, females, to the point of reading books, research and reports about the phenomenon, and discussing it with medics I know. I'm also interested in and have some cautious respect for (happy to elaborate on the "cautious", should you wish to engage more meaningfully) for a number of trans women commentators - I've read a fair amount by Debbie Hayton and watched Natalie's ContraPoints videos, for example. I also skim transreddit sometimes to hear what the "other side" is saying. I don't engage there, though, as the posting style is so different to the usual standards here - more personal attacks and unfounded assumptions of prejudice, much like your reply to me above.
But everyone has their own interests and priorities and, above all this, I care about women's sex-based-rights. Everything I've read - and that's a lot by now! - has consolidated my concerns about the impact this ideology is having on these. I make no apologies for this focus, or for stating it directly and forcefully in a context like this.
More than any of the above, though, please note that, even my more strongly worded posts offer up (I like to think, often quite good!) arguments that you could respond to instead of the quote I paste above. Lengthier, more thoughtful responses - I was involved in a really interesting debate with (gah - forgotten the poster's name) on your side recently - are those that tend to really interest and engage me. Because this is a complex issue and I believe in open debate about it.
Anyway, in short, the approach I take, which so, so many do on the FWR board especially (which is what drew me to it) is so utterly different to the one your post above epitomises, that replies like yours above just tend to confirm our concerns about the movement your post is (I assume) trying to support. There seems to be a fundamental lack of reason, insight and meaningful empathy (as opposed to selective and surface "kindness") characterising it. I find this disturbing, and it leaves me worried for women and also for its more vulnerable members.