Long post, as journey over and pulling stuff together. If it's too long for posters to read/respond to, no worries, just scroll on by. But replies hopefully awaited if possible from @mattala and @giraffezoo.
This post really gets to the heart of our disagreement, Mattala. I've now read everything up to it, and get the impression we're still not on the same wavelength re. where I personally saw bias (prejudice was probably an unhelpfully strong term) in the first post of yours to which I replied. The following may help?!
Above, you say, "I think language choices when discussing things that give people pain should be chosen carefully and mindfully." I agree.
With regard to this, I can see your argument that the lemon metaphor could be distressing to trans-identifying individuals. @GenderlessVoid has also opened both our eyes to another demographic's suffering on this front (I was so sorry to read this). My original post focussed on a third group: women in the sense of female-bodied adult humans.
Can you see that I had to add a definition there to clarify my meaning? The word previously used to describe that group has been degraded so much that it's no longer possible to refer to it without wordy explanations and qualifiers. I personally see that as hugely problematic. I'm still not sure where you stand on it, though. Your initial post suggested to me that you didn't really see it as an issue. Subsequent posts have focussed on AI (again, not using it!) and, still, trans people's pain. So I remain curious about your views on the women?
In recent pages, Taztoy shared some of her personal trauma, including asking, "Can you explain to me how me thinking a man can present as he chooses but cannot change his sex is mocking? I’m really interested and asking genuinely." You later use the words, "Imagine if it was someone who was talking about their real pain and you went and compared it to something trivial and silly." I hope Taztoy doesn't mind me saying: this is exactly what's happening to her. Just to pick one example of many: of the huge proportion of women who have endured rape or abuse, a significant proportion will find the BBC's description of high-profile rapists as women an incredibly distressing trivialisation of their sex-based trauma.
I mean, it's not really even a matter of "someone talking about their real pain" and it being compared to "something trivial and silly" - if only it were as simple as that. I'd argue that it's something far more disturbing and, frankly, earth-shattering to them. It denies their physical reality. It's obscuring public understanding of risk profiles. It is, by extension, also distorting political debate and democratic norms. It's huge. And, to return to your focus on the individual, it is, meanwhile, unutterly distressing to many individual women. AprilMizzel goes into this more deeply in her post at 1313.
We don't hear about these women much - certainly not as much as we do about trans women. Many are afraid to speak up. When you look at what some have been dragged to court for, it's not hard to see why.
So what I and some other posters are seeking to understand is 1) Do you recognise this perspective - that trans women's appropriation of "woman" and, yes, the pronoun "she" is offensive, humiliating, viscerally distressing etc. - does exist, and 2) Do you recognise its validity (ie. perhaps not agree with it, but at least see that some people may justifiably feel this way as opposed to simply being bigotted)?
I'd also be interested to hear from Giraffezoo re. 2), above, especially in response to your description of "transphobia" and "the idea of transphobia" (or whatever your words were) as being essentially the same. I'd say the two are in fact vitally different: for me, "the idea of transphobia" is the current cultural currency (the largely unquestioned belief that it's "kind" to use preferred pronouns), and the other must be reserved for actual bigotry. I believe that, in confusing the two, we do transpeople a disservice, too - as others have pointed out - in leaving no word (once again!) to name something that needs a name: actual hatred.
Speaking of cultural currency, to draw to a close...
Mattala, you also say, "Im saying mocking any pain is distasteful and not something I like to partake in due to my moral reasons. Which I think is due to growing up in a culture that drums tolerance into you from a young age." To me, this is actually the crux of it. We're living in a culture that's beating an aggressive drum of tolerance to transwomen at the expense of women. I think many people have accepted this unquestioningly, in large part because of eg. the BBC and main political parties effectively proscribing the GC perspective for so long. That saying TWAW and calling males "she" is fundamentally good, preventing distress, was always an arbitrary moral decision. In an alternative universe somewhere, to say the exact same things could easily be seen as utter anathema - appallingly cruel - because in that wonderful universe, women are valued more highly.
My feeling is that the greatest oppression is surely the one that is least visible of all - even to the average good-hearted, thinking person.