Not everyone is pushing it, but most of the loudest ones in here are.

>If other trans- phenomena exist, let them at least be
>characterized, defined and understood. Simply doing so does
>not counteract transgender/LGBTQ advocacy in any way.

I don't know of anybody who is opposed to a discussion of other trans-phenomena, only to discussions that are used to counteract transgender advocacy, which is what we're seeing in this post.

>I mean, does the LGBTQ movement subjugate the Black Civil
>Rights movement? Did the Black Civil Rights movement subjugate
>the Women's suffrage movement?? Lol, like where does it end.

...Is there a transracial movement that I somehow missed?

>The meta-narrative here is really supposed to boil down to
>human rights. Alleviation of barriers to improved quality of
>life. Gender expression is but one arena where humans
>encounter such barriers. Why would barriers with respect to
>poverty/class, race, ethnicity, sex, etc. not also be a
>"thing"?

Cool. I'm all about discussing concrete examples of real-life plights, not insincere hypotheticals.

>The "non-thing"/"LGBTQ was here first" theme is really one of
>the most disappointing products of this discourse. It's like
>"Identity Olympics"

I've never heard or ready anyone say "LGBTQ was here first" and I'm not convinced that you have either.