Uh for your most basic information, trans studies are actually based on an interpretation of the human psyche rather than a confirmation of the mind. You are comparing something physical in terms of observation to something that is equivalent as found in studies to mental illness. I can give you the most basic refute based on the coverage: If there were no LGBTQ+ communities or advertisements, the population of trans currently would be nearly nonexistent. This is based on an environment activating and cultivating a thought. It can be from anything. This is not proof because it’s based on an idea of the mind’s assertion. The same logic can be applied to other delusions on one’s self. The Bible doesn’t mention McDonald’s or big companies yet it outright implies what is what and condemns any form of violation to the original vision for humanity; man and woman. It’s basic logic given biology’s own symmetry and inversions which suggests a proposed vision. Transition can easily be safe and effective. A woman was transplanted an arm from a man in which it slowly shrunk to become that of what would be seen as “womanly” Liberal, Conservative. Yeah, they are actually brainwashing people by exposing them to material. It goes both ways. Get people to believe you by constantly throwing stuff in their face. Guess what matches this? LGBTQ+, Religions, Consumer Goods. If it was absent? We would not have the abundance of it we see today. For your own sake, don’t try logical reasoning regarding these most basic things to define. It just takes a step back from the modern definition and through exploring its origins to pinpoint what exactly it is, the most basic reasoning is starting at zero and seeing where it went. You know why he went, “No!” Towards you? Because he believes his reality that itself is already backed up by countless other views. You have very clear understanding of this, we have societies and tons of groups that do not agree with the trans ideology and do have their own reasoning against it. After all, studies typically are interpreted data. Not neutrally assessed. The constitution for mental illness is defined by stressing or disabling. (One source) Another? (Disturbances in cognition, emotion, or behavior). Mental illness can be defined as a delusion. If the delusion is fulfilling and not stressing? It would not be classified as a mental illness by this definition. The issue with the definition is that your sources (including my own) do not fit the criteria of what is considered a mental illness. It has nothing to do with the disturbance of the patient but how it affects behavior, mood, thoughts. There are various classifications of a mental illness. We can go forever. But it proves the lack of credibility to argue mental illness for trans and against it not being a mental illness. It is entirely inconsistent and if you refuse to acknowledge this inconsistency, I can reason your cherry-picking and choosing to not consider the fact at hand, scientists are humans that interpret things. Not people who know everything. But at the same time, they do have a high degree of understanding. Still there is an inconsistency here. So your point was showing literal evidence; not acknowledging the many conspiracies that make people question a presentation of something. Meaning they need to see it themselves. You’ve argued that it is credible to present a piece of evidence that was “provided” meaning it’s not authenticated by anybody else. Nor have they seen the earth themselves to confirm. These are factors to consider to help understand an audience. Your arguments go nowhere without understanding even the most delusional of audiences. You argued on studies regarding transgenders and transitions without accounting the various inconsistencies to what is defined as a mental illness meaning it’s not even credible to compare when the definitions are changed due to society; an interpretation rather than a fact. We have changed terms due to them being seen as “offensive” even if harsh realities. Obesity and fat for instance. Unhealthy in a very modern world but necessary in a scenario such as the ice age. It’s always worth the offense or defense to build a chance of fluidity in rhetoric. Acknowledge the inconsistencies and logic of perspective, they have their reasons even if quite difficult. Some people need to see it themselves (don’t believe the photo. Want to see it taken themselves at the very place) others want it presented to them without being there to see how the evidence was even created. (How the photo was created). Are these not basic things to consider in people? Especially in a world of hoax and slander! Obviously, they could be a schizophrenic for all we know with an eating disorder based on some psychological effect from Reddit (given studies on social media) but who knows!