1) it's not.

2) a political opinion can be transphobic, or racist or homophobic. If you push to take away a gay couples right for adoption, that's homophobic and political. It really depends on the reasoning behind it.

3) The terms of a relationship are defined by the people in it. If the dude I'm seeing sees me as a woman then it's a straight relationship. If you wanna call it gay I'd say it's inaccurate, but whatever floats your boat.

4) misgendering is often used to attack trans people on a deeply personal level. But I like comparisons. If you cite the bell curve because of your worldview and science your're probably a racist. If you misgender trans folk intentionally because of your worldview you're probably a transphobe. 5) Gotta get em young you know. Can't build a "transsexual empire" if you don't start early. Edgy jokes aside. GD is an actual thing and early treatment gives better results overall. Not for everything [trans men beeing shorter and trans women may have issues with SRS later] sure. Secondly if we continue assuming that GD exists, then we should enable those who suffer from it to have access to the most effective treatment possible. If you don't think it exists, then you may want to provide another reason for why trans folk exist.

6) spaces and sports are different and should be evaluated differently. I'm not knowledgeable on sports so I won't comment. Spaces depend on the space. Bathrooms don't get safer for women if trans folk have to use the bathroom according to their sex, once you actually think about it and grant the premise that predators will dress as trans women to gain access to these spaces. Let me explain. If trans women had to use men's bathrooms it would follow that trans men should use women's bathrooms. Trans men don't pose a threat to women, because they are women, but a certain percentage passes as cis at a glance. Now you have male presenting people in women's bathrooms. So a cis predator wouldn't even have to try and present female to gain access to women's spaces. If you wanna argue that it's especially the trans women who pose a threat, then that would be transphobic. If you argue for 3rd spaces you probably aren't.

On the note of using these spaces pre transition. Don't. But if your medical system requires social transition before access to treatment that's a different story.

Prisons and similar are a different issue, but even there strict sex segregation isn't the solution if you have the safety of all vulnerable groups both during and after the sentence in mind. The latter is especially important if we want to use prsion as a chance to reform and not just as penalty.

7) as I've said before superstraight is actually quite welcome. If you give me a heads up that you don't wanna date me great. I don't get the comparison to hair color, height or race or whatever traits, but I can't intuit sexuality in general so that's most likely a me problem.

What I have an issue with is the current state of the movement. It's not the alledgedly wholesome movement it started out as. At least not anymore. There is a ton of transphobia running around. I also don't get the need to organize a movement. If you wanna write superstraight in your dating profile great. If you go full pride Mode like the oppressed majority you are and parade it on Twitter you're probably transphobic.

The discussion about "super" straight as opposed to something like cisgay or cisbi is also interesting, but useless. The only person it tells us anything about is the dude on tiktok who came up with it.

8) I think you found the most of the common points.