gender abolish rescue

I take a true left wing position on the Transgender issue.  I do not promote the gendered nomenclature practice because I do not want to bolster the oppressive inegalitarian gender construct. I want to abolish gender to end such oppression and spread egalitarianism

Since some leftist, progressive and liberal trans rights activists promote the gendered nomenclature practice, which fulfills a conservative function in that it bolsters the oppressive, inegalitarian gender construct, such trans rights activists are indeed right-wing, regardless of whether they identify as such. Like all fauxgressives, they unwittingly advocate right-wing ideas under the false impression that they're actually progressive.

Keep in mind that the term "right-wing" (which is synonymous with political conservatism) is ambiguous. Most broadly, conservatism seeks to maintain (or "conserve") the status quo, whatever it may be. Since the first class societies formed some 10,000 years ago and generated widespread economic and general social inequality, conservatism has been characteristically anti-egalitarian; it has thenceforth functioned to preserve this highly unequal state of affairs.

Here, I am using the term in this latter, more narrow sense of anti-egalitarianism.

"you're arguing over something you've invented yourself"

False. The term "right-wing" (conservatism) is variously defined as "the view that certain . . . hierarchies are inevitable, natural, normal, or desirable," "a political and social philosophy [whose] central tenets . . . include tradition, hierarchy, and authority," "the intellectual justification of inequality and privilege, and the political justification of the authoritative relationships such inequalities and privileges demand," etc. This is in line with my definition and application of the term, which is evidently not some idiosyncratic take on the topic, as you seem to imply.

"You have far too much time on your hands. All you're doing here is wanking, you're not achieving anything other than giving yourself a reason use terms like vis-a-vis, nomenclature, fauxgressive etc and waffle on."

I really don't get the point of these kinds of useless comments in debate. They do not strengthen your argument; if anything, they detract from it.

As I stated above, these tactics are all you people rely on, because actually addressing criticisms of your view would force you to accept its untenability. Ya'll are fanatics, not genuine truth-seekers.

"All I've said is respect trans people's wishes, that's it."

And that's all you can do: Offer simplistic takes.

"Please don't reply, it's tedious."

This is quite the candid remark, one that I did not expect. What you're basically saying is that fauxgressives like yourself are averse to defending their views because they feel that doing so is tedious. I concur; the mental gymnastics required by adherence to fauxgressive ideas must be tiresome indeed, as they are all untenable.

If nothing else, at least you're honest.