I know, I know,, logic is mean, maybe white supremacist, and surely Raayciss, but like other truths, this is another point idiots,, oops, misspelled lefties, can't answer..

 This mixes two different things.

 Birth genitals versus gender "affirming" changes.  The logic is that genitals at birth do not affirm the psychologically accepted/identified gender after birth when a human has some lived experience.  

 Surgery to alter the biological/physical body to match the psychological dysphoria is the affirming action.


 Acknowledging that genitals at birth are different than the psychological identification of gender is not equal to supporting gender altering surgeries, identification of gender or even the birth of humans.  None of my assessment is "defending" any type of surgery of any kind on any human anywhere.

Great explanation of what the 'WOKE" think.
some would call that deflection.


 Its not deflection it is just how transgender identifying humans argue their point.  Birth genitals do not affirm their gender, the surgery altering their birth genitals do.  One is physical, one is psychological, the gender-affirming surgery alters the physical to match the psychological.

 None of that statement is implying anything.  None of the above statement is "defending" any "WOKE" think.  None of it is saying people "should" get gender-affirming surgery.

 Acknowledging how gender affirming surgery is argued for is not equal to supporting it.  

 Just like acknowledging that Red gun laws exist and how they are argued for, is not equal to supporting Red gun laws.  Since you can accurately assess how Red gun laws work, does that imply you support them?


More to that, or is it as written?

Or was it 'inferred' that you meant when you typed;
"...None of my assessment is "defending" any type of surgery of any kind..."
It was only about Gender surgery,
not Gallbladder Surgery.

 It was about all surgeries.  None of my statements "defend" any surgery.  My statements have nothing to do with "defending" anything at all.