Listen, you can be a they/them non-binary whatever. That is your right to self-expression. But when it comes to substantial politics and real LGBTQ-issues, I consider a couple comprising a male and a female to be an ordinary straight couple. You might think it is queer and against heteronormativity when the masc-leaning female gets pregnant, because then the “man” in the relationship is carrying the child. Or you might think it is queer (lesbian) when both partners identify as women. But when, in the delivery room, the female pushes and the male is comforting them or is absent, I see nothing but the foundation of straight culture since the beginning of human existence. So, for the sake of this text, I am talking from my perspective, hence from the intersection of homosexual and so-called gender-non-conforming, and leaving straight people with a mere political view aside. 

And from that perspective, I do not see much difference in the issues raised by the "I am gay, not queer" gays on one side and the trans crowd on the other side. It very much resembles the horseshoe theory from general political theory (a theory that might be wrong). I don't have much to say about lesbians, and they are also perfectly capable of talking for themselves anyway. But when it comes to biological males, hence masc gays and trans women, the claims "gay men are just normal men" and "trans women are women" sound pretty similar to me. You both try to have your lived gender roles confirmed by appealing to the straight majority. 

But guess what. This will never happen. For neither of you. In the eyes of the straight majority, impregnating females is as much a duty/desire of a real man as being strong and protective of one's family. These values are not weakened; on the contrary. The reinstallation and further development of obligatory military service (for males only) in Central Europe affirms that these values are very much in effect in our societies. That the first reflex on both sides of the political spectrum, when masses of refugees are crossing the borders, is to wonder how many women and children are among them is another piece of evidence. And for trans women, you can fight your fights about legal recognition as "women". But the semi-formal word games of lawyers will not change reality. While the legal recognition of gay marriage made a difference, i.e. inheritance, visitors' rights, and similar things, this was only effective because it affected primarily the lawyers' game. Your wishes, however, for access to toilets and women's sports also have an aspect in reality that the fictionalism of if-then-ism of legal systems will never alter. 

And for what? Straight men will not start to accept trans women as partners. Trying to solve this by transitioning as early as possible is very likely to be unsuccessful and parasitic on the lived reality of effeminate gays, as the issues with the Tavistock Clinic showed. Trans women will continue to be part of queer subculture and will never integrate into whatever it is they are trying to integrate into. Also, the straight majority’s prospect for gay men to live the life of the supporting guncle (gay uncle) leads to an emptiness ready to be filled by chem-sex parties. We see drugs tearing through our community like a freight train. Participating in straight culture on its own terms has been hurting us as closeted gays, and it will continue to hurt us as adoptive-father gays. 

Affirmation by the straight majority, or trying to engineer their concepts, will continue to lead nowhere. We must start to build our own social institutions, that is, we must build on queer culture as a subculture and not a mere aesthetic or political movement.