Breaking down Faraazkhan's "Trans Activism" views

 

Firstly, here is the definition of transphobia given by Planned Parenthood, and it sums up what it means cleanly, succinct, and in markedly non-extreme terms:

Transphobia is the fear, hatred, disbelief, or mistrust of people who are transgender, thought to be transgender, or whose gender expression doesn’t conform to traditional gender roles. Transphobia can prevent transgender and gender nonconforming people from living full lives free from harm.

Transphobia can take many different forms, including

• negative attitudes and beliefs
  

• aversion to and prejudice against transgender people
  

• irrational fear and misunderstanding
  

• disbelief or discounting preferred pronouns or gender identity
  

• derogatory language and name-calling
  

• bullying, abuse, and even violence

Transphobia can create both subtle and overt forms of discrimination. For example, people who are transgender (or even just thought to be transgender) may be denied jobs, housing, or health care, just because they’re transgender.

People may hold transphobic beliefs if they were taught them by other people, including parents and families who encourage negative ideas about trans people and who hold strict beliefs about traditional gender roles.

Some people are transphobic because they have misinformation or have no information at all about trans identities. They may not be aware of transgender people or trans issues or personally know anyone who is trans.

Source: What’s transphobia?

With basis in this definition, let's look at and break down Faraazkhan's own summary of his views and opinions of at My “Controversial” Perspectives linked in the video Twitch Drama [Enough is Enough!]. Specifically the "Trans Activism" "Against" points, and let's discuss why these are immensely problematic.
When reading these points: keep in mind aspects like the specific language used. There is consistent use of terms like "experimentation", "indoctrination", "enroachment", "performative behavior", etc. These are relevant to the clear negative biases Faraazkhan expresses and share with notable anti-trans activists which will be mentioned later. Lets begin:

The definition of “Transphobic” to include anything that could potentially be deemed offensive or “uncomfortable” for trans individuals or activists

As the above definition clearly states, that is not what is transphobic. Claiming this is what the issue is deflects away the criticism of these bullet points, and multiple aspects of this is covered in this post.

 

Gender affirming therapy and the widespread experimentation on children

1: not true in the slightest, it is a pure malicious lie to construct fear for how youth are treated. Gender Affirming Therapy is the scientifically proven way to best help provide for transgender people, and is not given on a whim.
Links for studies and resources on the topic:
Management of gender dysphoria in adolescents in primary care
Gender Affirming Therapy for Gender Dysphoria: A Rapid Qualitative Review
Gender-Affirming Therapy Summary

Transgender children who have not socially transitioned have historically shown high levels of depression. But one recent study points to the benefits of social transitions. Among the more than 100 socially transitioned children studied, their ratings of depression and self-worth were about the same as for their non-transgender, or cisgender, siblings and peers.

- Article: Gender-affirming care improves the mental health of transgender youth

2: this is drastically contradictory to both "Support of children in exploring and expressing their gender identity and expressing who they are as individuals" and "The ability for gender dysphoric kids to have access to puberty blockers, although only through very stringent and scrutinized processes".

The indoctrination of children at young ages with information that is not scientifically based, misleading, and potentially very damaging

This point is in and of itself based in misuse of completely unrelated scientific studies, as well as misuse of scare tactics like "bone density is lowered", "they are transing our children", and going in with the assumption that being transgender is something people can be reliably manipulated into. 

More specifically, a central part of this is argument is based in the hypotheses of Abigail Shrier and similar who claim that transgenderism is a "social contagion". Aside from the clear parallell this has to homophobic attitudes that flourished 20-40 years ago, her works and activism show her as an undeniably trans-hostile person. If you want to see a specific analysis of how and why you can check this long-form series from cognitive psychologist PhD, Cass Eris: "Irreversible Damage" - Introduction, from a cognitive psychologist. 

Probably the single most important term for this topic is "detransitioning", which describes a person going through either social or medical "transition", and then for any reason ending up "transitioning" back to their "old gender". This is a genuine problem that does need proper, trans-friendly research, understanding, and acceptance. As you all know this is an incredibly "controversial" topic. The reason for this, though, is not transgender people; the reason is people like above mentioned Abigail Shrier repeatedly spreading absolute heinous lies regarding: the statistics of detransitioners, the already subpar healthcare treatment, that trans people are manipulating cis people into transitioning, that people are fast-tracked to hormone treatment and surgeries, and more. 

Obviously, none of those things are more than specks of reality, and even then they've been twisted until they are barely even resembling any real world issue. Detransition Facts and Statistics 2021: Exploding the Myths Around Detransitioning sums up actual statistics of detransition:

On average, 97% of people who are transgender are happy with their decision to transition. Only ~3% of trans people experience some form of regret, but may not detransition.

This source also sums up the most common reasons behind why people "detransition":

[..] The main reason cited for detransition is social pressure. Recent research by Dr Jack Turban has found that around 90 percent of people who return to their birth gender in the US don’t do so because of regret or dissatisfaction, but because of pressure from family, school, work, or society in general.

The National Center for Transgender Equality found that the most common reasons for detransitioning were lack of support at home, problems in the workplace, and harassment and discrimination.

Other reasons for detransition include exploring a different gender identity, unrelated health issues, and financial complications.

Only 5% of people who detransitioned (0.4% of all trans people) did so because they felt the transition was not right for them.

Additionally, there might be unwanted sexual characteristics that are brought on by transitioning to the gender that they identify as.

The situation is also aggravated by gatekeeping and combative attitudes in healthcare. In many countries, like the UK, trans people have to spend years proving they are who they say they are in order to access treatment.

Yes, those who detransition need and deserve support as well, but this argument is in and of itself fully misused while ignoring the above data to argue for an heightening the already degradingly high requirements to receive gender treatment in the vast majority of cases.

Here is a quote from the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) survey An evaluation of early pubertal suppression in a carefully selected group of adolescents with 'Gender Identity Disorder', specifically on the matter of administering puberty blockers which is what Faraazkhan is claiming is being fast-tracked with "indoctrination of children":

For the study, a highly selected group of young people who along with their families were actively seeking this treatment and fulfilled the eligibility criteria were invited to take part after lengthy assessments (two years on average). These young people had been experiencing gender dysphoria which had been consistent and persistent over at least 5 years and had significantly increased with the onset of puberty

[..] The fact that 43 out of 44 of them went on to access gender-affirming hormones is consistent with other studies internationally where the discontinuation rate varies, but is typically in the 2-5% range.
[..] one young person did stop treatment without progressing to cross-sex hormones. This provides some evidence that development of gender identity continues on GnRHa treatment and confirms the importance of continuing supportive psychological therapy to allow further exploration of gender identity and a range of future pathways whilst on this treatment

This shows how high the requirements for this treatment generally is, as well as the majority not opting out of future further treatment, as well as how health care standards do leave it up to the patient, as they should. 

In terms of "potentially damaging", it would here be referring to harming bone density due to lack of pubertal growth during adolescent years, but this is also adressed:

As anticipated, pubertal suppression reduced growth affecting both height and bone mass density. In both cases (height and bone strength) there was some growth but less than would be expected during those years without hormonal suppression. There was no loss of bone density over the study period and the expectation is that the resumption of growth on both counts would be achieved when puberty resumed either naturally or via cross-sex hormones administered from 16.

Dr Polly Carmichael, Director of GIDS, says: “This paper adds to our understanding of the best way to support these young people. The results show patient experience on the blocker is positive overall and there were no unexpected adverse events, but that more research is needed around this complex issue.”

In other words: yes, the experts in trans healthcare do explicitly say there is need for more knowledge. No one has ever denied that, but it is not the horror story you hear from the anti-trans activists Faraazkhan routinely adapts his views from. There is no "indoctrination", there is so much scientifically based information that is directly ignored, and in spite of that Faraazkhan echoes this view in the exact way the anti-trans activists do.

Another supplemental article that covers aspects of this topic and how this extremely harmful these lies are, and points to several resources as for exactly why that is and how can be found here: 'Rapid-onset gender dysphoria' is a poisonous lie used to discredit trans people. Shortly, "ROGD" is a completely debunked hypothesis behind the phenomenon of parents being shocked by their children coming out as questioning or transgender. This phenomenon has a very simple examplation: it is a fact that parents are not their children; they do not know their childrens' thoughts or feelings, they merely observe from the outside with their own biases.

Again, here too Faraazkhan has contradicted both "Support of children in exploring and expressing their gender identity and expressing who they are as individuals" and "The ability for gender dysphoric kids to have access to puberty blockers, although only through very stringent and scrutinized processes", and showed his ignorance on the topic.

 

The blurring of lines between medically responsible questioning and conversion therapy

Consider how much thought regarding gender someone trans actually has to put in. Being questioned to the degree of requiring living to the strongest, clearest gender stereotypes for 2 years before getting any proper treatment like hormone therapy is still a reality in a country like Norway. The goal is already to convince trans people we are cis through constant questioning instead of trying to help. To wait 2 years for health treatment before having to lay bare every single bit of personal info cleanly to health "specialists" is beyond degrading. The treatment is already beyond subpar because they don't trust the patient. Fact: genital surgery is a requirement in some places to be regarded as trans. That's what should be challenged here, not anything about adding more horrid restrictions. Conversion therapy is this exact concept of convincing trans people they are wrong in the concepts they have thought about and been plagued by for years before actually getting treatment. In view of that, is this argument against "Trans activism" not 100% ill informed?

This "Against" is steeped in values that being transgender is implicitly wrong, that we need to be questioned and at all costs make sure that we are not transgender. This article is one of multiple effects of such argumentation: NHS Waiting Lists Force Trans People To Leave The UK. No one asks for treatment for being transgender without having thought about it and the immense social stigmas for long times beforehand.

 

The encroachment on Women’s rights, especially in sports and incarceration 

First of all: look at choice of word. "Enroachment" is a clearly negative and accusative word to describe trans people as stealing the rights of 'women' [which in and of itself already excludes trans women from the definition of woman].

Now, have you talked to a single trans person to hear how huge the received effect of HRT is on aspects like lowering sporting performances? Trans women's HRT leads to lower testosterone levels than for cis women (Do Trans Women Athletes Have Advantages?). Why, yes, there are minor effects that linger like physical sizes. But these have already, in Faraazkhan's above opinions, been forced upon said trans fems due to arguing against proper treatment of trans youth.
Yes, there is grounds for being partially unsure regarding lasting effective results of medically transitioning later in life. But the main takeaway from any of those studies is that there needs to be further studies (Effect of gender affirming hormones on athletic performance in transwomen and transmen: implications for sporting organisations and legislators, "Study limitations and future directions") as there is simply not enough conclusive data. 

Fact of a matter, there are still significant blind spots and using this to argue against trans participation based in pure hypothetheses and partial data showing no conclusive points of more significant advantages than what occurs naturally within cis genders already it is indefensible to call for discriminating against trans women in these arenas. This also ignores the aspect of trans struggles where living to exercise properly pre-transition is a significantly heightened challenge due to the significant stress it is to live with significant identity aspects repressed, often due to not having the possible knowledge for it due to society-wide ignorance.
Using the term "enroachment" to describe this with the lack of information in mind shows the kind of bias Faraazkhan approaches the issue with, immensely similarly to anti-trans activists.

In addition to the above, this article from the Olympics Committee cover the ideals sports are based around, so who different classes should include, but also more importantly why:
IOC releases Framework on Fairness, Inclusion and Non-discrimination on the basis of gender identity and sex variations.

In terms of "incarceration" first in direct response: this has been covered by multiple venues, but due to scope I will restrict myself to only refer to R (on the application of FDJ) v Secretary of State for Justice [2021] EWHC 1746 (Admin) [Para 75]. Here the Judge in the case assessed and judged the anti-trans claim of "transgender prisoners are five times more likely to carry out sex attacks on inmates women's jails than other prisoners" to be described as, and I quote, "The statistical evidence available to the court is unsatisfactory. [...] that seems to me a misuse of the statistics, which in any event are so low in number, and so lacking in detail, that they are an unsafe basis for general conclusions."

Secondly, have you actually looked at any crime statistics of how many trans women are victims? Seeing the numbers below: how can you defensibly claim that this group is in any way "enroaching on women's rights", instead of being a disproportionately marginalised group ourselves? Is there any reasonable way to defend putting trans people in prisons of their "birth sex" knowing that they are much more likely to be victims of crime than cis counterparts? Or are you suggesting to handle it similar to how segregation of black and white people was in the past?

Fifteen percent of transgender individuals report being sexually assaulted while in police custody or jail, which more than doubles (32 percent) for African-American transgender people
- Sexual Assault in the Transgender Community

According to the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey:

• Nearly half (46%) of respondents were verbally harassed in the past year because of being transgender.

• Nearly one in ten (9%) respondents were physically attacked in the past year because of being transgender.

• Nearly half (47%) of respondents were sexually assaulted at some point in their lifetime and one in ten (10%) were sexually assaulted in the past year. In communities of color, these numbers are higher: 53% of Black respondents were sexually assaulted in their lifetime and 13% were sexually assaulted in the last year.

• 72% of respondents who have done sex work, 65% of respondents who have experienced homelessness, and 61% of respondents with disabilities reported being sexually assaulted in their lifetime.

• More than half (54%) experienced some form of intimate partner violence, including acts involving coercive control and physical harm.

- Violence Against Trans and Non-Binary People

[...] In others, the victim’s transgender status may have put them at risk in other ways, such as forcing them into unemployment, poverty, homelessness and/or survival sex work.
- Fatal Violence Against the Transgender and Gender Non-Conforming Community in 2020

Transgender people (16+) are victimized over four times more often than cisgender people. In 2017-2018, transgender people experienced 86.2 victimizations per 1,000 people compared to 21.7 victimizations per 1,000 people for cisgender people.
[...] “Research has shown that experiences of victimization are related to low well-being, including suicide thoughts and attempts,” said study author Ilan H. Meyer, Distinguished Senior Scholar of Public Policy at the Williams Institute. “The results underscore the urgent need for effective policies and interventions that consider high rates of victimization experienced by transgender people.”
- Transgender people over four times more likely than cisgender people to be victims of violent crime

These last two especially points out issues that are urgent to handle, issues that are vital, rather than harming us further by segregating and increasing the stigmas already existing. One subgroup being included in the place they belong does not eliminate any other subgroups.

 

The compelled speech outlined in Bill C-16 (Canada)

It is literally just an amendment to federally cover how harassment or discrimination people on basis of their gender identity in addition to the already existing federal laws about discriminating based on race, religion, or any other characteristic. These limitations were already in-place in provincial laws.

This is not a new law or concept, this is an amendment adding "gender identity and expression" three places in existing codes, and uses Policy on preventing discrimination because of gender identity and gender express (OHRC) as a baseline for defining this. In short, this document is a good summary with sources for how transgender and gender non-conforming people are statistically significant victims based on their characteristics.

This is in no way different from being disallowed to actively and repeatedly referring derogatory to coloured people with racial slurs, women with sexism, gay parents with homophobia, etc. That is not being forced to use certain words, that is being expected to adhere to basic concepts of human decency and respecting others' identities and existence. If that is something that someone are willing to do then C-16 means there is a legal framework to defend the basic human dignity of the offended party.

The main argument against "compelled speech" is that you can be punished for performing the above mentioned acts. This is absolutely and completely void of basic empathy and ignorant towards these people regarding the, and in the case of gender identity, a complete ignorance of the multiple studies and reasoning behind the above mentioned policy. There are countless statistics that explicitly prove how transgender people are mistreated, victims, and suffering from severe social stigmas.

This is the official summary of this bill, as well as the bill itself:

The bill is intended to protect individuals from discrimination within the sphere of federal jurisdiction and from being the targets of hate propaganda, as a consequence of their gender identity or their gender expression. The bill adds "gender identity or expression" to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination in the Canadian Human Rights Act and the list of characteristics of identifiable groups protected from hate propaganda in the Criminal Code. It also adds that evidence that an offence was motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on a person's gender identity or expression constitutes an aggravating circumstance for a court to consider when imposing a criminal sentence
- Bill C-16 (Royal Assent)

The bill sparked a national debate, but actually brought federal laws up to date with already-established provincial human rights code
- Article: Canada’s gender identity rights Bill C-16 explained

 

The degradation and politicization of scientific journals, research, and institutions  

What does this even mean? I see absolutely nothing of reality that this even can refer to unless it is criticising that trans healthcare and science is actually happening? Is this referring to things like the above that ignore all the actual studies and work going in to the topics of transgender care?

Again, notice the choice of words: "Degradation".

 

The inability to have conversations about these topics without it being a terrible risk for all involved

This is not at all what the issue is. There is a terrible risk involved when your views echo those of:
Abigail Shrier, who in addition to the earlier anti-trans book signed this anti-trans "Declaration on Women's Sex-Based Rights". Here are some resources to parse this entire declaration: In-depth analysis by Lecturer in Law at BristolUniLaw, Sandra Duffy. This table is an overview of specific trans-hostile issues, and where to find them:

 
Dr Jordan B Peterson. Argues against Bill C-16 using the exact same fallacies on "compelled speech" as Faraazkhan. Jordan Peterson On Why He Refuses To Use Special Pronouns For Transgender People - LBC, where he admits major ignorance towards trans identities and concepts, and accuses non-binary people for being "contentious" and most likely presenting on a "narcissistic powerplay".
Joe Rogen. "I say if you had a dick at one point in time, [..] You're a f***ing man. That's a man, OK? You can't have... that's... I don't care if you don't have a dick any more..." on trans woman Fallon Fox.
Dr. Debra W. Soh. GLAAD Accountability Program - Debra Soh.

You may not specifically agree with all their individual views, but this entire list of "Against" points is as if it was taken straight out of these peoples' expressed views. He hosted and interviewed Dr. Debra Soh, and then proceeded to praise her views when she is claiming things like "nonbinary biological sex diversity, gender as a social construct, and gender dysphoria in children necessitating transition are 'myths.'" Looking back to Gender-affirming care improves the mental health of transgender youth, or Management of gender dysphoria in adolescents in primary care, we can see how heavily this conflicts with actual science on trans youth. A very recent study (Published: December 14, 2021) on gender affirming treatment for transgender youth that completely disproves Dr. Soh's statements on the topic:
Association of Gender-Affirming Hormone Therapy With Depression, Thoughts of Suicide, and Attempted Suicide Among Transgender and Nonbinary Youth
This is just one result expressing the views Faraazkhan results in: The horrific abuse two councillors got after transgender motion
Actually general resources on what being transgender actually means, and how to actually support transgender people: GLAAD Transgender FAQ Tips for Allies of Transgender People

The performative behavior surrounding the activism. E.g. Pronouns in bio or email footer, or terminology like “Birthing people” 

With basis in so many of the above links and studies: these are not performative. These are genuine helpful solutions to things that does harm trans people [as well as cis people to a smaller degree]. Pronoun tags make it clear what you should be referred to as instead of forcing people to endure completely needless situations. Especially for trans people where a big issue is things like misgendering, where this can, and most often will, have genuine ill effects due to the amounts of years the person in question has been subjected to these small infractions in all aspects of their lives. There are studies on trans healthcare, which are direct results of such social treatments, stigmas, and constantly dealing with things like these "questions" and similar: A qualitative study on minority stress subjectively experienced by transgender and gender nonconforming people in Italy A systematic review of social stress and mental health among transgender and gender non-conforming people in the United States The role of gender affirmation in psychological well-being among transgender women

Regarding "Birthing people" and similar; there is little-to-nothing performative about including all people that can get pregnant in the discussion where pregnancy is relevant. That is including them without referring to them as something they're not. For example: a trans man is not 'woman' just because he can get pregnant. A major point of feminism is precisely that: people are not defined by their bodies. Complaining about public healthcare using inclusive language like this is inherently complaining about officially respecting these peoples' identities. It is complaining about the concrete measures made to reduce those daily stresses trans people are subjected to, and directly ignoring the needs of trans people that have been repeatedly sourced above.

Censorship

This is a purely negatively charged way to complain about consequences being faced for expressing such transphobic opinions as above. This essay goes very in-depth on one of the more recent cases of "cancellations" of Kathleen Stock who, in addition to this essay Academic Freedom in the Media: Who Is Being Silenced?, has had multiple articles in major english media since her "cancellation" for her refusal to accept trans people. This is not anyone being cancelled; this is a person losing their job for harassment. That is not censorship, and claiming it is is saying that her harassing trans people is not harassment. In addition to the above essay, her insistence on disrespecting trans people's identities are direct violations of articles 22 and 30 of the UN Human Rights declaration.

 

 

Supplementary

Faraazkhan retweeting Abigail Shrier, furthering the scientifically determined anti-trans myth that it is a "social contagion".

Faraazkhan (Jan 13, 2021) on group identity, has his claims challenged. He never responded.

 

Faraazkhan (Jan 13, 2021) argues [as the resources in this post have proven] in complete ignorance about "woke" topics. I challenge his ideas. He never responded. 

 

Faraazkhan (Jan 13, 2021) on BLM and feminist activism and willfull ignorance towards those sayings. I answer and challenge his statement. He never responded.  

 

Faraazkhan (Jan 13, 2021), not on trans activism, but him responding to general heavily marginalised feminist and BLM concepts. Ignoring him maliciously ignoring the other commenter's entire point. He never responded. 

 

Faraazkhan (Jan 13, 2021) continuing to criticise BLM and Feminism and the "woke crowd". I respond calling him out on the multiple of the above unanswered tweets. He finally responds, deflecting and ignoring the arguments and viewpoints that challenge his:  

"Either you are having a conversation with yourself or you are reading the wrong tweets. Would reccomend going back and re-reading, none of the claims you have made seem to be accurate".

 

Faraazkhan (Jan 13-14, 2021) being called out, asks for specifics of what he did that is transphobic [etc], I provided a specific example. He, again, never responded.

 

 

 

After Faraazkhan conducted an interview with anti-trans activist Dr. Debra Soh where they both repeatedly conflated and misused fundamental concepts on what being transgender is, I sent this (Mar 31, 2021) resource with specific basic information on transgender identities and definitions that were completely misrepresented. He never responded.

 

  

Faraazkhan (Aug 22-Aug 24, 2021), he again uses his voice to display his ignorance on topics like trans care and similar, and claims it is untruthful because people are emotional when discussing it. This strongly contradicts the scientifically found and accepted truth from the sources above throughout this blogpost. This again shows his ignorance. I call him out on him echoing alt-right figures (Jordan Peterson, Abigail Shrier, Joe Rogen, and many more) while ignoring the humans he speaks out against [see every single picture above in the supplements]. Then he calls me out for "[talking] shit about [him] behind [his] back", after he has ignored multiple direct confrontations in the public twitter space before, only replying once to deflect and mock. This repeated here as I at this point have zero interest in discussing with someone who over significant time demonstrated absolute willful ignorance and would rather attempt to mock instead of engaging in discussion. He finished this with calling me a "coward" when I, again, was the one to actually use my voice to challenge his his views repeatedly. 

  

Faraazkhan (Oct 26, 2021) praising Dave Chappelle for refusing to apologise for stating 'I'm team Terf' and his transphobic jokes.

 

 

Faraazkhan (Dec 21, 2021) actively praising Dr. Debra Soh, who has been scientifically proven to provide dangerous misinformation, while also showing the same willful ignorance he has this entire time. 

Faraazkhan (Dec 21, 2021), responding to another challenge from an angry trans person. Again, Faraazkhan actively avoided recognising any of the criticism levelled.

 

 Faraazkhan's single takeaway:

Conclusion: 

I want to open this conclusion with a completely personal note based in general experience: admitting to not knowing something, to being mistaken, is a genuinely hard action to take. Just like the vast, vast majority of everyone both reading this and not: I struggle with admitting biases often. When a concept that is new to me comes in and challenges my understanding of life, however big or small, it is a challenge to take it in and learn. I am a trans woman, and I dealt with multiple months of extremely stressful "questioning" even though I felt immense dysphoria and in retrospect know that it was the right thing to socially transition. Even now I still struggle daily with the social stigmas and biases they have imprinted on me regarding these topics, which by definition is internalised transphobia; learnt automatic trans-hostile reactions. I understand challenging one-self is hard. That, though, does not, and will never, excuse spreading these dangerous lies and values. Even less when there are trans people all around you who are even more educated, experienced, and active, some of which you literally seem to call your friends. In my opinion (and experience) that is inexcusable, it is abuse from willing ignorance, it is a refusal to learn and grow, it is directly violent.

With that said, let's sum up the points and look to the definition of transphobia from the start:
This has gone through every point on Faraazkhan's "Against" summary of "Trans Activism", and has sourced multiple sources and resources on how ignorant, harmful, and counterproductive all these are in regards to transgender health and conditions. 

There are proper worries in here, but these have all been misused and used to attack trans rights and our human dignity. Covered in a veils of intellectualism and "worries" are views constantly worded derogatorily, showing full ignorance of all the above scientific sources, and a complete show that Faraazkhan does not listen the trans voices that do speak out.

Going back to the definition at the start and the specific examples given with, now with all the above in mind, how does Faraazkhan come out:
    Transphobia can take many different forms, including:  

• negative attitudes and beliefs:
  yes, he is ignorantly showing explicit opposition to scientific studies and propogating harmful lies and disproved myths regarding trans care, rights, and issues.
  
• aversion to and prejudice against transgender people:
  not necessarily aversion, but clear prejudice towards the entire trans group based in anti-trans works.
• irrational fear and misunderstanding:
  yes. his points are based in ignorance of the studies above, and run absolutely counter of what is proven to be the best way to help and treat trans people. 
  
• disbelief or discounting preferred pronouns or gender identity:
  not directly, but his Bill C-16, praising Dr. Soh, and complaints about "performative behavior" are completely discounting and countering the actual trans voices and studies that are both widely accepted and proven to lower struggles with trans health.
  
• derogatory language and name-calling:
  no, not directly, but he utters clear support and praise of those that do.
  
• bullying, abuse, and even violence:
  yes. he made a 12:30 video to tell people about me and others directly by name were bullying him while stating the exact things in this post. He attacked us for pointing to his own objective statements and views. That is direct abuse in response to having his statements amplified, based in ignorance, and refusal to take in any trans voice.
  

With all this in mind, can you in any defensible way claim that Faraazkhan is not a transphobe? Is it defensible to repeatedly diminish the voices stating these exact things, denying the validity of this factual reality summed up here?

Now, if you saw and endorsed the video where Faraazkhan called me and others out by name as harassing him by calling him a transphobe: this entire teardown is based in Faraazkhan's own statements and views, and actual knowledge of being trans. With the supplementation of his complete and utter disregard of any actual criticism or actual counter-arguments, I feel very secure in my statement that yes: Faraazkhan is objectively a transphobe who routinely expresses deepfelt and extremely transphobic opinions and views.