“In America,
voters don’t pick their politicians.
Politicians pick their voters.”
Wayne Dawkins

America is the land of the free.
‘The people’ can, according to the Constitution, choose among the candidates.
The politicians can, also in ‘certain’ conditions, choose their voters…

And those so inclined can choose their gender!

Do I have a problem with that?

No!
But I find it very interesting that ‘gender-mandering’ is such a divisive subject.
Very revealing, actually.

Let me start with the beginning.
“The word gerrymander (originally written Gerry-mander; a portmanteau of the name Gerry and the animal salamander) was used for the first time in the Boston Gazette^[b] on 26 March 1812 in Boston, Massachusetts, United States. This word was created in reaction to a redrawing of Massachusetts Senate election districts under Governor Elbridge Gerry, later Vice President of the United States. Gerry, who personally disapproved of the practice, signed a bill that redistricted Massachusetts for the benefit of the Democratic-Republican Party.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering.
In this context, it’s worth mentioning that the Democratic-Republican party very soon later divided itself into the present day Republican and Democratic parties…

So, gerrymandering is one of the many common traits shared by both parties…
“The Founders frequently wrote about the dangers of political parties. They often labeled them “factions” that were divisive and rooted in self-interest. In Federalist #10, James Madison wrote that factions were a majority or minority animated by “some common impulse of passion, or of interest” harmful to the rights of others and the common good. They could be a source of unjust laws and a threat to popular self-government. President George Washington concurred and warned in his 1796 Farewell Address that “the baneful effects of the spirit of party” included strong passions, jealousies and revenge, dissention, and despotism.” https://billofrightsinstitute.org/essays/the-history-of-political-parties-in-the-united-states

“Some common impulse of passion, or of interest”

And there is a common impulse of passion. And of interest!
Both parties want power. And in order to get it…

Hence not only gerrymandering – used by both parties – but also ‘gender-mandering’.
Using gender as a bone of contention. A very useful posturing pretext…

Who, but those experiencing gender-dysphoria, is actually interested in the subject?
Maybe those baffled by the insistence with which some trans-women demand to be allowed to participate in professional sports… against cis-women, of course!

On the other hand… as a posturing pretext, the subject is invaluable!
To some, it epitomizes ‘you can be whatever you want to become’. ‘Progress’ in its purest form.
To others, it is anathema. The very notion of ‘against’. Against of nature, defying God’s will, you name it!

Did I make myself clear?

What about those living ‘in hell’?!? ‘Caught in the wrong person’?
Who cares about them?!? They are few enough to be negligible. Except for when a scapegoat is in order…