Why certain segments of the Transgender community are losing their minds over Super Straights (and why they need to stop)

 Recently, a bunch of more.....excitable, for lack of a better term, transgender types are losing their minds over a new thing called "Super Straights" or S+ for short.

Basically, a bunch of straight people, gays, lesbians, and the more reflective members of the transgender community are basically saying to the more militant transgender types who deem it cruel to not be attracted to them (for example, a transwoman deeming it hurtful to be rejected by a man, regardless if they pass or not) the following:

"We have nothing against you as human beings. Regardless, we are NOT interested in you sexually if you do not match what we consider sexually desirable. We wish you well with a more receptive person, but we are not interested, it is not up for debate, please leave us be, we'll do the same"

The above is perfectly sensible logic as a matter of legal custom in most places around the world, is generally civil and polite by most societal standards, and there is nothing, on the face of it, that should be offensive.

However, it seems the more excitable transgender types view this as an attack on all transgender people, especially when the S+ crowd expresses the following opinions:

S-Straight: I only prefer people of the opposite sex who are not trans.

S-Gay/Lesbian: I only prefer other people of the same sex who are not trans.

S-Bisexual: I prefer those of both genders who are not trans.

And since this includes some trans people under S+, they are as follow:

S-Trans: I only prefer those who are transgender themselves.

Legally, morally, and ethically, there is nothing wrong with this. No one can be sexually coerced into having sex with another person they have no interest in, it is immoral and unethical by most societal standards to even try, and logic would dictate that those offended being trans is a sexual turnoff should find those who are more accommodating. Given the 7 billion-plus people on the planet, that's not a death sentence for intimacy.

However, certain transgender types view the above as bigotry because it's saying they are not sexually attracted to the parties expressing the above opinions, and they are trying to shame and "cancel" the S+ types because they deem not catering to their desire to be desired to be the height of cheek of arrogance.

In my view and that of anyone else who believes we have the free will to make our own choices, that is madness. I'm a heterosexual person, only interested in women who were born as such, and if a transwoman was sexually interested in me, I would politely decline and wish them well with someone else. I am a devout Christian, but my religious beliefs are secondary to my own personal moral to live and let live for the choices of others, and I would happily call myself S+ because that resonates with my own personal feelings.

As for the transgender types who deem the above rejection of them as sexual partners bigotry, then all I can say, rather bluntly, is to get over it. As explained, there is no legal, moral, or ethical reason for anyone to cater to your sexual desires, and any attempt at coercion would be a moral disgrace and a legal crime for the party who cannot accept the word "no".

That said, I find it disturbing such a need to say "no" is even needing to be done. If it's gotten to the point it's offensive to assert one's own free will to be sexually attracted to whom you please, then those who are so offended need to realize they have no legal, ethical, or moral entitlement to the sexual agency of another human being without their consent, which is the crux of the matter at hand.