There were other things that were difficult to gauge. For example, countries with widespread cultural recognition of transgender people but no legal recognition didn't make the cut. The US and Australia have recognition in many of their states, but not nationally (without surgery at least).
If anyone has any advice on improving the quiz or changing criteria, please feel free to let me know!
As I've said multiple times here, the term "transgender" can be confusing and doesn't have a set definition. Generally though, I think the definition that is becoming most commonly accepted is people who identify based on a different gender identity than what they had at birth, since biological sex can only change with surgery and gender expression isn't about identity.
Second, to address your question, yes it seems that India only allows gender change with surgery. It looks like it wasn't required according to the initial Court decision from 2014, but a more recent 2019 law mandates surgery for gender change. Thanks for pointing it out!
I think my views on this topic more or less concur with India's current laws. Mentally stable adults should be allowed to change their gender, with prior therapy and medical approval. However I think young kids, who are not fully mentally developed yet, should not be allowed to mess with their bodies and should not interfere with normal hormonal development.
And while I see why you would think that, I think getting care to transgender children is really important. Rates of depression are incredibly high among transgender kids who have gender dysphoria (which is essentially a condition where someone feels they are trapped in the wrong body). Unfortunately, this leads to really high rates of suicide among transgender kids. Hormonal therapy and psychiatric care alike have been shown to help save lives, which is why most major medical organizations in the US agree it's crucial for kids to be treated as much as adults.
Just yesterday, Arkansas made headlines here for passing a law that would completely restrict medical care for transgender kids. The bill was so extreme that even the Republican governor vetoed it (although then the state legislature overrode the veto so it became law).
And, of course, legal recognition doesn't always translate to acceptance. I read an article recently about a transgender person who became a news anchor in Bangladesh, but only after facing tons of abuse and rejection for her identity. In contrast, while Samoa (and possibly other Pacific Island countries) doesn't legally recognize transgender people, it's common for people to identify as non-binary there, and there's widespread social acceptance.
South America and Europe didn't surprise me but I found South Asia to be interesting. I have heard about the Hijra community only quite recently through Youtube of all places.
People chosing their own path through life is not.
I'll still call you by your pronoun of choice and if you don't believe in God, then I 100% understand why you made the decision you did and I want to respect that decision.
I also don't really think that I'm imposing my religion on you. If you were part of a cult which believed that college was evil, would that be imposing your religion on me? In my opinion, no, because I'm not bound by your beliefs. I think the same thing applies here.
While I think making more people, especially religious people, accept LGBT rights is important, attacking people will only entrench them further into their views. I think listening to the arguments of others and using their own values (and I'd argue that some religious values can be used to support LGBT rights) to convince them LGBT rights are worth supporting is much more valuable than just saying they're wrong and ignorant. And, as with me, I think a lot of people become more accepting when they realize they have friends or family members who are LGBT.
These days, though, supporting someone's rights no longer seems to be enough for the social justice warrior crowd. You have to be in complete ideological lockstep behind them or you become their enemy, which is so dumb and counter-productive. I support everyone's rights regardless of what their "identities" are... but... nobody has the right to go around changing what words mean. Not straight people. Not gay people. Not trans.
The first response most people would have to the first sentence is to think that I'm misunderstanding them, and honestly, there is probably some truth to that. However, I think the only way to get rid of that misunderstanding is to have open, honest conversations where we just want to see the other person's perspective. Not "us versus them". Not the philosophy of "if your morals don't align with mine you're an ignorant bigot". I think the same mindset would also be helpful in the areas of race, politics, etc.
One of the things I appreciate about JetPunk is that people are willing to learn from each other and hear other opinions. Everyone on this comment thread has been pretty civil. We probably wouldn't be able to have a conversation like this on Twitter or most social media platforms.
One thing about this debate that is fact-based though: transgender people (especially kids) suffer from really high rates of mental illness and suicide. I think most decent people regardless of their values can agree that this is something that should be addressed.