I have no clue as it would obviously be beneficial. I feel like you’re hyper fixated on this either way. Like I said in my previous reply, this is one example. Even if I granted that this someone disproved my example (I’m not entirely sure how that would work) it wouldn’t actually have any bearing on my original statement.

That would be a good reason to include race on IDs then, not a counter factual to why gender being listed is necessary. This is also just one example like I said previously.

I mean the most accurate but unsatisfying answer to that is whenever a picture wouldn’t be satisfactory. There are multiple hypotheticals you could come up with. The simplest I can think of is a general description is more important in searching in a crowd than a picture is, but you could certainly come up with more than enough examples to justify m/f identification to be necessary.

What does that have to do with gender-neutral bathrooms?

What gender someone presents as needs to be tracked for drivers license to ensure proper law enforcement. Sex needs to be tracked for a multitude of medical reasons.

Your third paragraph confuses me. Why would conservatives be alright with this solution?

That would be tracking sex, not gender. Gender has no bearing on medical issues as it’s a social construct.

Conservatism is not fascism. In no understanding of either definition could either be considered congruent with the other. Fascism is an extreme form of conservatism, as you’re well aware.

She’s a progressive, not a social democrat