Why the ultrarich come after trans people ?

Its alla diversion.
Find some group that is different, then shit on them and make them look bad publicly while this relatively small group can't so much to talk back publicly.
It'll outrage the public, they'll start looking at the group while trump and Co then go and rob the state blind while no one is looking

Just the latest social group that's still broadly acceptable to shit on.
There's not a ton of global census data out there, but in Canada trans and non-binary people make up 0.33% of the population. Which means there's a lot of people who don't know anyone who is trans or non-binary. Unfortunately there's also a lot of people who are unwilling to emphasize, or even sympathize, for those they feel are different or strange to them. It take time and effort to listen to others' stories and to gain appreciation for their perspective, and it's an effort many people are uncomfortable making if it feels they are deviating too far from society's norm. What you're observing is those in power taking advantage of the same human weakness that's been used forever to discriminate on whoever the current permissible outgroup to hate is.
How many times have you heard, "I don't care about anyone being/doing Y, but...", and then proceed to say some sort of transphobic, homophobic, racist, or sexist shit? When I grew up it was the G in LGBT. When my parents grew up it was African Americans. Women only got the right to vote a century ago, you better believe some of our great granduncles had some shit to say that would make today's uncles look like saints.

Because it's nothing more than a trick to divide public opinion and control it.

Divide and conquer.

It's called smokescreen. Turns the attention of the masses away of their wealth and power
- I get it. But that smokescreen is achieved with anti-immigrant rhetoric. Throwing Trans in , seems so random
- In the case of Rowling, it wasn't a smoke screen so much as black mold.

As far as I can tell, they didn't. J.K is a straight example, but Elon went looking for an edgy movement to align with, and Zuckerberg just wants to stay rich.
Your everyday regressives want to go after trans people because they don't think they can take gay people on anymore. Some political movements have capitaised on this to gain their support, and have captured rich supporters as well because trans abuse is compatible with the rich continuing to gain more and more power.
How rich are the Wichowski sisters? You bet they're not a fan of any of this.
- You might be right: it's a rebranding of anti-gay sentiment.
- Elon has a trans daughter
  
  Huh. He wouldn't be the first person to shit on their trans kid, I guess.

They will pick whatever group they think will suddenly put as many idiots as possible under their control when they say "GROUP A IS BAD".
Most of them don't care they are trans, they only care that they can take advantage of the oppression of a minority group in order to consolidate control over people so that they can oppress more people.
When everyone alive and dead is either oppressed or under your control, you become god. This is the goal, but they don't care about the process to get there.

All threaten the oldest hierarchy of all: man over woman.
As for musk, he has a trans child he hates and disowned. And he’s a Nazi, straight up. Family left Canada to go to apartheid South Africa because they agreed with apartheid and white racial supremacy. See the hierarchy here?
Zuck is an opportunist who will align with anything that makes him money. But he also has a weird obsession with Roman history that’s a red flag to me about being a closet fascist.
Jk Rowling is a second wave feminist and she’s big mad that people without vaginas can call themselves women and be in women’s spaces.
- so 3 different agenda, with the same result. Probably it is as coincidental as that
- an post op trans people be in women places?
- All threaten the oldest hierarchy of all: man over woman.
  Pretty much this. I remember being a teenager and hearing the most basic watered-down gender theory and being really confused and upset. Even back then I knew it was because, for it to be true, it meant a lot of things I take for granted about society were actually totally irrelevant. Unfortunately some people don't ever have to confront their cognitive dissonance, they just use their money and power to enforce the status quo they're used to.
  Jk Rowling is a second wave feminist and she’s big mad that people without vaginas can call themselves women and be in women’s spaces.
  Unfortunately you could have the best neo-vagina money could buy and terfs would still find an excuse to exclude you. It's not truly about genitalia, it's about being trans.

Scapegoating
- Oh so now we’re blaming the goats
  
  what the heck!

They are frequently interviewed.
Which means they are frequently asked: “Why’s everything fucked up?”
They can’t give the real answer, which is “ultra-rich people”.
So they give no answer at all (in which case you don’t hear about it) or they cite the Enemy Of The Day.

They saw /egg_irl and blame them for why eggs are now expensive.

The reasons generally start out personal and become generalized as a political “position”, which really consumes your life after a while.
Rowling has said that she had a queer “phase” and that if she were going through that nowadays, she would likely have ended up considering herself trans (incorrectly, by her assertion). That reads to me as some internalized bigotry that she never worked through. Musk has a daughter who’s a trans woman and disowned him for being a piece of shit. He started posting about “pronouns” soon after. And Zuckerberg seems to have seen the way the winds are blowing with the current administration and jumped on the anti-trans bandwagon because he’s a lizard man with no soul (metaphorically, not in the David Icke antisemitic way). These are all guesses, but not based on nothing.
It ends up being socially unacceptable to say, “trans people remind me of my estranged daughter so I don’t like them,” and rightly so. So you have to retreat and bury the context, taking it up as a matter of principle. And your mind can backfill the justification over and over again, further cementing the ideas as people start to ask you to talk about trans people over and over again. After all, you’re a public figure who doesn’t like trans people. That’s a hot topic. People on Twitter want to talk about it. Reporters want to talk about it. So it snowballs from there. Transphobia can absolutely take over the life of a public figure.
Philosophy Tube has an excellent video on something called phantasms and how people get stuck in irrational worldviews. Would recommend.
- astute observation. Zuckerberg with all his new 'masculine energy" stuff, could still fit in your approach: he dont accept his woman side

Gender is a load bearing brainworm for capitalist society. Capitalists need stratification, having a gradient of various degrees of precariousness for workers to experience that would push them into accepting a worse deal for selling their labor. Gender is clearly one of the primary ways to achieve this: an absolutely incredible amount of domestic labor is performed without compensation by women every day, and society would fall apart if it wasn't. The rigid structure of the patriarchy is a key feature of this system, which means that trans people represent a clear break in that logic; if AFAB individuals can just choose not to be subjected to gender-based exploitation, it starts to rip the whole thing apart. Equally, transfeminine people represent another break in the opposite direction. The patriarchy is more or less incompatible with the existence of trans people, at least without significantly transforming itself.
- very interesting take. Thanks
  
  I wanna add that the way I formulated it is incomplete, or at least too partial to the functional perspective that someone who wishes to preserve the status quo would have. Obviously trans people don't just "choose" their gender, it's much more complicated than that. But I think it's worth looking at things from this lens to understand why the billionaires in particular are recalcitrant about gender.

Easy to scapegoat like most minorities that a large part of the population has never interacted with before.
- Also, societal attitudes have changed to the point where at least open racism or homophobia aren't really acceptable any more. So they needed a new scapegoat.

Poor, trans, minorities, leftists, educated, and even moderate Republicans are all under attack. These billionaires participate so they can be part of the fascist takeover of this country, not through any personal conviction.

preface: conjecture
musk and zuckerberg benefit from “othering” a group so that the majority of people get caught up in arguing about the rights of that group. While you’re busy being distracted by that they can push for agendas that benefit their companies and personal wealth, which inherently fuck you over.
musk does seem to have a personal vendetta as well given his issues with his trans daughter but I truly think this is ancillary to enriching his wealth and power. He also seems to love getting involved in topics that rile people up because deep down he’s a 14 year old reddit troll
rowling is double down and attention. She has a shit take, posts about it, people call her out. She’s a literal billionaire “beloved author” used to being surrounded by hangers on so being challenged wrecks her shit. Rather than reflect and look at scientific consensus she doubles down on her shit take. Because of people like above this gets her increasing amounts of attention and relevance so her beliefs are reaffirmed and deepened constantly. Now she’s consulted to speak authoritatively on the matter despite having no actual qualification other than being a rich lady who got into twitter arguments about it
Many of these apply to nobodies as well. Your stupid anti trans neighbor benefits from “othering” someone because it gives them someone to deflect blame onto. For most of American history it was black people, or Hispanic people, sometimes Jews, basically any minority. They also will double down when called out on shit takes and will absolutely respond to attention given for shit takes.

There must always be an "underclass" in capitalism for the upper echelons to threaten the middle echelons. No exceptions. Wether that's the homeless, psychiatric patients, gay or trans people... doesn't matter. There will be some regional differences in what constitutes this underclass but the end result is always the same. Capitalism CANNOT FUNCTION without this implicit threat of excommunication and starvation.
The only real difference with the recent past is that all of this has become much, much more explicit than it ever used to be before. But make no mistake, even with a Biden or Harris at the helm, this would still be the case, just much more muted.
This is a feature of the system, not a flaw, and will never change as long as capitalism in its current form dominates.

You can't get ultra-rich while being a compassionate person
- This, and all the more nowadays, because anything progressive has been intrinsically linked to a change of the Status Quo. And those trillions of fun bucks in the mattress (as well as their self-importance and self-perceived relevance) must be protected from those pesky Socialists!

Trans people’s very existence requires the rest of us to question our own upbringing. There are a lot of childhood experiences that boil down to you doing something or not doing something on no basis other than the fact that you were told.
You were told by your family, you were told by your friends, you were told by random strangers, you were told by the media, and they were all telling you the same thing. So you listened, even though you didn’t know why they were saying it. Surely EVERYBODY can’t be wrong, right? Some people might have told you something contrary but they were the losers, the outcasts, the villains. You don’t want to be any of that, surely?
For someone to transition, they are required to do the exact opposite of what so many told us all. They embrace the very outcome we were threatened with when we failed to conform, that we would not actually be the gender we were failing to conform to.
To accept that they are valid in doing so requires us to admit that many of our own guiding forces were actually just bullshit. We have to question why we are the way we are anew. If what they’re doing is strong, what we did, what we’re continuing to do, was weak.
When confronted with the idea that we were all just raised wrong and that much of what we collectively spend our time and energy stressing about is stupid and pointless, how many people do you know that will just shrug and say “oh well” and then move on with their lives? Easier to find an excuse to keep doing what you were already doing. “They’re just lying because they’re perverts that wanna cheat at sports.”
Some of these rich people are insidious and manipulative, no doubt, but the loud ones are usually just idiots no different from the uncle you don’t want to talk to except that being rich means they’re able to yell louder.

It is easy for many people to think trans wars is a distraction, scapegoating, or a genuine threat to the authoritarian world view. I ask you to carefully consider that anti-trans hate is genuine.
Nazis had prioritized Jewish genocide and pursued it to an irrational degree, even prioritized the genocide to actually winning the war. Some analysts say that this shows their war was always and primarily against civilian Jews.
We have evidence to think this is the case with trans people now.
The recent "anti-christian bias" order outright frames trans rights as an enemy of their ingroup.
Reed has covered the leaked Christian emails that show them believe trans people are demons and evil incarnation and want to wipe them from the face of the earth.
Rowling has been caught on tape saying she wants to minimize the number of people transitioning so that they have less work to do "special accommodations later" for trans people.
For those aware of the term Sonderbehandlung this leaves no doubt: trans people are their primary enemy, they have poured their millions into the pockets of nutjobs and politicians that will relieve them from having to live side by side with trans people.
Don't be fooled that this is just distraction and/or scapegoating by power-mongers.
They have a trans Holocaust in the making and they have already put the plot in motion. ACT NOW
Edit:
I realize I might have not responded directly to OP's question. See the following for my take.
My analysis linking Bathroom Bans as early signs of completely banning trans people out of public life https://lemmy.ml/post/25037664
I wrote this while still believing that anti-trans hate was an election-winning distraction. It partly responds to where anti-trans hate comes from https://lemmy.ml/post/24711061
In this sense many people are deeply transphobic, but billionaires have the resources to eradicate trans people from public life. The rest can only curse, badmouth, trash, verbally attack, workplace harass, fire, refuse healthcare, sexually or physically attack or mob-lynch trans people. Every transphobe does as much as they can get away with. Billionaire transphobes can get away with genocide so they're doing that.
Additional resources in support of the argument
Summary of early Holocaust course of events and why targeted people were not mobilized https://lemmy.ml/post/25008729/16208799
Erin Reed article on fundamentalist anti-trans lobbyists' leaked emails https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/2600-leaked-anti-trans-lobbyist-emails
- good post

I tried to read the wheel of time once and what i learned is that gender is the ultimate defining factor in some peoples lives. It is their whole defining principle in interacting with others. Everything about you is a direct consequence of your sex. Mess with sex/gender and you destroy their entire way of interacting with humans. Hunans dont exist for them, only men and women. The sexes are actually incapable of communication or cooperation of any kind. Effectively different species. This makes trans people a literal impossibility. A leopard cannot become an attack helicopter. A trans person threatens their world view in a fundamental way.
These people also want control of everything, probably due to inability to cope with anything they don't understand, which is a lot. I don't understand being trans, but i undetstand the right to health and happiness and i wish it for you.
- That could be an interesting explanation of why gender studies have been a target so often, even during the Nazi era
  Other scapegoats have changed, while this comes bsck
  
  I read that book and it felt like satire, but apparently this extreme belief in gender differences is the norm and im a freak.
  Im ok with that, but i do raise it to make the point that some of us just dont see your sex/gender as particularly important information and anyone changing their gender is a massive threat to the status quo beleif that such things are not only natural and right but the basis for who you are and how to interact with you.
  I remember people calling for sex/gender to be declared as part of your reddit profile. This is why, they cant interact with people as humans, they need a sex/gender to tell them how. It's very disturbing to me.

They want you fighting a culture war to keep your mind off the class war.
The mainstream "left", such as the Democrats benefit from this too.
Draw the national party lines between bigoted and non-bigoted. Now everyone can fight over that and nobody has to address the fact that two thirds of the country want universal healthcare.
- A lot of them genuinely hate us. Don't discount that.
  
  No doubt. But if you look at the whole ecosystem, a lot of them are just maggots that are personally indifferent but are happy to get people killed to secure a pay rise.
  Musk might have fried his brain hotboxing farts with his sycophants. Someone like Thiel however; I can't imagine he really cares but he's happy to fund whatever dorks will start a podcast about why they "left the left" because that shit will - he's hoping - get people to vote for politicians that give him more economic power.

Musk: more politically oriented than just money now, had aligned himself with a very large part of the population that thinks at a minimum that even if some people need to transition for their own health, society retains the right to consider their pre-transition history to still be part of reality
Zuckerberg: profit driven, is aligning Facebook etc with the political reality in America and the real prospect of being fined or embargoed by a Trump administration, would flip back if a democrat won in 2028
Rowling: belongs to a British generation of certain age where trans people are superficially accepted BUT regards their pre-trans history to be something still relevant. That's where this started and it escalated / deteriorated from there E.g. compassionate to a degree and willing to entertain the "fiction" that a biological man is now a women for the sake of that person's mental health: see them at the shops presenting female? carry on as normal.. talk to them? use their current name and pronouns out of politeness.. BUT.. if they want to access a female shelter, draw a line.. if they want to teach young children, risk assess them including their pre-trans gender and history etc. Rowling then got into increasingly fractious arguments on Twitter, largely arising from other people she followed and liked and what the trans community inferred from that. At that point she doubled down declaring advocates on Twitter to be increasingly hysterical and deluded whilst simultaneously insisting she would treat trans people humanely in person. She's then lashed out in numerous ways including in her writings aligning herself with increasingly extreme anti-trans people. FWIW, I think she would have carried on being a mildly tolerant (if dated) person of a certain age had she just stayed off Twitter entirely. But lashing out, being misinterpreted and misinterpreting others had led her to spiral down into viciousness and bitterness.
- I agree with your analysis. I think on Musk's case there is also his estranged daughter, it has entrenched his position
  
  True
- I consider your theorizing of "pre-transition history" being within the "rights of society" to "keep in touch with reality" as misleading and problematic.
  In fact, these are the axioms of trans erasure I discuss in my other response. In the core of this reasoning is the idea that "men are inherently dangerous to women" therefore "women must know at all times the biological sex of any person they interact with".
  So you can't go past the "transition" history for reasons that under all other circumstances you would decry as "misandry", but only apply this to trans women (victims themselves of cis violence in bathrooms and all other settings). Why? Because you register trans women in the semantics of sexual perversion. Then, the "right" to know anyone's medical history does not exist, on the contrary people have the right to privacy to medical interventions of any type.
  Due to stigma and discrimination trans people are furthermore entitled to hands down secrecy, given that a random bigot can just shoot them down for being trans with zero consequences. But this is also hypothetical now. The amount of cis-passing is different for every trans people.
  Some may pass for cis, most don't. Besides the existential crisis some people experience when they can't tell a person is trans, in practice stealth trans people are relatively rare, and there is not an iota of evidence that there is any societal harm from stealth cis-passing trans people. So there is no reason behind your purported "societal right to know", apart from cisgenderist entitlement.
  Enforcing such right is not only infeasible, but it sufficiently and necessarily leads to banning public trans life, with no other explanation other than cis people's uneasiness. The civil rights movement has established that majoritarian uneasiness with minorities sharing their bathrooms is not enough to justify perpetuation of discriminatory segregation practices.
  This is textbook transphobia.
  
  In the core of this reasoning is the idea that “men are inherently dangerous to women” therefore “women must know at all times the biological sex of any person they interact with”.
  I don't believe that, just to be clear. But I think that's the view of a lot of people, and that's what i was outlining. because that was relevant to OP's question.
  So you can’t go past the “transition” history for reasons that under all other circumstances you would decry as “misandry”,
  I will assume you are not talking about me here as you have no idea of my point of view on the matter. I believe you are talking generically...
  even if you are talking generically, i don't think your assumption here makes sense. many people feel free to discriminate between people on the basis of their biological sex. there are many contexts where (for example) men will accept they are treated differently but will not resort to calling this "misandry". at least in the settings i'm familiar with and amongst the people i've lived alongside here in London, UK. you may have very specific incidence in mind or may not be intending to speak universally, but you said "all other circumstances", which sounds pretty universal, so i'm just pointing out that's not correct..
  entitled to hands down secrecy, given that a random bigot can just shoot them down for being trans with zero consequences.
  I don't know where you live, but this is not true in the UK
  while I agree with the thrust of what you are saying you have a writing style that puts words and assumptions in my mouth in a manner that comes across an unnecessarily combative. you also use exaggeration to make your point which is itself problematic..
  
  I think Peanuts is speaking from JKR's perspective, not justifying it
  But I also skimmed bits of both of your comments. It's ironic really, because I'm equally verbose
- This is the answer. It's the intersection of those with strong personal opinions and the power (money) to speak their mind without true repercussions, and the power (money) hungry who are following the strongest zeitgeist in the halls of power.
  The zeitgeist exists because the entrenched powerful ones are currently using trans people and migrants as a wedge between different parts of the working class. It used to be homosexuals and communists. Or abortions and hippies. Or slaves. Or indigenous people. Ad nauseum. It's about keeping the working class divided and maintaining power. This is the latest version. And it's not just in the US BTW
  People like Rowling are new money working class that fell for the con

My personal opinion is twofold:
they need a diversion. Like a magician (or more accurate a pickpocket) they will take anything to make people blind while they amass their power. It is a sickness of the mind. They are addicted to power and ever anxious to loose it. Minorities are a good enemy for the people to blame the problems on that these people either cause themselves or dont want to take care of. In the past it was witches, nowadays it is other minorities.
minorities have been fighting for a place in the world for a long time and there have been significant improvements. But that is not a positive development if you want to rule supreme. If you‘re power crazed, you need people to fall in line. Otherwise it wont work. We have ample evidence that only a sufficiently subdued population will not rise up against authority.

trans people are a threat to the status quo of the patriarchal-capitalist Gender regime. the ideology of patriarchal capitalism is that your gender assigned at birth is immutable and there are only two. in patriarchal capitalism your gender defines a lot of what path your life will take, the societal expectations placed on you, and importantly what opportunities and privileges are afforded to you. obviously the setup is men dominating and oppressing women which has been going on for far longer than capitalism but worsened significantly under it. the division of reproductive labour is the social basis of gender. according to traditional gender roles, women are expected to act as broodmares to reproduce more worker stock and also perform most or all domestic labour in essentially a slave role. the existence of trans and trans nonbinary people disproves the two axioms on which this all rests, that your gender is immutable and one of just two. gender in capitalist ideology is little more than a tool or system of oppression, and by existing and living our lives as we see fit and not railroaded by traditional expectations based on assigned gender at birth, we show clearly that it doesn't have to be that way. so to answer your question they come for us because we are a genuine threat to capitalist patriarchal orthodoxy, we show by our actions and existence that a better social order is possible, one where individuals are actually afforded self-determination instead of being locked into a predetermined role based on what genitalia you are born with.
sorry it's kinda an incoherent thought dump, there is plenty more to say this is just a quickie of the root superstructural reasons that we are perceived as a threat to patriarchal capitalism. of course, most transphobes won't have these specific reasons in mind (in fact probably couldn't comprehend them at all due to ignorance) and have just been convinced by capitalist propaganda and transphobic media to hate us because we are icky etc. the prevalence of misogyny also is why it's so easy to get people to be transphobic, a lot of it just boils down to either "hah! why would a man want to be a woman?", or "hah! a woman could never be a man".
- I just want to add that it's not just the idea of gender being immutable, it's identity as a whole. So much of society is built around stuff like legal names. They use them to track and control people. And then trans people are out there deciding to change them just because we want to, or using prefered names that don't match our legal names. The idea that people can just decide who they want to be is threatening to them.

Transphobia, just like any form of queerphobia, serves the maintenance of property rights and the reproduction of the workforce that generates billionaires' wealth. This is where the antagonism comes from.
Also, please don't call Elon Musk that.

Point 8
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ur-Fascism

They are a fairly small group compared to other marginalized groups, and particularly vulnerable compared to others. There is already a lot of misinformation about them. Average people often dont run into them or understand them Well enough to make informed decisions. Its easy for billionaires and republicans to wield religion against them. They are often vocal about their beliefs. Intersectionality is also important (e.g. supporting and protecting other minority demographics' rights because it is the right thing to do, and tearing each other down is counterproductive) to them, which isnt always the case. Disappearing them sets an example and is a test run for setting up the infrastructure and means to take control. See: nazi germany with the deaf, and current marginalization by the trump administration of the trans and disabled communities.
- I think this is an important part of the answer i don't see mentioned much. Lots of good answers that seem right to me, amd i think also because trans people are such a tiny part of the population, they are politically not very strong. Bullies always pick on those weaker.

Rich/famous transphobes' voices are louder because they're rich, unfortunately. It's the same problem with every other awful opinion that rich/famous people have.
I do suspect though that it also has to do with social class and thinking that they are "above".
- yeah may be it's just rich people having a louder voice . But trans existed for a long time, and we never heard so much vitriol against them until a few decade back

My conjectures:
Musk: Trans kid who disowned him for being shitty so obvipusly it must be trans peoples fault and not his.
JKR: I firmly believe she's selfhating in the closet trans. The equivalent to the homophobic pastor who eventually gets caught with the choir boy. We just haven't seen the choirboy yet.
Zuck: Not transphobic, just a sociopath (at worst) who will go whatever way the wind blows.

Products of their generation. As they die off others will take their place and society will move on to other groups to target.

There are a lot of other good answers, but it seems worth remembering lots of poor powerless folks hate trans folks too.
Part of the reason they're coming after trans people is because it's human nature to hate or fear those you don't understand and who are different. A dark, and sad part of human nature, but part of human nature nonetheless
All the other stuff folks are talking about is also a true, but it's not like they're unique in their contempt for people who are different

Mostly a people to blame and for others to fear monger, it's a way to make people look the other way also, a common "enemy" instigated from the true enemy. And sense there is not a lot of trans people statistically it's hard for them to defend themselves. It's all about manipulation and control over the people

I wouldn't say that JK Rowling was "going after" transfolk, she just didn't agree with their premise. I wouldn't go so far as to say that's hatred
- she seems pretty vocal about it : https://theweek.com/feature/1020838/jk-rowlings-transphobia-controversy-a-complete-timeline
- Trans people: "I'd like to exist."
  JK Rowling: "I don't agree with your premise."
  Totally not hatred.
  
  Strawman dark pattern, I see. Very nice. Good to know you're all acting in good faith here. Better downvote me rather than have an honest discussion.

Correlation is not causation.
Personally I just think they're just pandering some group of people who have real power to determine how money flows in a society and they happen to be right wing conservatives.
US democracy is collapsing and the future throne is probably already set and they might have inside information.
Like you said, trans people can't really do anything. Perfect target when you want to show where you are planning to stand.

They may not be politicians but they spend money to get themselves into positions of political power as these few days have shown with Musk. And these people get most of their power from the masses that are dumb enough and bigoted enough to be swayed by a shared common hatred of groups to scapegoat for everything.

Because there are alot of ignorant people in the world afraid of what they perceive as different.
In your first two examples, regardless of not being politicians it's clear that by helping put politicians in power they benefit, so whether they genuinely care or not, it's just about money and lack of compassion to them. And continuing to drive class warfare continues to benefit them.
In your last example, I think that person is just in the ignorant and afraid of change category with an unfortunate amount of exposure.

- Deeply unserious of you to consider yourself "normal" when this is your understanding of gender and sexuality. Touch grass and talk to people.
  
  Must resist temptation to see what the comment said...
  
  so tell me what do i need to know to understand it better? What else is there? ;D
- what the fuck is wrong with you
- Alright, poster, I’m revoking your right to lump yourself in with “normal” people as you clearly do not meet the requirements

Most people agree with the ultrarich on this issue (at least initially, before social media insanity), but only the ultrarich can afford making arbitrary people hate them without any good reason. That's why it looks like only the billionaires are doing it.
Then they go to Twitter with these opinions and go insane and the whole thing enters a neverending tailspin.
Elon is slightly different insofar that one of his own kids is trans. So that's not entirely due to Twitter, but there's also some lived experience at the bottom of it all (I assume here that he spent time with said child).
- "Most people agree with the ultrarich on this issue (at least initially, before social media insanity)"
  Are you saying most people are anti-trans? And that people who aren't anti-trans are somehow not of sane mind?
  
  Are you saying most people are anti-trans?
  No, I think it's more nuanced than just black-or-white allies and anti-trans people. The level of pro- or anti-transness within individuals falls on a spectrum that's shaped like a bell curve, and the majority in the middle are usually amenable to trans rights if they bump into the issue in a way that resonates with them. Like for instance in their personal life with friends or family.
  But less amenable if they mostly face the issue on TV, social media or via angry activists. You might then recognize these people as anti-trans, especially if the issue is deeply personal to you.
  And that people who aren’t anti-trans are somehow not of sane mind?
  No, that's not what I was trying to say. In fact, I'd say that genuinely anti-trans people (the other end of the bell curve) are the insane ones. Socio- and/or psychopathic. My claim (possibly a bit extraordinary claim in this day and age) is that most people are not at that end.

Edit:

Additional resources in support of the argument