Star Trek is widely known to be extremely progressive. It quite literally is not like any other sci fi show at the time, and this continued throughout the series. Why would "the fit of this metaphor in a 90s sci fi show" be relevant given this?

You're jumping through a lot of hoops to not directly show or link to what you actually said, making vague remarks about what was said instead and then playing the victim game.

Someone else called it out in a separate thread as well, regarding the Coronavirus debacle. You seem intent on providing a single side of a story and then expecting everyone to believe you without doubt.

Maybe just make it easier for everyone, link to the comments, and let us judge for ourselves.

I grant that Star Trek is extremely progressive- I've been watching it since before I could speak and every year since.

Whether or not my reasoning is correct that the Dax character is too loose a metaphor for trans people to be applicable to real world issues, the point is this makes for no reason to label me an enemy of the state. I could be right or wrong, but it's a valid point of discussion in a Star Trek sub, under a post about how Dax is a trans character.

I'm not linking directly to the comments for one obvious reason: I don't want to link my HN account and my Reddit account together.

For that reason you can judge everything I've said in the worst possible light if you think that's fair under the circumstances.