If perceived short-term survival sources ("food" a.k.a. "money" a.k.a. "employment opportunities") are low, and if perceived long-term survival sources ("reproduction" a.k.a. "sex" a.k.a. "dating opportunities") are in the range of low-to-nonexistent, transexuality is a rational individual choice.
Transexuality is not only a rational choice for individuals, but a natural choice under a competitive evolutionary rubric. Males have evolved for X thousand/million years to seek effeminate holes, 99% of the time during which grooming and costuming were ineffectual or nonexistent, leaving certain duplicable signals (shapes, sizes, colors, gestures, sounds) as the primary cues for evolutionary success. Ergo a market of millennia exists for effeminate holes, traditionally filled (the market, not the holes) by potential female mates, more likely sexual access to whom hit the right genetic cues for randy (a.k.a. programmed to be evolutionarily successful) males. A hypothetical "advent" of culture made social affirmation a strong, though not as strong as effeminate cuing, stand-in for reproductive success, as sub-species that encouraged reproduction via the cue system better fostered members' mating and outbred hypothetical cultures that punished mating or pregnancy. Which is to say, once a cultural institution is developed which affirms reproductive pairings and/or effective-parenting collusions and/or effective-social-collusion collusions, the evolutionary pressure to conform to such institutions would become massive; indeed, omnipresent for members of such social groups.
If Big Chief say extra wheat go to "family" with "children" headed by "father," then the approval of Big Chief means something akin to life and death, ergo if Big Chief says screwing trannies (or whatever other non-reproductive partner[s] you care to postulate) is officially okay, there is verifiable, instinct-evidentiary approval for screwing trannies. The predecessors to today's Big Chiefs did say the former, for thousands of years, because Big Chiefs that did not say so fostered societies of randomly-violent, randomly-horny nomads who were, for whatever reason, unable to develop patrilineage, related male-parenting traditions, and/or correlated (even if not causal) technological traditions. For Big Chiefs today to say screwing trannies is okay, and for Young (potential) Farmer-Warrior to then screw trannies (or chicks on birth control, groups of same, mixed groups, bedposts, platypi, et cetera), is completely scientific and rational and traditional for Young (potential) Farmer-Warrior to comply, since New Big Chief's decision has mimicked in form the increased evolutionary success provided by Ancestor Big Chief's sanctioning of other relationships. In that way, most twentieth-century leaders were not "leaders" so much as they were trans-leaders, manifesting the superficial qualities associated with headmen while not actually possessing, so to speak, the relevant genitalia. Today's are post-surgical transleaders, possessing eerie collaborative imitations thereto, but still, like parasitoid wasps, sending regional militaries to force humans to pay taxes to Israel. Satisfying to grossly desperate, desperately gross caterpillars, but objectively disgusting parasites nonetheless.
Whether these decisions are for better or for worse is beside the point, from Young Farmer-Warrior's perspective. Ergo we perceive the fundamental contradiction, the inbred idiocy, in the false dichotomy between zero-sum evolution and fiat creationism, meant to keep us running the great hamster wheel; for, a majority of opposition to the inherently nihilistic evolution of the Jenomic invader-trader-slavers and their colonialism will be channeled through firmament-worshiping belief systems offered up to guarantee a return of nihilism, just as a few burgeoning centuries of atrocious nihilism led to a counterreaction which views inquiry and freedom, rather than superficially celibate child-rapists, as an enemy worth blogging against.
Which is to say, people most likely to have a problem with random perverts per se are most likely to approach the problem through ye olde teevee's perspective of Consolidated Sky Jew Worship, guaranteeing their predictable rebellion will collapse under the weight of its own idiocy some centuries from now. And on the veritable Wheel spins. Within the maze, it occurs to few that the reason certain options seem to be suddenly open when all others are blocked is because someone is funneling us in a certain direction via inserted planks, the sequence of which were planned out millennia ago.
If rational economic actors are genetically motivated to seek social affirmation as a stand-in for survival (short-term: food; long-term: reproduction), strong instincts are therefore detrimental to survival, because those better at retaining past learning will become less likely to reproduce and therefore less likely survive. Ergo those who seek social affirmation and sexual pleasure, trusting to their instincts (which equations worked out correctly for X thousand/million years) that these things would lead to successful offspring, will achieve reduced or zeroed reproduction, because they are more likely to pursue MTFs. Particularly in a culture wherein actual reproduction is discouraged, but all of the evolutionary cues pertaining to reproduction are encouraged, it is very much the right thing to do--the partially right, but to the functioning child of evolution, that may be all he really has--to screw hand, VR, computer, tinder chick with birth control, tranny, et cetera. Big Chief says go for it, Little Chief with food-paycheck says go for it, and the alternative is a pedophile who believes Invisible Sky Jew uses invisible roof to stymie space shuttles because of orchard theft.
Be like Rousseau and imagine cave-times with a bunch of hairy people, and the desperate survival-level maximum importance to a male organism of immediately fucking a humanoid with hairless legs, tits, a soft voice, and an interest in being fucked. Then jump forward a few thousand years to a hypothetical culture where a humanoid with hairless legs, tits, a soft voice, and an interest in being fucked is presented in conjunction with an even more reproduction-friendly social sanction for fucking it. Ergo MTFs ascend in a display of economic and evolutionary necessity: the modern ability to groom imitations of ten thousand years of fresh pubescent female cues, combined with a desire to behave in a traditionally feminine fashion, makes a strong evolutionary trap, sic.
Individually, the choice is rational because, presented with the option to obtain limited temporal survival (food, affection, or similar) by mimicking a desirable a.k.a. cared-for class--say, the class consisting of "possessors of effeminate holes"--is, evolutionarily speaking, preferable to starving in service of traditional morality. If Invisible Sky Jew prefers you to die in the street rather than sin, that's another story entirely; if there is no Invisible Sky Jew, then short-term rent-seeking of a potentially exploitable product is an economically rational choice. Caring about one's identity as one half of a sexual dyad, evolutionary or theistic, may be vulgar, wrong, demeaning, or dishonest, but no more so than pretending to care about the customer-service philosophy of whatever place might provide a less-well-paying temp job. In either case, you have to put on the little bistro apron, mechanic's coveralls, or some other uniform, and get reamed by assholes for your pittance--in some cases more honestly and forthrightly than in others. The good refuse to play, and die; if you're here, you're either a whore who accepts it, a whore in denial, or the worst sort, namely a whore who doesn't even have to put out because you live upon the proceeds of past whoring done in your name by a genetic or ideological predecessor. The reviled honesty of McVeigh, Brown, and Roof in pursing their goals comes into play here: we ourselves endure only through partnership with, through tacit acceptance of, the larger system.
Granted, transsexuals tend to be, like most of us, thoroughly unappealing to the point of loathsomeness, but a little science can change all that. Give them a hundred years; they'll all look like...crud, who is supposed to be attractive? There's always some designated one or group filling that role. Today, are aristocrats supposed to be, businesspersons, movie stars, virtuals, or something or someone else? One never knows for sure. Well, insert your own preference-based image here. Once STDs are declared defeated for all time, all the people who semi-believe Big Chief will be presented with no logical difference from the perma-sterile co-eds and the prepubescently-surgical MTFs. Yes, I know what the ones now look like, but use your imagination. 1880s Union Pacific engine room versus receiving the sixth course in the lounge of your new Global 8000--it's not a question of if a hypothetical you would be fooled, but of the philosophical difference underlying the technology that would, or already has, fooled you.
Another irony of evolution would be success precluding success. Posit those who recognized (or accidentized; as you prefer) the trend of society as becoming more important than that of smashing things to get what you want, and who adapted to Big Chief. More liberalism, genetically speaking, leaves you more vulnerable to screwing tinders or trannies, therefore not reproducing, while those who were too slow in evolving to conform to updating social norms would achieve greater ironical success. Contrasted with Big Chief's messaging to females to be headstrong, belligerent, confrontational, et cetera, the threat of false pleasures--nihilism writ large--is a variation on Plato's cave, whereby any form of virtual reality possesses the power to entrap willing humans inside a socially-approved pleasure-cave. And will vial-breeding make this method ultimately more successful, or will the nomadic lechers emerge from the wasteland to beat the pupae from their comfort pods and reassert a different kind of inherent flaw in this shattered place?
Here we are again, talking like it hasn't already happened many times before. The triumph of the romantic family over the lineage family--the former focused on short-term-pleasure, the latter on long-term--was, perhaps, the latest decision to enter the cave, though limited by the technology then available. Per the rules of either evolutionary nihilism (contra evolution) or (frightened, Jenomic) fiat creationism, our scientific suicide has already begun. When we tell ourselves that facial symmetry correlates to success in the realm of fighting to death over the last deer in the forest, we're attempting to rationalize our decisions under the rules of two broken rubrics that are more connected than either the Christian or the Scientist wants to admit.