I honestly don't think it's helpful or accurate to refer to trans as a 'cult'. It's a narrative/set of beliefs that some people use to make sense of their experiences. You may disagree with those beliefs, think they're unhelpful or damaging but >

it's the proliferation of those beliefs throughout society and institutions, often the most extreme essentialism versions underpinned by misogyny and homophobia, and the authoritarianism meaning there is no room for alternative narratives and beliefs that are the real problem. >

This is not about individuals, it's systemic. It's a narrative that relies on and reproduces existing inequalities. It appeals to people and they defend it vigorously because it upholds the status quo. >

Also because we're living in a time where any transgression in thought is severely punished and group cohesion is policed so people are constantly needing to prove their allegiances and worth. This necessitates a them and us scenario and increasingly aggressive interactions >

By calling trans a cult I think people are denying the real nature and extent of what we're seeing, as many have suggested before it's probably best understood in relation to other medical models of distress that have resulted in invasive treatments that are no longer used. >

Or other, now rejected, narratives used to make sense of phenomenon people considered inexplicable. Sexual inversion, which sought to explain why people were LGB (which actually has parallels with the dominant version of trans ideology) is one example. >

So, obviously I'm not seeking to police people's words just trying to explain my thoughts and I am absolutely not denying that some people behave like they're in a cult, just that that in itself does not make it one.