We were asking them nicely, there was no need to attack us like that, though if you were not we apologise. Tone can be difficult to tell in text alone.

I am confronting you becuase I think your chastisement was simply wrong. My questions are honest - I would appreciate it if you would answer them - but if my understanding of diversity of identity is decent, you’re asking them to deny the identities of countless beings for the sake of including you in a brief remark, when what they said is perfectly correct and merely doesn’t refer to you.

There are beings that self-classify as objects, with exclusive it/its pronouns. There are transhuman beings that want to transition into an existence as software, including ones that want to merge with AI or map themselves onto AI. Are you sure none of them identify as replaceable by AI? Do you exclude them from “everyone and everymany”? Or do you declare their identities less valid than yours because you don’t understand or agree?

Sure, I wonder too whether their self could be preserved in such a transfer. But that is, medically speaking, none of our fucking business.

Furthermore how do you expect others to know beings like us exist and want representation and respect too if they aren’t made aware of that?

This implies you can’t make people aware except by chastising them, which is ridiculous.

If you just want to inform people (leaving aside for a moment whether what you’re informing them of is true), why not respond to their comment with "

can’t replace a human

Yeah, and neither can they replace any other being/person/[some other category]!"