[itishappy]

You're arguing that somebody who wears dresses and has breasts should be referred to as male? That pronouns shouldn't be based on appearance or preference like we've done throughout history, we should instead invent new classifications based upon unobservable characteristics like genetics or genitalia at birth? And that this is all being done to reduce confusion?

I'll be honest. I'm confused.

[umvi]

I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree. I personally think it's simpler to continue to refer to "Chelsea Manning" as "Bradley Manning" with he/him, even if they decided later to completely change their identity. Close friends can call them "Chelsea" out of respect, but society should not rewrite history to erase all traces of "Bradley" in order to accommodate one individual's mental health struggles. I find (the history rewriting) to be extremely confusing and, frankly, Orwellian. That said, if I'm interacting with a trans person that prefers some name/pronouns, I will use them out of respect, even if I fundamentally disagree with a lot of trans activism.

[itishappy]

Do you hold the same views about marriage? That changing one's last name is is confusing and Orwellian? That close friends might humor the individual out of respect, but society at large should refuse to allow history to be rewritten?

[umvi]

I personally am against changing of last names at marriage and encouraged my wife not to change hers.

But to directly address your point... the main difference here is that "dead names" and "dead pronouns" are considered harmful and/or offensive and are therefore actively hunted and scrubbed from history by activists, unlike maiden names which are considered benign.