I have a friend who suggests using the term "alignment" instead of "transition" when talking about gender presentation; ie, "I'm bringing my gender presentation into alignment with my gender identity."

OBVIOUSLY I like this a lot because of D&D: In D&D, playing your character in a way that doesn't match their alignment can result in stagnating experience point attainment, or losing XP you already have.

"Playing" myself out of alignment with my gender identity, living with a gender presentation that doesn't match my identity as a trans woman, absolutely hobbles my irl XP progression. I gain less experience, have trouble advancing, and don't level up.

I focus so much of my mental and emotional energy on my gender dysphoria it prevents me from focusing on other aspects of my life like education and careers, which keeps me from reaching my potential.

As I "align myself" properly by transitioning, I'll be able to level up, which will lead to more difficult encounters with higher-level monsters, like liches and mindflayers and Republican legislators, but I'll be more properly emotionally equipped to handle it.

And YES I KNOW not all editions of D&D treat alignment like that! My favorite, 5th edition, doesn't at all, but it DOES have some text explicitly inclusive of trans characters, including non-binary identities.

Granted that text isn't perfect and is kinda problematic, but it's something, and the point is that it's up to the player.

Plus it can serve as explicit textual support against people who try to argue other players should only be allowed to play their perceived assigned gender.

Which is how I spent most of 4th edition playing a boy half-elf warlock character I hated when I'd intended her to be a girl.

In retrospect, my post-campaign headcanon is she transitioned, multiclassed as a rogue, and took control of the Thieves' Guild from her asshole father.

I hated 4th edition. Anyway what was I talking about? Oh yeah, alignment!