This is a classic application of the appeal to think of the children. I'm sure before homosexually became culturally acceptable there were plenty of people employing the same arguments against legalising homosexually.
Transition of minors does not seem to be a morally clear cut topic to me, given that they aren't allowed to do a lot of other life changing things. You can argue for the opposite, but too many trans activists are painting their opponents as stupid, disingenious or even hateful and want to silence them by force.
This will blow back on them.
(If you can't answer this question without googling it shows that maybe you need to slow down before posting, to avoid spreading misinformation.)
If we are going to let them do that we should at least let them put their genitals where they feel like before then.
The hypocrisy is the problem. You can't both have children be too immature to decide to have sex, yet be mature enough to make decisions about their sex which will impact them for the rest of their lives.
This is disingenuous moral panic and a good example of the motte-and-bailey approach the UK press uses to discredit proper medical treatment of trans youth.
It's really simple:
You are either OK with kids having control of their bodies up to and including invasive surgery and having sex with who they want or you are not.
Anything in between is either pedophiles trying to push the narrative on their side, or idiots not understanding what they are doing.
It is currently against any kind of recommended practice to perform genital surgery on children. It is not approved nor is it practiced. This kind of intentionally hyperbolic language is the sort of thing that is the stuff of tabloid headlines, not reasoned discussion.