I would be very interested, thank you. The flag is probably justified since HN is not really the place for these culture war things :) but I'm genuinely trying to understand the perspective here, because it does seem like a big gap between my understanding (the Democratic party has moved left on these issues) and theirs (the Democratic party is just playing defense on these issues).

I personally wonder if people were arguing and complaining that America was moving left or failing back when racial integration was the big fight. I’m sure there were people arguing that letting non-whites drink from the same water fountains was dangerous for white women. Think about that a bit while you lament transgender people.

You're proving my point here - the original comment claimed that the left was merely defending the pre-existing, settled rights that trans people have "always" had against the right's aggression, I'm saying that the left has been actively pushing for change and new rights. I think the left sees trans rights as a continuation of the civil rights movement. This is an empirical question, entirely separate from the question of whether this is a good thing.

No, I'm saying you're derailing the conversation with your "empricism", congratulations. That's what you people do around here. If there are simply a few examples of the "danger" you people claim, then why is it such a problem? Answer is that there is no problem, it's a made up issue that is being used to divide us politically, like abortion or gay rights or weed. It doesn't matter if "the democrats are moving left", you're either for the rights of people to exist as they wish, or you are for limitations on how people can express themselves in this way. I'm finished with this line of conversation, you have wasted enough of my time.

Could you explain the racial analogy in more detail please? It's not obvious how restricting males from using female-only spaces is similar in concept or principle to racial segregation.