didcote

In such situations, how does one distinguish a male with bad intentions from the others, though?

That they may insist on access to spaces they know are intended to be female-only, despite being well aware that many women are uncomfortable with this male imposition, is already an indicator of dubious intention. Perhaps not directly predatory, but certainly a violation of boundaries.

I don't think that an advanced stage of transition can broadly override this, in reality. Becoming a modern type of eunuch isn't the same as actually being a woman. It seems unreasonable to compel women to accept these as being equivalent.

Here's an example of the issue at hand: https://www.womensforumaustralia.org/tribunal_says_men_who_i...

A group of lesbian women want to hold female-only events, but they're not permitted by law to exclude the heterosexual males who call themselves lesbian women.

Similar conflicts apply to most other women's spaces, between the women who want to maintain these spaces as female-only, and the males who want to gain access to these spaces on the basis that they identify themselves as women or female.

> This doesn't have to be a dichotomy.

How not? There is an inevitable clash of rights when it comes to protected spaces and who is permitted where.