dighp

> You don't need conversion therapy to eliminate transgenderism; you just have to stop recognizing it at all, and treat people based on their biological sex.

That does sound very compelling, when the alternative is what we are witnessing today, with males gaining access to what were previously female-only spaces, disregarding the boundaries of women and girls where they are most vulnerable.

It's becoming increasingly clear that transgenderism is a form of male dominance over women, and should be opposed like other forms of sexism. Women are being made second-class citizens again, but this time it's being touted as progressive.

It's a good question, and one that their activists don't like answering because "the right to impose oneself on spaces designated solely for the opposite sex" isn't what most people would accept as a human right. So they ignore or block or ban or attack instead of engaging reasonably.

Exactly this. It should be a massive red flag that any of these males want to violate the boundaries of women and girls in the first place, knowing fine well that they are not welcome in what are supposed to be female-only spaces. Instead, it's seen as evidence that they should be permitted to do so.

> > Why should prefixing a proposal with the phrase "trans" suddenly allow one to invalidate other people's rights?

> It doesn't, though the phrase "To those on top, equality feels like oppression" comes to mind.

The rights of women to enjoy female-only spaces, for their safety and dignity, is being invalidated in the name of so-called "trans rights", whereby a subset of males who demand access to such spaces, entirely disregarding women's boundaries, are being granted access.

This isn't equality, this is male dominance over women.

And yet again, same as it always is, this is oppression of women to meet the demands and desires of males.