Hoardasurass said "I very much doubt that a woman would intentionally set another woman to be raped just to prove a point against gender ideology".
That is not what I said or meant. I used TERF as shorthand for sex realist man or woman, and I was positing (or trying to) the possibility that the "decision" is a combination of policy and individual actions, and that a sex realist nurse (male or female) might have thought "I know she needs to go on the women's ward, but if I walk her there I will get shit, maybe reported, and we'll probably get sent back to the male ward anyway. Fuck it, I cannot be dealing with trying to protect these women any more, not least as people like them are exactly who are reporting me for expressing concerns about vulnerable women in men's spaces... I don't want her to come to harm, but if she does at least that might be more ammunition to keep women safe in future".
I do not for one second believe the hospital had a sex-realist policy and some nasty TERF went against it to cause harm to a trans person. Or anyone gender critical actively wanted her to come to harm
usedtobeaylis said "That is not equally a possibility. What the fuck?"
Sorry, I said "equally" in the sense of "in addition and having the same importance (used to introduce a further comment)" eg "not all who live in inner cities are poor; equally, many poor people live outside inner cities". That does not mean I think both are equally likely, or that there are equal numbers of poor people inside and outside of inner cities.