If the definition of transgender had remained firmly with transsexual men who have gender dysphoria, we may not have had this problem.
They are generally not attracted to women, many have surgery and they're not politically motivated.
But the men who have hijacked the narrative have had the official definition from Stonewall, changed to include cross dressing fetishists. They may have had hormones to create breasts, but they need their penis in order to get aroused by said breasts. Many are attracted to women, hence the persecution of lesbians. A double whammy, because it's the sex they are attracted to and the description of lesbian will validate their own 'womanhood'. Hence lady penis, girl dick.
So even before you start on regular predators, you have an entire cohort who will demand access to female spaces purely because it turns them on. As does the lack of consent from women.
Then add misogynistic men and/or predators to that mix.
Who have suddenly realised that they require zero modification, either to their anatomy or their clothes, in order to identify as women.
Men who would previously have spent decades building up a reputation in children's organisations, the clergy, teaching, healthcare, in order to groom and victims, can now just walk into any space containing women and children. Partially dressed, and vulnerable.
Then you have those, of which there are so very many, who just make a point of letting women know how they can dominate them.
Travis of Topshop fame, whose best friend calls children kinky and deviant, for instance. Not giving a toss that people could read all about that on the Internet, he asserted his entitlement to dominate and got topshop to change their fitting room policy, to allow him access.
Or the men who targeted a tiny vegan restaurant, because it was run by lesbians. They garnered support to leave hundreds and hundreds of one star reviews. Thereby ruining the business.
Or the man who targeted the women run on-line bra shop for adolescent girls. Complaining that the language was exclusionary because men wear bras.
Or the man who took on Hampstead women's pond, demanding access to that one, despite there being one for men and one unisex.
Those are just a tiny percentage of examples. There are loads.
The recent example being to allow men to identify as women and become rape crisis/Women's Aid counsellors. Which made me feel a bit sick because there were threads on here last year from women who answer rape crisis helplines. Who on a regular basis, have to deal with men, pretending to be women who had been raped, and fetishising it down the phone to them.
It happened so frequently, they could recognise it within 10 seconds of the beginning of the call.
This isn't about a handful of people.
This is a concerted effort to target every single thing that is predominantly by, or for, women and girls and bring it down. If they can't bring it down they will join it and take it over.
All under the guise of inclusivity and progression.