Rawr, right, I'm confused. Do you think that because 'we' (I'm using the royal 'we', because I'm aware that gender critical FWR posters are not the Borg) do not believe that people can magically change sex with medication, surgery, by what they wear/how they present themselves, and because we recognise that in UK law rape is a crime that you need a penis to commit - otherwise it is termed sexual assault, although can carry the same penalty if it is analogous to rape - that somehow this means that, what, we think that it doesn't matter that sometimes men are the victims of sexual assault? Eh? Has anyone you're trying to rail against said anything like that?
You have expressed an extreme homophobic opinion that you didn't initially qualify or explain that it was 'theoretical'. You did so in order to back up your own straw man argument that 'we' believe that transwomen may rape children by accesssing women-only spaces (again, eh? You suggested that!? I haven't seen anyone stacking trans people - a lot of concern and sympathy expressed, yes, objection to appropriation of women-only spaces and terms, yes, because that harms women - but no intent to harm transwomen, at all).
What I can't figure out is what any of this has to do with discussing genital 'reassignment' surgery, and the ethics and language used to describe it. Which I thought 'we' were all discussing.
It's almost as if you just wanted to come and shout TERF at everyone to 'prove' how nasty everyone is? Really, what is your point, apart from derailing the discussion at hand?