Datun No one is taking anything from them or denying them anything.
Some of them might disagree when they are being denied access to this that or the other, or are being denied even being considered as this that or the other.
HornyTortoise The only analogy I can make with the gay marriage thing is if gay people, rather than wanting the right to be married themselves, were demanding (aggressively) that every person who is already married had their marriages removed from all records, and were expected to get married again.
The analogy is about understanding what people might consider a threat to their group and the subsequent reactions to this.
When someone expresses puzzlement at the aggression and attempts to silence "a bunch of women sitting around discussing stuff" the first point is that if this "stuff" involved arguing against the rights/recognitions that the group wants, then to this group that is a threat. And such discussions can form the backdrop to denials at a legal level.
Then to further help understand people's motives and actions, consider the way some homosexuals/allies responded to the "homophobes" who were just sitting around "discussing stuff". Being vociferous to them, insulting them, trying to silence them.
This might help depuzzle you as to why some peopel act the way they do.
Of course, if you get hung up on whether you personally agree or disagree with the minority group in question's aims, and start making arguments for why in one case they were justified and in the other, not OK, then you are going to miss the point and may well continue scratching your head in puzzlement as to why some trans people will react aggressively and strongly to a mere trivial discussion of "stuff".