@ICJump - it was a facetiously worded response to a ludicrous statement, it was not meant to be watertight. Of course I understand that uncontrollable desire is not the only (nor main reason) that men assault, rape, intimidate or generally impose themselves inappropriate on women.
@Datum - I do listen, and I do understand that I am different to natal women, with some different issues and struggles but does that, therefore, mean that the experiences I have, with respect to being trans female are therefore not just 'worth less' but also worthless despite many of them being the same as a natal woman? I do not think so..
I do not think my lack of affinity to the issues natal woman face is the issue, I think it is a lack of understanding from many users on the likes of MN that is the problem for not seeing that there are clear parallels between the issues faced and that instead of dividing and shrinking away from trans issues, natal women should helping to protect us. You have the experience and the numbers to do it. But I will not accept that because I am trans I am in anyway inferior to natal women. I accept I am not a 'true woman' in a biological sense but in a colloquial setting I am. THAT is why I will interchangeably refer to myself as both a trans woman and a woman depending on the conversational setting.
As for moving goalposts, I think that is a bit much. I have in one message said if anything trans woman (of a more slight build once on HRT) are at a disadvantage and in another stated that there is no measurable advantage or disadvantage, however this is a simple case of playing devils advocate and proposing a line of thinking to be able to discuss things from several viewpoints. As I said in my opening message, I only have the data I have collected on myself and my own experiences to draw from because there is so little peer-reviewed data on the matter.
Apologies if I lead you to believe that I was picking and choosing my narrative. The only narrative I do have is that in MY personal case, as a trans woman, I do not see an issue, but as I have said in a reply to another user I can understand why if there was a pre-HRT and still at their male prime trans woman competing then I can see this as a huge issue.
I do have a problem with the language consistently used, however. I am not a man. I am male. Big difference. I have been very careful (I think?) to not confuse woman with female (except with the exception of where Parkrun is concerned with it's M and F categorisation) whenever I have been discussing biological/physiological functions so why are most users not as insightful? There is a huge difference between a trans woman and a man physiologically in MOST cases. I understand it is a petty thing to pick out as all you and others had to do was type 'male' instead but again, an important distinction to make.
If 'Men' started claiming trans status just to be able to run in the women's category then I would absolutely be with you on the side of 'that is not right' but saying trans women are just men looking to run as women is disingenuous and simply not true.