A lot of later tweets about "shut up TERF" and so on. What angers me is that inane argument that rights are never like a pie or that if someone gets more rights you won't get less and so on.
In this case rights or demands do clearly clash.
TRAs appear to want any reference to biological sex in the definition of 'woman' to be erased. This obviously benefits trans women and, oddly enough, it also benefits trans men and nonbinary female-bodied people. This may explain why the project is so popular.
But for many (perhaps millions or more?) natal women, gender identity intimately depends on having that female body.
It is the body which others treat differently from the way they treat a male body, it is the body that gets pregnant and gives birth and lactates. It is, on average, smaller and less powerful than the male body, and possessing it puts us at greater risk of sexual assault. So it matters to have that body than some other kind of body. And yet we are not allowed to define our own womanhood as biology based once TRAs get what they demand as rights.
Erasing all terms referring to the female sex would also make fighting against sexism (which is based on sex) so much more difficult as data on female bodied people as a group would not be collected and we would have no words to even name that group. It is currently called 'people' in most woke places which write about pregnant people and menstruating people. But 'people' is a terrible term to be offered to those who want to study the victims of sex-based oppression and who find that someone has stolen 'women' from them.
Genderism probably does exist but genderism is not the reason why, say, nonbinary people who look female might be treated badly. Sexism is the likely real cause.
But surveys in the future might offer an enormous number of different gender identities to choose from, none of which could be assumed to measure someone's biological sex. This lack of data on sex would make studying the phenomenon of sexism and establishing its causes much more difficult.
Women's and trans rights obviously also clash when it comes to sports. The usual argument is that trans women are women so what is the problem here? The problem is that sports are sex-segregated because the characteristics (strength, speed, size) of human bodies are distributed differently among male and female human beings.
The women's events are meant for people whose characteristics are drawn from the female distribution. But a trans woman's characteristics are drawn from the male distribution. (It's a little like having a range of moped types which differ in how fast they can go and a different range of motorcycles which also differ in how fast they can go. If we randomly pick one moped and one motorbike from each distribution, it is very likely that the latter will be faster than the former.
That is one example where gender identity is not a useful basis for deciding who can participate. There are others, such as applying for earmarked grants and scholarships specifically intended to increase the number of women in, say, a male-dominated STEM field. I don't think that the increase should come from MTF transitioners. If that was seen as just fine then (only in theory, of course) all STEM fields could fix the problem of attracting more women by simply having half of the men already working there transition.
My frustration comes from the fact that these issues cannot be debated on Twitter at all.