I absolutely agree that transwomen shouldn’t be in female prisons. The two aren’t connected because nobody of any note is refusing to use the word ‘woman’.
You don't see the connection between woman meaning violent male sex offender when it can mean putting males in women's prisons, and a charity that replaces woman with cervix haver so it's not a necessary criterion for males who identify as women?
It's exactly the same agenda.
Putting males in female prisons is the extreme end of the spectrum that starts with redefining the word woman.
The only reason it doesn't feel like that, is because it's far rarer. It doesn't make it not the extreme end.
Anyway, I think I've explained this sufficiently, for anyone else reading this thread.
What's happened is that mainstream media is reporting on a move that would affect every single person, almost immediately. Unlike prisons.
That was stonewalls mistake.
Going after the word mother.
Woman was clearly being replaced all over the shop. People are far more emotionally invested in the word mother. (And, by extension, father).
It immediately affects everyone. You don't have to be put in prison, or a rape refuge, or play sport.
Hence the outrage.
And yes, this is very much something that is being pushed. Look at the Freddie McConnell case, going all the way to the Supreme Court. A legal, fully funded case, with one of the most expensive London lawfirms, that wants to eliminate the entire concept of mother and have it replaced with the gender identity of father.
The case is still ongoing, I believe. But Freddie wants to, quite literally, make the word father mean human who gives birth.
Legally. Set in stone.
Minimising it doesn't work, I'm afraid.