Not getting into the whole are they pure enough to speak stuff.
Apparently being made to look at a male appendage against your will is bad when it’s a ‘cis’ bloke who’s doing it but not so bad when it’s a ‘trans woman’.
That. Good point, well made. Are women supposed to ask the male appendage owner how said appendage owner identifies before deciding whether or not they're allowed to safeguard themselves or be distressed? And predicate their boundaries entirely on a male person's personal choice of internal self realisation at that moment? Which places the male in really quite a stupendous position of superiority over the female patiently waiting to be told what they think and feel, but also assumes no male will ever lie.
I know self-identification is all the rage, but it is a bit much to ‘identify as’ a crusader against misogyny when you have contributed, whether wittingly or unwittingly, to a new culture of misogyny.
Equally and absolutely true. Women web-wide are noting and naming men such as David Lammy as hypocritical beyond belief. Or apparently, since they are the same ones holding the "excuse me, can you tell me my pronouns and whether or not you're committing indecent assault on me?" views for women, possibly they don't think women are human enough to remember what they said yesterday or the day before.