The situation would improved for everyone if there was an acknowledgment that humans create narratives around events, which can help or hinder our quality of life and are open to change.
Single sex provision is legal when considered a proportionate means to achieve a legitimate aim. Viewing this as nothing more than a provision targeted to support a specific vulnerable group is a healthy narrative for everyone. Viewing it as a deliberate act of oppression against a subset of males is a damaging narrative for that subset.
When females present in ways that are often coded as male (e.g clothes, hairstyles, gait), a healthy narrative to hold is that it is quite likely that some people, who are making incomplete judgments based on presentation may, benignly, mistake you for a male. It is unhealthy to build or hold a narrative that this is anything other than a predictable mistake that is simply rectified by stating you are female, they’ve wrongly sexed you.
15 or so years ago, my work as a psychologist largely comprised of exploring, with patients, the meaning they gave to events in their lives. We explored plausible alternative explanations and the difference these had on their wellbeing and relationships. Today, many people are very wedded to ‘their truth’ and suggest that questioning it is fundamentally wrong or harmful. It is somewhat ironic that the harm and damage is arising from ‘their truth’ and their quality of life would improve significantly if they amended it.
The linked document provides a library of stories that are harming those who own them. It would be so simple to reduce or remove the distress the article sets out to showcase.