Madeleine

You've avoided nearly all of my questions, Norah, because you're literally incapable of answering them. Your mind is firmly closed to any evidence or facts that undermine your preferred narrative. You consider it immoral for anyone to even question you, even though you voluntarily and confidently entered this discussion. You're like a flat-earther. Nothing I or anyone else says to you will permeate your stubborn quasi-religious beliefs, because to change your mind would take away a core part of your self image, which is as somebody who is kinder and better and more righteous than the nasty people still advocating for the safety of women and girls. You repeat your thought-terminating clichés and unevidenced assertions, which I assume sound clever inside your echo chamber, but which, outside it, make you appear not only dim, but a total moral vacuum. Increased risk to females? Who cares. Women threatened by violence? Of course those poor trans-identified men lash out when they meet resistance! What is a gender identity? You can't really say, but like the flat-earther, you're sure it exists, because your tribe is held together by belief in it, and pride themselves on their blind faith in it. I keep waiting for a single gender ideologue or trans activist to truly engage with the facts, but all of you sheer away from them like horses from fireworks. It truly is like talking to cult members who're incapable of engaging in rational debate and just keep chanting the mantras, consigning all serious questions to the 'evil' bin. I've been told I'm on the wrong side of history thousands of times. By debating people like you, I've come to realise that your ilk's idea of the 'right side of history' means stripping women and girls' of their rights, excusing male violence against women, siding with those issuing death and rape threats and attempting to suppress critical thought and freedom of speech. Maybe, like the flat-earthers, you genuinely think history will vindicate you. I believe people will look back on this period and analyse your arguments, not because they admire them, but because they're trying to fathom how so many supposedly intelligent people fell, hook, line and sinker for a bunch of vacuous, post-modern, pseudo-intellectual cobblers, while being completely indifferent to the real world harm they were enabling.

So in summary: you want all women's single-sex spaces and services taken away to accommodate men who claim their 'gender identity feels different from what [their] body is.' You can't explain what a gender identity is, or explain what it means to 'feel' female, as opposed to being female, but you still think society should reconfigure itself around an unfalsifiable concept that cannot be objectively observed or proven, in spite of the well-evidenced risk to women and girls this poses.