Yes, THIS issue. Absolutely. But they are wrong on many other things. Most of all, they are wrong on issues that I believe have opened the flood gates for the transgenderism to even take hold in society, if I understand their position correctly on social constructionism. Of course they are right on TiMs being male. You need to be indoctrinated into some cult - or have attended an average western university - to be this delusional about human biology. But they refuse to then look inwards to see the contradictions in their own ideology that this same faulty reasoning about biology stemmed from. They allege that TiMs competing against women is unfair, and that is true. But they refuse to then also revise their positions on alleging discrimination against women in every social arena where there are disparities in outcome. This was basically the central contention in such recent debates as Jordan Peterson with Cathy Newman. I am being told that I am bringing up the same old arguments, which must be true, because the same old arguments still show up the faulty reasoning on those ideologies. Women and men are not socially constructed. They differ in many ways, and even if we treat them fairly, there will be differences in outcome, without it being unfair necessarily. They also cling on to their narrative of oppression based on superficial disparities of outcome. They see the greater levels of authority men had historically but they refuse to acknowledge the greater burden. These are obvious discrepancies, which remain without a good answer from its proponents, so I'm sure they keep hearing the same arguments. But they will have to retreat to ever more remote hug boxes until they confront those contradictions, as evidenced by the censorship in their communities on Reddit, as evidenced by their censorship here. Many people who now oppose transgenderism laid the ideological frameworks for this identitarinism and the social constructionism, the tabula rasa nonsense. That was their entire basis for claiming proof of sex based discrimination on the basis of disparity of outcome.

I hear the same people who are abhorred by the chaos wrought by the transgender movement tout the belief that the brains of men and women are the same, for example. There are fundamental differences from an early age. They still try to deny gender differences, but they are forced to admit the unfairness of athletic competition between TiMs and women. Many of them are smarter than this and have since changed their position, but there is always a remaining contingency of people who apparently cannot wrap their head around how these positions are contradictory.

I believe that they react emotionally. Their fear is that, if they acknowledge gender differences, that this will also give rise to and validate gender essentialism, which I do not think is true. We can acknowledge biological differences between men and women, while also giving women the liberty of going beyond the traditional constraints imposed by nature of their gender -- as was men's. There is a biological and a social component to what it means to be a woman. Ideological opponents will currently either side on one extreme or the other, which is why there has been this protracted stalemate in public discourse for so long. Professionals most knowledgeable are too cowardly to take a position that might be considered politically incorrect so it is up to the community leaders of those activist groups to talk sense into their constituents -- which they refuse to do, as we can see on full display here.

They made their bed, now they have to lie in it. Until they iron out their own inconsistencies, they will not have the solidity of foundation to confront the same type of hipocrisy in their opponents.