I think in general we agree but you've made some amazing points here that I definitely overlooked. Particularly about vulnerabilities within the same-sex group, and how is a trans identity deserving of different treatment for this reason? I usually fall back on creating third spaces as it seems like the best way to ensure women's rights are upheld all the while catering to trans conceptions of safe spaces, but you've given me some things to look into.

Also, the idea of incarceration based on severity of offense is another good point. Where I live males have been imprisoned with females despite being convicted of sex crimes and then actually sexually assaulted the female inmates, so having them separate from females has been my biggest concern, but of course it does make more sense to imprison based on the concrete measures of sex, crime, and risk without feeding the idea of internal gender identity as holding weight in these circumstances. TRA usually argue that transwomen would be incredibly vulnerable in male prison, but that ties into your first point about in-group vulnerabilities, and of course ignores both female vulnerabilities and the pervasive dangers of self-id.

The issue keeps coming back to the fact that gender identity is not a tangible condition. It cannot be measured, so the conditions to join the group are largely arbitrary. This self-identification and the subsequent demand to receive special treatment and inclusion in groups not designed for them is unfortunately impacting medicine and law where I live, which is why I'm curious how we can allow the self-id of the few to eclipse the needs, rights, and vulnerabilities of the majority.

Thanks for your thoughts and the links!