Your question itself is loaded. By asking a negative "why is it not... ?" everyone who wants to answer will instantly have to start any point by defending a position your question assigns to them. A position they may not necessarily share. 2nd: In your question you equate male bodied = men instead of just using male. Here you're again injecting your own position into a question...

Like QT didn't usually do the same thing...

Nevermind. I just read the rest of your post and it continues in the same charged way by equating trans women's need for safety - which is the same desire as cis women's - to predatory behavior via the red flag bit.

It would be great if QT stop pretending this issue is about safety. If trans identified males were just worried about their safety in sex-seggregated spaces, they would accept third spaces as a solution. The fact that most of them are completely againt this compromise and insist in accessing women's spaces, in spite of women's concerns, show us that what they really want is "validation". OP has a point in what she says because, just like with other males, we cannot tell which trans males are predators and which ones aren't. Futhermore, we cannot ignore the fact that most trans males are sexually attracted to women, that most of them don't undergone any kind of genital surgery, that many of them are perfectly okay with ignoring women's boundaries (i.e. trans males accessing places like women's bathrooms, changing rooms, shelters, etcetera despite not all women are fine with this) and that many of them have no problem threatening dissenting women (and many times such threats include their "girldicks").

Maybe you can do better in your next post.

Yes, because we all know that women framing their concerns in a compassionate way can expect to be treated the same way./s If only QT would police their own half as vehemently as they police women... Where are all the articles condemning the doxing, death and rape threats, etcetera of fellow transactivists? Where are all the articles saying, no, demanding that transactivists should do better?