So basically like every other cheater, they don't want their own methods used against them.

Seems like strict vetting, webs of known relationships, members sponsoring other members, and forming private clubs are going to be necessary for a while, as non-inclusive as that sounds. We are way past "this is why we can't have nice things" with this going on. Assuming it's set up correctly, it appears that you can't bitch about who gets into a private club. Don't like someone else's? Make your own. Indiscriminate inclusiveness can be exploited (without even trying) and isn't always suitable for that reason.

Time to deploy some firewalls. Really. No means no.

Interesting stuff at these links, but I don't know what tangled webs of laws and precedents any particular group would have to navigate to try to bulletproof themselves, because you know the TRAs would take them straight to court no matter what, since they have to stick their dicks in every place they are not wanted:

1. https://law.jrank.org/pages/5315/Club-Protecting-Civil-Rights.html

2. https://www.workforcebulletin.com/2012/03/09/for-private-clubs-a-little-discrimination-in-membership-can-go-a-long-way/

This conversation is one that should have stopped being necessary after the 1950s. But perhaps these methods can bring some semblance of freedom of association back because ultimately, the abuses going on in these videos should qualify as a violation of civil rights, here in the US at least. Nobody is stopping TRAs from going and doing their own thing. They don't have to see every women's space as a scarce resource to be grabbed and absconded with, but since they do, no more access for them. Reconstitute, reconfigure, resurrect.

Wonder how they are when they're guests at someone's house. With this mentality I would assume they arrive and are immediately holding up the owners to transfer title to them. This is very mafia-like in some ways. What's next, demanding protection money to keep their own kind out of women's spaces?