Why should she be allowed to compete with biologically female athletes, be housed with "real" (sorry, sorry, biological) women, be allowed to use the Ladies' restroom?

albaby:
I'm not sure why you're using that phrasing, if you're starting from the point of acknowledging trans identity. We don't ask why she should be "allowed" to have the same rights and privileges as other women; we ask if there's any reason to prohibit her from being treated like any other women.

Because these are not the only choices. "trans woman" is just a phrase, it doesn't mean he/she/they are a "woman". I could call them "intersex" or "drag queen" or something else. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.

I think "narrow-minded" people like me want to acknowledge that (a) trans women are not men, and are exposed to danger if forced to use men's restrooms at the same time as men, and even more so when housed with male prisoners, BUT, (b) trans women are not women either, and pose a small danger if using women's restrooms and a slightly larger if housed with female inmates, and absolutely should not participate in women's sports and most importantly (c) overly broad accommodations for genuine trans women leaves the barn door wide open for men (and teenage boys) to pretend to be trans and victimize women and girls.

BTW in California AFAIK a trans woman does not have to dress or look like a woman. Anyone can declare they are trans (actually no one asks). Any man can use any woman's restroom at any time. This has gotten to the point that a lot of commercial establishments in Northern California have eliminated any restrictions on restroom use. I can't tell you how awkward it is to share a .... let's say long bathroom break ... with a woman in the next stall.