But the answer is pretty simple. Most folks drafting inclusionary policy start from the premise that trans women are women. So if you ask, "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?" the simple response is, "because she's a woman, and that's what women do."

First, let's agree that gendered bathrooms are unnecessary. Also, there is no reason why we couldn't established non-gendered athletic competitions while retaining gendered competitions as well. There are ways to do inclusion that don't require forcing square pegs unto round holes. Insisting on claiming that trans women are women and not what they are--trans women--evacuates the concept of women of any meaning. In this trans world, gender just becomes a preference within the gender/sex dichotomy. A preference that rejects that biological foundation of gender distinctions in a culture without rejecting the gender patriarchy itself. However contradictory, it also retains the biological determination of gender by arguing that the trans condition is rooted in some gender dysphoria in which the impulse to express oneself through gender is at odds with ones nature.

It would be better to dispense with gender altogether and just accept people pursuing self expression in any manner they please, except that to do so within the construct of gender is to reproduce the gender patriarchy with all its sexism, violence, misogyny, a discrimination against women. I'm sorry, but you can't have a penis and wish to enter the world of women as a woman without this presenting a problem for women. Until the cultural distinctions between men and women expressed through gender are transcended by the humanity of us all, and patriarchy is superseded by a post-gender equality, gender cannot be negated simply by moving from one pole to the other.