I don’t understand how you don’t see the issue here. You can’t protect sex based rights without a clear understanding of what the word ‘sex’ means, and it’s currently contested. Some see it as an identity term that is purely constructed, and all around the world they are implementing laws on that basis — which has material negative impacts for many groups. This intro is good.

If anyone can be any sex (because the word means nothing) then it renders women’s rights meaningless (e.g. right to a female only space, service or provision). Same goes for lesbian rights e.g. our right to have a lesbian only space, service or provisions.