"Women should not be limited, punished or abused because of their femaleness, but their being female is an observable fact. It is also the basis for their historic oppression. Replacing verifiable sex with gender identity helps nobody but men trying to take women's rights."
And:
"Of course trans-identified men have the right to exist. They have the same rights to employment, housing, the vote and personal safety as every other citizen. However, they aren't entitled to enter women's reserved spaces or sports, because they are male."
And:
"I don't believe there's such a thing as 'gender' in the way trans activists use it, ie, as an inner male or female essence that is independent of the sexed body, so it's a matter of total indifference to me what an individual trans person looks like or how well they pass. They're free to identify however they like, whatever they look like. The clash of rights starts when they demand my compelled speech and that I, the law and the whole of society agrees they're a member of the opposite sex."
How are you interpreting her perspective as not being fundamentally based on women's rights advocacy?
It's the exclusion that ultimately leads to the damaging aspects of this "policy".