Or that it's just not a big fucking deal, because we have some Victorian notions about 'private areas".
They are not "Victorian," they have been part of our culture for decades since before the Victorian era, all the way up to . . . well now. There are a vocal minority supporting biological males in the female private areas, but they are by no means represenative of contemporary culture. In fact, I rarely see a biological female who is not some kind of TV personality or celebrity say they want biological males to enter their bathrooms. It is nearly always a transwoman advocating for that.
When Christian missionaries came across tribal people who were naked most of the time, they wanted them to wear clothes. They tried persuasion, but went quickly to force if the people did not change fast enough.
The LGBT-Q activists and their allies are operating the same way.
I would say that they should have a history of identifying as female, they just can't decide that day, for instance. But here's the reality... trans-ladies have been peeing in those areas ever since the Victorians established them.
Yes, people have always played dress up. When caught, they had consequences.
Why in the world can they not decide that day? If they are about to enter the girls room and someone questions it, they can go in if they decided last Tuesday, but not if they decided this morning?
More to the point, suppose I want to use the ladies room because I believe they are generally cleaner, and I think urinals are always nasty. Shouldn't I be able to, just like the Japanese do it? The ladies in that bathroom assumed that risk, just as you said.
I don't want to have sex with them because most of them are hideously ugly.
That is the third reason you have given. First, it was that they were dishonest in not telling you they had a penis (which most trans allies would excoriate you for saying), then it was that they do not have a sex hole, and now it is that they are hideously ugly.
Not saying that you're wrong, all three are valid reasons. They all stem from the fact that "transwomen" are not women.
Actually, I find it fucking insulting when someone says 'I'll pray for you".
They you seek reasons to feel insulted.
Let's take your trans person who you Bible Thumpers are going to "Pray for". Why? They are clearly happy with their lives.
Wait, what? Are they happy with their lives, or do they have a shockingly high suicide rate?
They'd be happier if they didn't have to deal with bigots like you and the Mormon Stalker, but they are certain who they are and want to live that way.
Are they certain? At what age are they certain? Please respond either with data, or with "I dunno."
"I'm going to pray to my almighty Sky Pixie so that you change to something I'M comfortable with." What absolute narcissism.
I don't see saying that "I'll pray for you to change," meaning change your choices is any more narcissistic than saying, "Your thinking is wrong on this issue."