Like a doctor treating a patient with lets say Dengue fever is ill advised to call that efver an "altenative state of health", we should see gender equalizers and ultramfeminists (denying male and female gender differences) as nutsy where they indeed believe that 1 plus 1 is "11", and not appease them by saving them from confronting them with the truth, "2". We certainyl should nit rewrkite the laws of ,matematics and teach new math where 1+1=11 in our schools. And thos epeople who simplöy claim - claim! - that they feel this or that, we should have undergo a throrough medical exam and genetic analysis. XX or XY - that must be the fundament of our assessment of male and female.
A very small proportion of men claiming to be women in the wrong body and women claiming to be males in ther qwrogn body, seem to be real, accompanied by massive hormonal deviations and maybe even genetic deviations. I once read - and was told by a local expert doctor on this matter whose wive is the house doctor of my mum - that the ratio may be i the range of 1:1000. Meahjs of 1000 people storllign by and dr4ssing fancy and claiming to be trappedf int he wrong budy, porbaly only indeed tells the truth. The tohers imo are peopel with sweriosu mentaal problems. adn as such we should see an dtreat them. We should not change all our biological and medical science just becasue somebody makes a subjective staterment. Traits and qulaities of life forms have their basis in the genes. You just cannot get around the geneticla code. You do not become a frog suddenly just because you claim you feel like one. A doctor kissing you will not make you a frog either.
Same with gender deniars amongst ultrafeminsits, the name to look out for is Jeanne Butler. There are men and there are women. These people deny that, and they have become increaisngly aggressive and totalitarian in their attempot to hammer their deniyng into society's heads. But is BS what they say. The difference are there, the behavioural science results are there, the body and hormonal and metabioloustcoi and mental and cognitive and emotional difefrenbces are there, we do not pick our gender at choice, we are given a gander by genes. Ultrafeminsts deny that and claim we cna chose freely. And that is what I call mental derrangement. To me these people are a case for the psychiatrist: pathologic reality denial. A loonie jumping off the roof becasue he thinks he is nio human but a bird.
We are a heterosexual species, like almost all mammals. Some things simply are not just a question of taste,m but are laid ndown in the hard code.
And some people imo mistake sexual appetites and tastes with gender. I once saw a film about a poor ill man in Japan, who lived "in a relation" with a rubber sex doll. He introduced the rubberdoll as his olartner to his family andf friends, and seated it on a chair when he invited friends for dinner, and so forth. Needless to say, he got socially increasingly isolated. He even wanted a chnage in legislation to formalise his "relaiton status" inbto soemthign recongised by law. I say this is a very desperate suffering being with a psychiatricx relevant tick and a deeply dysfunctional social life. A state of mentla suffering an dillness. Nothing to be accepted as an alternate form of normality. It is not normal, it is deviant.
I recent two decades the ambitiuons have reahced wide to dseny that men and wiomen tic k differently in their heads. I always doubted that this claim is true, as a (ex-) psychologist I doubted it, I mean. The study I quoted, destroys claims that both genderS brains are identical and thus think and tick and like and silike the same. I do not say the one is moire intelligent and the other is weaker thna th eother, that is stupid thing to say, no. But Men and women are different, girls and boys altready are, even the fetus in the mother'S woms behaves differenbtly, according to gender: for examnple, an often givne exmaple, a female fetus practice seven times as much communication/speaking movements with mouth and chin than a male fetus. Now those brain scans find that femalee brains have grey matter organised to higher complexity in those regions of th ebrian repsonsible for conflict solving and social interaction. Could it be that nature designs bioth ewgnders difefrently accoridng to the differenbt roles they play in their lives and nature'S grand plan? The man fighting off enemies and bringing fresh meat in and prtecting his female and children, the wife making sure to beocme orgnant only where the baby wozuld be risen in safety and protection, not neeidng to fear toi tget eatbne up by either a new father ir by social iocnflicts in the herd?
You get the generla idea. Both genders were cnstntly streamlined by the evolutionary process accoridng to different roles they have toi play in nature. They are not designed equal by evolution, becasue they do nto play the same roles. They are different for sure -
but complementary. 
Thats why I sdaid in other contexts that I am all for equality before the law - but totally against making everoyne and men and women equal. The first is justice. The latter is malicious, power-hungry ideology.
Maybe some noticed the row about the Harry Potter author, Mrs. Rowling. She is a feminist of old school, to give it this label for the purpose of communication. I have no problem with that or with anything she said. Yet the hunt on her was opened, because her most rational and natural statements, although given in ironic wording, simply make sense and are true. What she is about, is not about making genders equal and denying their obvious differences, but everybody being equal before the law. And that is okay. And must be the end of femism'S ambitions. Until there I support it. Beyond that I fight against it.
Give both the same laws to follow and beigngprotected by, but let girls be girls, and boys be boys in all their beautiful, complementary differences. That simple it is.