No, that's not what happened.
A man did self-ID as a woman to gain access to women's spaces where this particular person insisted on being treated as a woman, being touched by women, although biologically still a male. The response from Canada was complete silence. Not until it became clear that Yaniv had - allegedly - engaged in predatory behavior around children did the outrage bubble over as people still have zero tolerance toward a grown man who preys on children. But women? Not so much.
The #MeToo movement dissolved into absurdity caused by excess. Not every man is a predator and not every sexual encounter is potential rape. Some are, but not every single one. Women and men should be capable of creating healthy boundaries on their own, but this requires we know who is a man and who is a woman.
Jonathan Jessica Yaniv claims to be a woman, although his biological sex is that of a man. And since he self-IDs as a woman he demands to be treated as a woman in every way to the extent of having his private (male) parts handled by women. The Canadian Human Rights court is now looking into the case and we'll find out soon what they have to say about a religious woman's right (and any woman's right, for that matter) to refuse to handle a man's private parts.
Yes, that's where we are now.
Two hundred years ago people sold something called "snake oil" that promised to cure every ailment. Of course it did nothing of the kind and medical professionals are now required to obtain extended training and lisencing to be allowed to practice medicine. False claims of one's ability to practice medicine can lead to a lot of trouble, both legal and professional. This is true although not everyone agrees what medicine should look like. Some believe western style medicine is completely out of touch with our human bodies, others say eastern medicine cures nothing, and then there is every kind of medicine in the between with competing claims. Yet, no one is allowed to practice medicine, no matter which kind they choose, without training and licensing.
Not everyone agrees a transwoman is a woman. Even fewer agrees a man who wears makeup and women's clothes is a woman while having a biological man's body. The question is, of course, what is a woman? When it comes to medicine the answer is clear: it's intention is to heal the human body when ill. But when it comes to women we are back in the patriarchal wishywashy definitions that give no real answers.
"A woman has the ability to have children."
"A woman is a female human being."
"A woman exists to serve men".
Since self-ID is about the mind rather than the body, we have added to the definition, "Anyone who feels like a woman." The "feels" is based on stereotypycial feminine behavior, although culturally these vary. In other words, the body is completely irrelevant when it comes to who is a woman and who is a man.
But is it?
Gender identity is based on cultural stereotypes, biological sex is based on biology. We are told cultural stereotypes are more important than biology; biology can be discarded. But is that so? Can we just decide which gender we want to be, or not be? Can we just tell our bodies to correspond with the mind without any further ado? Well, the body doesn't do that.
Although some of us are sapiosexual and find the intellect, rather than the body, supremely sexy, most humans respond to bodily features, and it's the source of endless worrying and fussing. People put themselves through rigorous diets and exercising programs. They add implants to their bodies, lenghten this and that, plump up parts that aren't plump enough. All is done to attract a sexual partner, because as far as sex is concerned, the body reigns supreme. The mere idea that a person would become sexually arosed of the thought that the person they are looking at has another gender identity than seen in their bodies is ludicrous. It's tantamount of telling Mother Nature sexual selection doesn't exist. That it can be made void by ideology.
Humans really like to play these kinds of mind games.
And they really think they are winning.
Sexual selection has always been female driven, although the budding scientific discipline of biology tried vailantly to deny it for a hundred years. Females choose their mates, while males fight for available females; the source of male competition, which is considered sacrosanct in patriarchy, while it does everything to prevent it by denying women the opportunity to choose their mates. Feminism returned the woman's place in the evolutionary scheme by giving women opportunties beyond procreation. Modern women are far fussier about their partners than their grandparents were, but at the same time they are also less discerning. We are now meant to find our soulmates, not someone who will be there when the babies arrive. As a result, we have been rather illequipped to face life's challenges. The younger generation hasn't been obliovious of this (they were born into it), hence their desire to eliminate all gender distinctions. Wouldn't it be better if there was no sexual selection, if men didn't have to work so hard to attract a mate, if women didn't have to work so hard on being seductive? If we could all just choose what gender we want to be at any given time, we could eliminate all the fuss and we could all be happy. That way a man can decide he is a woman and bypass the competition for a mate. He can just declare himself a lesbian and the competition is cut down by 90%. It's pretty good odds.
Except that a lesbian woman doesn't want a man.
Yanis claims to be a proud lesbian while his body is that of a biological male. A couple of decades ago Yanis would have been labeled (I use the word "label" since people are so very much into labeling nowadays) a transvestite: a heterosexual man who enjoys wearing women's clothes and make up while still being attracted to women. S/he isn't a person with a woman's body, hence no lesbian would be attracted to her/him. It's wishful thinking to assume sexual desire will follow our ideological beliefs. We are attracted to bodies. The way they look, move, act, smell. We want to touch the bodies of humans we are attracted to, to hell with the mind! That's why we say, "I lost my mind" "I couldn't help it" "I just wasn't thinking." Because the moment our bodies are filled with the desire for another body, the mind just seems to shut down.
Yet, before any rape-apologists get their hopes up, there is still a part of our brains that is capable of saying no. Just as we know how to say no when we feel like throwing ourselves off the cliff, or spending a month in front of the TV. We know how to say no because we know what the consequences are. But when there are no horrible consequences awaiting, the body wants what it wants. We can't tell ourselves "Oh, she has still the body of a man, I must find a way to be attracted to it."
Those who love their own sex, love the person because of the body, not because some secret identity the mind contains. They love the fact that the person's body is similar to theirs, that's what the word "homo" (similar) means. Those who love people of their own sex don't want to be told they have to love someone of the opposite sex, just because the person identifies as the opposite sex.
Beyond same sex love and women's right to privacy the question boils down to whose rights should prevail: the right os people who have decided their bodies don't correspond to their mental gender identity or those who just wish to live according to their conscience? This is where biblical reading becomes supremely helpful. The Hebrew Bible contains numerous laws and Rabbis have argued endlessly which laws have pre-eminence over others. It's one of the most fantastical exercises of intelligence and has left the world a better place, much like the Greek philosophers and their endless quest for wisdom. But I still think Jesus wins this one. According to Jesus no law can break the two laws that are the foundation of all others: Love God with all your being and your neighbor as yourself. In other words, if you want to self ID as male or female, you cannot use your self ID as a cause or reason to oppress others. You must always consider the inerests of others before your own. If all would follow this law, all argument would end. But because we already know it's not the case, I believe a return to a time when a person who wanted to change their biological sex had to undergo a strict regiment, much like medical doctors, to ensure no man or woman would abuse such change is in order. People just aren't that good or nice to have it any other way.