Hmmm, the source of my confusion hey? You've missed the point entirely. The point is, that in our very recent history as a bunch of organised, civilised, enlightened organisms, women, black people and the disabled have all had their fundamental human rights limited. Which in essence, is a statement made by those in power (historically this has been white European men) and who are dictating such lopsided laws, that they aren't fully human. Why weren't women allowed to vote? Because, the thinking went, they weren't up to the responsibility. IE, they weren't as fully capable as the men, and so didn't deserve full human rights. Why were black people in America (but realistically everywhere) not allowed to use the same facilities as the empowered whites? Because they were considered subhuman. Catch my drift?
So a continuation of the same discrimination - by not allowing a certain group of us to access the same structural and legal aspects in society is to fundamentally say, you are not considered as human as me, and therefore you don't have the same rights I have.
Again, my point is, is that in taking your stance, you are on the same side of history as the people who were fighting against civil rights in America, because it was going to undermine the 'fabric of society'. Little do people like that realise, that the fabric of society is actually undermined by disallowing that fundamental equality to everyone.
Though I don't know why I'm bothering trying to explain these basic concepts of equality and human rights to you, because it is very apparent in your use of language ('sexually confused'?!?) that you have completely misplaced your ability to recognise someone who is having a different experience from yourself, an experience that you don't understand, as being just as validly human and deserving of respect.
You're ignorant, and arrogant, and a noose around humanity's potential to be a fully realised, fully accepting, fully achieving force for good.
