Seeing as this person on public record as being female for the vast majority of their life. I'd have to say that the verdict leans in the direction of them being as such.
I didn't quite follow that. Could you please rephrase, maybe include a little more context or detail on who is who and such.
This is the same age in which there are men who claim to be female, just so they can troll around theme park restrooms and stare at young girls, or possibly worse.
This is also the same age where lesbians don't even need to make a claim and can just troll around restrooms and changing rooms to stare at young girls or possible worse. Oh wait, that age has been around for decades or longer. Or predator women can claim to be men to go into restrooms and changing rooms to stare at young boys or worse. Or predator men into the men's restroom and changing room, but again, we've allowed them to do so for decades as well.
The problem come from where you conflate the sex/gender with what action might happen. The crime is watching the person in a moment of privacy. For a restroom, anyone, save maybe a parent with their young child insisting on "independence", who is looking through cracks in a restroom stall is a problem regardless of the sex/gender or either person. Although why we just can't make a simple building code for public restroom to have stalls with no gap openings is beyond me. Problem solved.
But beyond that, is the fact that, that we simply don't make something illegal just because a small minority might use that to break another law. We don't make it illegal to drink just because someone might drive under the influence. Nor do we cater to .fear or uncomfortableness. We don't tell black women they can't use the women's restroom because some white women are uncomfortable with them and afraid that the black women might get violent. Or reverse that, and say that the white women can't use the women's restrooms because black women are uncomfortable and afraid that the white women will go all Karen on them and pull a gun.
Reality is, it's not as much of a problem as many would make it out to be. Unisex restrooms are popping up all across the country, not to mention around the world, and with no significant uptick in restroom assaults or "peeping" incidents. They are becoming quite common at many conventions as well, where some or all the restrooms within the venue are changed to unisex for the duration of the convention. Again, no increase in assaults, visual or worse. In fact, in every one I have personally attended (and as a board game demonstrator, I've frequented many as a booth helper prior to the lockdown issues) has not had a single incident. Nor have I heard of any from the cons that did so, that I didn't attend. And I would suspect that should such an incident occur, some rabid anti-trans person would have snatched that story up and shouted it to the high heavens.
I have no issue with someone coming out as a gender, opposed to that which they were born with. But where this measure stops is when they begin to demand certain standards be changed to accommodate them.
And what special standards are you feeling are being asked for? For that matter, let's also go the other way and ask why you think these certain standards, whatever they may be, should not be changed. After all, there was a demand that the standard of not marrying outside your race not be changed, or the standard that women or blacks not being able to vote not be changed.
Even your stance here has it's own issues. Because saying that "we simply don't know", means that they are just getting a pass and that this passing ignores a possibly serious mental issue.
This is the same stance that is typically used against homosexuals and bisexuals, and it doesn't fly there either. That is before we examine the use of my argument. I specifically used it to show that a person claims something as a fact that they cannot back up. That aside, if those conditions are indeed more common than we have previously realized, and are responsible for even a portion of the number of transgender cases, then it automatically becomes not a mental illness, at least for that portion. That said, a simple claim of mental illness is simply not enough. There was a period when we thought left handedness was a mental illness or even a chosen sin.
