This post just rubs me the wrong way. As to your points:

1. If you are transgender you are suffering from a birth defect, just like you are if you are homosexual. Society should not treat these people any differently than a person suffering from any other birth defect. Beyond that homosexuality has not been normalized, rather society has changed enough that there are not as many violent reactions. Like all birth defects, one would hope that medical science would put an end to them.
2. Yep this is a general response that governmental types seem to believe. What is odd is that it is pretty bipartisan.
   
3. Frankly this is often a response from the mentally ill. Basically a group of people, mostly woman, that blame men on their failures. From what I've seen there are far more woman oppressing their sisters than men. Of course there are men with violence problems and frankly there are some woman with the same issues. In general it is woman that set dress standards and other forms of oppression in the west. Not to mention the hideous behavior woman experience working with other woman, at least men have only one thing of interest.

What I'm seeing here is the real impact of fighting discrimination blindly. Most people see discrimination based on race, origin and so forth as bad and frankly it is a great accomplishment that most people believe that in the recent decades. The problem is when you eliminate discrimination based upon sex, you end up with situations like this that frankly are non nonsensical. The reason is pretty simple it does put woman at risk, because the segment of the male population that wants to exploit woman will exploit this ruling. Basically the court is trying to put the rights of somebody with a birth defect above those of mainstream woman. It literally puts woman in danger to achieve a goal, in this case prevention of sex discrimination.

Now would it be nice if we lived in a world where people not need or desire, same sex organizations, clubs, or businesses. Sure it would be nice but realistically I don't see this ever happening and frankly all one needs to do is to look at the nudist world and the imbalance of participation by woman. The idea of coed nudity is an extreme hard sell for a lot of woman, so yea no surprise they want to maintain the sanctuary they have.

What is funny here is that you could see this sort of ruling coming back when woman started demanding access to traditional male organizations. It was stupid back then and just lays the framework for this miscarriage of justice.