I fucking despise this notion that protecting children is some sort of "right-wing talking point" and not a legitimate concern. How convenient that Sarkeesian has no kids herself.
I have daughters. I'm male, which means that if my daughters enter a changing room it's without me present. So hell yes I have every right to be concerned about predators and weirdos, and you can be assured that my kids have been made aware of any potential hazards they may face. This is called good parenting.
There was a common libfem narrative I recall from a few years back -- basically that women shouldn't feel like they should ever be obligated to "protect themselves from men" as men should instead be taught not to assault women. Sound familiar? Google "teach men not to rape" and you'll find a slew of articles from 2013-2015. There's a sliver of merit to this thinking, predatory male behavior should obviously be discouraged, but there will always be crazies and there's thus nothing wrong with women being prepared to defend themselves.
Anyhow, the narrative has shifted in a weird direction by the handmaidens, who are now advocating for the idea that men are entitled to behave in a predatory manner (provided that they're "trans")
and that women should be passive and submissive when encountering such men. It's all so gross and misogynistic.
Another thing -- as modern transgenderism is predicated on "identity" and not appearance (arguably moot anyway as so few "trans women" can "pass") how the hell are women in a locker room supposed to distinguish between a "trans woman" (who ostensibly has a "right" to be there) and a man (who would be unwelcome)? What's the difference between a "real trans woman" (a man pretending to be a woman) and a "fake trans woman" (a man pretending to be a man pretending to be a woman)?
Relativist ideologies like transgenderism uphold no truths, and thus perpetually teeter on the precipices of chaos, disorder, authoritarianism, and violence.