The concept that by granting civil rights to Group A, Group B can claim that - as a direct consequence of that granting of civil rights to Group A - some or all of them in Group B are being disadvantaged (eg by being placed at increased risk to their personal safety).
First, I think there's a need to consider whether the claim being made is a plausible claim in the first place. Secondly, I think it's important to be able to elucidate specifically what rights are under consideration - something you seem to persistently sidestep.
1) In this case, I think the claim of increased harm and reduced human rights is plausible. Of course I'm biased - I and those like me are on the receiving end of that harm and rights reduction. Of course you're biased - this isn't an impact that affects you or those like you in any way at all.
And in this case, we do actually have evidence of harm having occurred. We have multiple documented cases of female humans in prison and in shelters being directly harmed as a result of self-declared transgender people being allowed into those safe spaces as an entitlement. So it's not merely a claim of "oh, this might happen". It's a fact that has already occurred. Female inmates have already been raped by the penises of self-declared transwomen, and those are rapes that are only able to occur because of the extension of privileges to those transwomen - privileges, by the way, that are NOT available to any other person. Cisgender people do NOT get a choice about where they are placed in prison. This is not a right that transgender people are being granted in equality to cisgender people, this is a special privilege above and beyond what cisgender people are allowed.
2) Which of course, brings me around to my second comment with respect to your bolded comment: What are the rights being asked for, and are they actually rights as opposed to privileges?
You, along with several of the activists in this thread repeatedly refer to the need for transgender people to be granted equal rights, but you also neglect to discuss what those rights are. As far as I can tell, most of what you're focused on aren't rights,
they are privileges.
Rights, from my perspective, include equal access to housing and employment, and fair treatment under the law. Additionally, I would include the human right to not be subjected to violence or harassment as a result of their status as a transgender person. Those are rights that I - and every single other person in this thread - support 100%, and will very happily engage in activist efforts to obtain on behalf of transgender people.
Unfortunately, that is not where the bulk of the effort appears to be. The majority of the argument and the effort is one that I feel is misplaced: it focuses on substituting 'gender identity' for 'sex' across the board, in a way that
results in transgender people having privileges that are not available to cisgender people. Cisgender males don't have the right to be in the presences of naked females against the will of those females, and vice versa. Cisgender people aren't entitled to a choice of which prison ward they use. Cisgender males don't have the right to compete against females in sport. Cisgender males don't have the right to access rape and domestic violence shelters designated for female victims.
Those rights do not exist.
Yet those are the 'rights' that transgender people are asking for. They're not asking for equal treatment. Equal treatment with respect to those asks are something they already have. They already live by the same strictures that every other cisgender person in our society adheres to.
What transgender people and their allies are asking for is special privileges that cisgender people do not have. They are asking to override existing sex-based segregations and services, and to be allowed choices and agency that cisgender people do not have. To make matters worse, those special privileges that are being demanded create situations that increase existing disadvantages for a class of people - females. So not only are transgender people and their allies demanding special privileges, they are demanding special privileges that directly disadvantage female humans.
In the transgender rights situation, it's females claiming that if transwomen are now allowed to use female changing spaces, females will be placed - as a direct consequence of transwomen having been granted that right - in a position of greater risk to their personal safety/privacy/etc.
In the black civil rights situation, it's white people claiming that if black males are now allowed to sit tight up against white females on narrow 2-person bench seats, white females will be placed - as a direct consequence of black people having been granted that right - in a position of greater risk to their personal safety/privacy/etc.
There is a fair bit of bait and switch here. I've bolded and colored the elements that I'd like you to give due consideration to.
You repeatedly use black civil rights as an analogy or comparator for transgender privileges. But your analogies are not clean: they implcitly include the exact situation that is under discussion as a source of harm and disadvantage. Your argument is presented as if the analogous dynamic is the relationship between black and white... but it still inherently relies on the dynamic between male and female.
Please take a moment and consider some alternatives.
In regard to public, non private interactions, such as busses and lunch counters: Would your argument work as well if you were relying on the claim by
white males to be placed in greater danger from
black males?
In regard to more private interactions, such as restrooms and changing rooms: Would your argument hold any water at all if it were relying on a claim by
white females that they would be placed in greater danger from
black females?
I rather think not. Particularly because those claims were never made, those were not arguments used in opposition to black civil rights.
And my near complete inability to visualize three dimensional objects with clarity and accuracy is part of why my art teacher in college suggested I might be better suited for a STEM field than a liberal arts one...