I guess the situation is that if she genuinely believes this than she is unlikely to stop doing so unless it is made illegal. Same with transgender people. They’re not going to stop being trans. So what to do?
I think in the case of the woman who says she believes she is black the compromise actual black people could make is to ignore her as I think a lot of her belief is linked to attention seeking and the more of it she gets the stronger her belief. I’m willing to be corrected but I’m not sure there is much damage she can cause other than making herself look very silly.
The transgender issue is more multi faceted. There is also, I believe; a significant element of attention seeking. They feed off the anger and opposition they generate and it only makes them more strident in their demands. So pressing the ignore button so to speak is a definite compromise option. The use of the she pronoun is also a compromise option. However in the cases where trans demands present a genuine threat to female safety then I’m not suggesting that they be allowed access to those spaces and services. I never have suggested that. My compromise suggestion as I have said before is trans only spaces - which recognise that being trans is a real thing and not forcing them to live as men. But at the same time it doesn’t risk putting women in any psychological or physical danger.
Most, if not all, conflicts eventually end with a level of compromise. The compromise does not have to be equal on both sides. But after all the shouting and fighting is done you invariably end up with a cessation of hostilities where each side give some ground.
the problem with this is that the trans rights movement has made progress by constantly, unwaveringly steamrollering ahead, with an implied (but reluctant) compromise position requiring being a few steps behind, but constantly trying to catch up to assume that the compromise position isn’t closer to women’s boundaries than the trans activism position.
the entire movement is characterised by demanding more ”compromise”
first it was
”don’t stare at the man in a dress, he‘w doing ir because he feels comfortable that way”
then it was
“the man in a dress believes he’s in the wrong body - calling him “her” will help him feel better, it doesn’t cost anything, and it doesn’t mean he’s a woman”
then it was
“She’s a trans woman, and anyone who goes through the process of hormones and surgery is genuine, so she should be included as a woman, even though we know she’s not female”
then it was
“yes, a woman is an adult human female, and since trans women *are* women, trans women are female“
then it was
“she’s a trans woman, and so should be included as a woman, and I don’t think cis people should be able to impose expectations of hormones and surgery so that trans women fit a cis woman’s idea of what a woman is”
there is no compromise position possible, because underpinning the movement is male entitlement, with some of the most vocal activists being motivated in part by an escalating need to transgress (so the more accepted they are, the more outlandish the demand needs to be)