Explain This

Here's a decent NY Times article talking about how both the Left and Right are trying to "erase" or "not count" women.  

Here's how the author describes the difference:

The right’s position here is the better known, the movement having aggressively dedicated itself to stripping women of fundamental rights for decades. Thanks in part to two Supreme Court justices who have been credibly accused of abusive behavior toward women, Roe v. Wade, nearly 50 years a target, has been ruthlessly overturned. 

Vs. 

The noble intent behind omitting the word “women” is to make room for the relatively tiny number of transgender men and people identifying as nonbinary who retain aspects of female biological function and can conceive, give birth or breastfeed. But despite a spirit of inclusion, the result has been to shove women to the side.

Do ya notice the difference? The Right wants to strip women of fundamental rights. The Left has noble intent, but unintended consequences. Really? This is our discourse now? We just assume the Right has nefarious motives - not even going to mention the debate about when life begins? And then with respect to the Left - why should we assume noble intent? It's been pretty obvious for a long time there are great swaths of the far Left who want to tear down anything that functions. This is why a lot of "environmentalists" block efforts for clean, abundant energy because what they really want is to impose an anti-consumerist ethos on everyone. It's why some homeless activists basically enable drug addicts to commit suicide in slow motion on our city streets and why some elements of the progressive Left want to Abolish the Police. These are people who want our society to commit suicide. Why assume these motives are noble?