And -please help me understand the “trying to erase what a woman is” argument. I know it is about trans rights, but if a biological women is transitioning to a man, and wants the legal right to be a man, is that not “they don’t know what a man is” too?
Cormoran, it’s simpler than that.
Women harm only themselves when they want to be men. They have mastectomies and take hormones with irreversible harmful effects. Also, they’re not a threat or a danger to men if they go into eg men’s changing rooms, and they don’t win medals in male sports.
Men rarely have major surgery when they transition. Most transwomen keep their fully functioning penis. Any man can gain access to most women’s single-sex spaces, even though self-ID has not been officially legalised, because it is unofficially so widely accepted by large organisations.
Having been so successful in gaining entry to women’s spaces, the trans lobby is now pushing for gender-neutral language, eg “pregnant people” to start erasing the concept of separate sexes.
This is the reason for strange new expressions like “cervix-haver”. It’s to give the impression that anyone might have any body parts — eg cervix, vulva, penis - and that doesn’t necessarily make them a man or a woman. That’s biologically untrue, of course. But it all helps to erase any barrier to male-bodied people claiming that they are women. It also helps break down women’s boundaries.