Harried
Just to add ... there is also the point made by some commentators that the male privilege absorbed by trans-women who have been socialised as men from an early age is a factor in the public vocality and activism of transwomen, as opposed to trans-men who have been socialised as women.
In short, you don't get vocal activism and demands for biological males to be called "cis-men" because trans-men have been socialised, as girls and women, to not behave in an assertive or aggressive manner in socio-political space.
Of course, when you start to pursue these lines of argument, you realise that certain claims from the transgender community begin to look very fragile indeed. I would go so far as to suggest many transwomen do not understand what "gender" actually means and what the implications of their arguments are.
For example: if womanhood is to be defined by gender that is, socialised notions of "feminine" performance that cover appearance, behaviour and thought then how can an individual who displays "non-feminine" socialised behaviour and thought be defined as a woman under these terms?
By their public and over-assertive vocality and activism, and their authoritarian application of universal labels to other identity groups, all of which are not traditionally perceived as a "feminine" traits and distinctly point to an expression of masculinity, certain transwomen activists are eroding their own claims to womanhood as defined under their own terms.
And to follow on from Hermione, one thing I have noticed in debate with transwomen is that the overwhelming majority of them have next to no understanding of gender and how it impacts upon the female sex, or the actual lived experience of biological females.
This is where, I believe, that list of cis-privileges comes from. You can sense the underlying assumptions about "cis" women and "cis" womenhood, all of which are little more than Disneyfied stereotypes.