Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Please help me understand the transgender issue

452 replies

Flippetydip · 11/06/2020 10:16

I fully admit that I don't understand this issue fully at all. I consider myself fairly liberal but I do not feel that this is fair. It seems to be the Emperor's new clothes. The fact that the comments towards JKR on Twitter are so full of vitriol does not persuade me towards the thinking of those shouting them.

So my questions:

Emma Watson saying on Twitter
"Transwomen are who they say they are"
If I say I am a size 8, intellectually brilliant woman, does that make me so? (Currently size 12, edging towards a 14 and intellectually fairly mediocre).

What is the difference between appropriation of sex and appropriation of race?
If I say I am black and I'm not, why is that so horrific, and yet if I am a man and say I'm a woman, that is OK?

Why is JKR wrong to say that women menstruate? Surely that is just biological fact.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
12
preferteatocoffee · 12/06/2020 10:43

[quote zscaler]@ShootsFruitAndLeaves I think you have misunderstood.

The point being made is that white people who claim to be black, or any other race, are less likely to experience discrimination as a result of those claims than transgender people do. Caitlin Jenner is a poor example because she is obviously immensely privileged - far more so than the average trans woman or man. But, in general, white people who identify into or appropriate black culture benefit from it; very few transgender people benefit in terms or money or statue from transitioning. The only benefit to them is the ability to live authentically.

Look at Rachel Dolezal - she benefitted enormously from pretending to be black. It got her a job, it gave her income and community and speaking engagements and awards and recognition. Had she experienced the actual oppression and discrimination faced by most POC, however, she could simply have taken off her costume and regained the privilege of being white.

Similarly, we see people rewarded all the time for appropriating black and latinx culture. Look the riches and adulation gained by the Kardashians for their deep tans and their box braids. Look at Iggy Azalea and Miley Cyrus, who use aspects of black culture as a tool to enhance and promote their own appearances and artistic output when it suits them. They don’t experience discrimination like a black person does when they use aspects of black culture for their own benefit. The simply gain the benefits, while retaining their white privilege.[/quote]
Many do not benefit from transitioning , but you'll have to admit some do. Frequently transwomen. Their achievements should be recognized but is it fair if it's at the expense of biological women?

Take Rachel McKinnon who won a cycling championship competing against biological women.
www.nytimes.com/2019/12/05/opinion/i-won-a-world-championship-some-people-arent-happy.html

Or the biologically female athletes who were afraid they would lose out on scholarships/funding after they were beaten by transgender athletes.

usatodayhss.com/2019/conn-transgender-track-title-ix

Or the gender fluid Philip/Phillipa Bunce on the top 100 women in business list who self admittedly used male privilege to climb career ladder.
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/anger-over-women-s-business-honour-for-cross-dressing-banker-h0gv3l7nw

Or The Wachowskis sisters receiving credit as the first women directors to do X ( can't remember the list) in relation to the Matrix trilogy

I by no means wish to detract from their achievements but why should their achievements mean that a biological women doesn't make the cut.

Seems like a similar argument to Rachel Dozeal to me. Why is it different for you? Could these individuals detransition if they wished in the future?

whatashower · 12/06/2020 10:48

flippetydip thank you again for this thread.

I feel I am learning, but with the excessive use of acronyms and acute sensitivity around the gossamer-thin nuances of language I can see why many people not immersed in trans rights are utterly bewildered and fear to offend.

I am going to say it. In my dull vanilla world, someone threatening to murder or rape me with their cock would be seen for exactly what they are. My fear is not altered by what they think, what they feel, what they need or what they identify as . Unless the genuine trans community disavow these MEN, I just cannot see how they will find support, reconciliation and acceptance. Surely no rational person could fail to see the concern of including a penis - and specifically a penis attached to an aggressive, angry person like this, in traditionally female schools, changing rooms, prisons, hospitals. I guess that makes me "GC"?

I will keep reading. I will keep trying to understand. But right now all I see is sophistry of the highest order imaginable, and I find this so very sad.

AMemeByAnyOtherName · 12/06/2020 10:53

@Winesalot thank you, I appreciate you taking the time to put that into perspective for me.

It seems to me that the majority of the problems surrounding this issue are rooted in the fact that it's become virtually impossible to talk about, without causing offence. I really can't see how this can ever be resolved if nobody is allowed to talk about what they need to in order to adapt to the changes.

At the moment, all of this seems like an abstract concept full of 'what ifs', but I do wonder what I would do tomorrow, say, if McDonalds changed all of their bathrooms to unisex only. A lot of this feels like things that I've come to feel comfortable about are slipping away, and I'm not allowed to say anything or ask questions about why.

endofthelinefinally · 12/06/2020 11:02

@Wolfgirrl. No need to apologise. I didn't mean to sound as if I as having a go at you.
It's just that the term is used so often in these discussions that it has become something of a bugbear to me.

ShootsFruitAndLeaves · 12/06/2020 11:05

"Intersex" is the old fashioned, outdated, inaccurate term for disorder of sexual development. DSD.

Not necessarily.

interactadvocates.org/interact-statement-on-intersex-terminology/

All people who have DSD are either male or female.

It's not quite as simple as that. For some people it might not be clear whether they are male or female. Someone with XY chromosomes and complete androgen insensitivity will have breasts and a vagina, and internal, infertile testes. They are however most definitely female.

Someone with XY chromosomes and MILD androgen insensitivity will be male. There is no doubt about that either.

However in a very small cases the determination about whether someone is male or female is a very fine one.

In some cases doctors might get it wrong.

Some gender critical people are very keen to make sex an absolute, or insist that it is a matter of having a Y chromosome. This isn't true.

We do know that some trans people falsely claim to intersex and that this has been going on since there were trans people. Roberta Cowell, an early transsexual, claimed to have XX chromosomes, and that trans people who had XY chromosomes were 'freaks'. However, this was impossible, Cowell having fathered children. This was a lie.

The existence of intersex people and their verifiable biological conditions and the fact that in some cases they were very truly and based on repeatable scientific tests 'incorrectly assigned female/male at birth' is what allows transgender people to claim that they were 'assigned male/female at birth'.

In fact this is a lie and an appropriation of intersex conditions. Transgender people were not assigned anything. They are biologically male (if transwomen) and were at birth.

That doesn't however stop a lying criminal who beat up a 102 year old woman that he was abused as an intersex child.

www.mirror.co.uk/news/real-life-stories/sex-swap-burglar-jasmine-goode-fathered-2274842

Contrast that with the lies printed by trans propaganda rag Prick News

www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/01/24/these-powerful-stories-from-two-trans-ex-offenders-remind-us-why-we-need-to-support-trans-rights-today/

I’m an ex-offender. I served seven years and four months in custody. I’m an intersex girl, so for anyone who doesn’t know about it, I was born with ambiguous genitalia. From the age of seven, my father – I’m from a mixed race background – insisted I was to be raised as a boy. So he injected me with testosterone and changed my name, which led me into all sorts of problems, because I couldn’t be the person I wanted to be. I tried to act like a boy, and ended up in prison.

However, because I was very much boyish-looking, going into prison was a bit of a nightmare. The testosterone started to drain out of my system, which led to, as you see today, this nice figure. The thing is, as soon as the prison service knew about it, they didn’t know what to do with me in any shape or form.

Males who want to be women don't want to admit they simply are males. So they make up these completely false lies about being intersex. They are violent criminals. We shouldn't believe them.

But because there is an incessant torrent of propaganda that all trans people are blameless angels being oppress by 'the man', we somehow ignore the fact that this man fathered eight children by five woman and had his raging criminal narcissism fed by the BBC (which filmed him talking about his sexploits with dozens of women www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01nwb55)

And then lying propaganda outfits like Prick News print blatant lies that he was intersex. And then he was invited to the House of Lords to advise them on how to treat 'trans prisoners'.

How about stop rewarding narcissism.

justanotherneighinparadise · 12/06/2020 11:06

[quote AMemeByAnyOtherName]@Winesalot thank you, I appreciate you taking the time to put that into perspective for me.

It seems to me that the majority of the problems surrounding this issue are rooted in the fact that it's become virtually impossible to talk about, without causing offence. I really can't see how this can ever be resolved if nobody is allowed to talk about what they need to in order to adapt to the changes.

At the moment, all of this seems like an abstract concept full of 'what ifs', but I do wonder what I would do tomorrow, say, if McDonalds changed all of their bathrooms to unisex only. A lot of this feels like things that I've come to feel comfortable about are slipping away, and I'm not allowed to say anything or ask questions about why. [/quote]
Your last paragraph is actually really interesting. What it will take is for something that obviously puts children in danger for parents to start to say STOP. So all toilets in McDonald’s becoming unisex is a bloody good example. There is no way you’d let your child use those toilets alone is there? Anyone think of any other obvious examples? Soft play? Theme parks? Disney?

AMemeByAnyOtherName · 12/06/2020 11:17

@justanotherneighinparadise yes, that's definitely one of my questions/concerns.

Someone mentioned earlier 'what does it look like to live as a woman without conforming to gender stereotypes'.

In my opinion, you can't, and you shouldn't have to. So then, you could argue that a transwoman shouldn't need to have feminine features at all in order to 'live as a woman'. They don't need to wear a dress, they don't need long hair, they can have a beard, none of that should be denied them.

But for me that then increases the uncertainty. If the bathrooms weren't unisex, but the law became that anybody who identifies as a woman can use the women's toilets, quite frankly, I would never feel safe allowing my daughter to use them by herself again, I wouldn't even feel safe using them myself because of my own history of abuse. I don't think for one second that a genuine trans person has any intention to cause harm. But I feel strongly that every single loophole will be exploited by someone who intends to cause harm and I'm worried about opening that Pandora's box.

Winesalot · 12/06/2020 11:24

AMeme

Maybe you will find this an interesting read if you have not read it yet.

fairplayforwomen.com/pronouns/

The problems are exactly that it is not talked about. The link that Guineapigbridge posted is great.

And I think your example of McDonald's is a good one.

MMN123 · 12/06/2020 11:34

@AMemeByAnyOtherName
Totally agree. We need womens only spaces and we need gender neutral spaces. We do not need men only spaces. The gender neutral spaces will accommodate men, transmen, transwomen and women who feel comfortable using them (which is a vast number - so the transwomen will feel safe and shielded by them among the menfolk).

The alternative is no womens spaces. So transwomen will never have access to women only spaces because they will cease to exist. So they may as well accept womens spaces and gender neutral spaces as a better alternative - and not go to the womens spaces. If they refuse to accept that they are just being spiteful - it doesn't harm transwomen if women have women only spaces, as long as gender neutral only spaces exist. Most transwomen are not spiteful so most transwomen would accept this solution. Those who are spiteful are the vocal minority who should be ignored. Men need to budge up and let women (who want to) and transpeople into their spaces and leave women (who don't want to share spaces) alone.

AMemeByAnyOtherName · 12/06/2020 11:35

Wines thank you. The morning up until perhaps 1pm is normally very busy running around after kids 😅 but I definitely intend to read these things later this afternoon. I'm not being disingenuous when I say that I want to understand this issue in it's entirety.

Dancethereupontheshore · 12/06/2020 11:42
  • It's very simples.

Men are still controlling women.

Because said men are now women, and women have been renamed cis women, and told to shut up.

Or we're transphobic.

Normally on the left of everything, but on this, I just can't do it.*

100% agree @gluteustothemaximus

AMemeByAnyOtherName · 12/06/2020 11:58

@MMN123 I really can't see how that isn't a perfect solution. My only worry is that it potentially usurps equal rights by suggesting that women are entitled to single sex spaces but men are not. It makes so much sense that the majority of certain types of abuse are committed by men towards women, and even my partner has told me during conversations that he wouldn't feel 'afraid' to share a changing room or a bathroom with a woman. But he still feels as though he is entitled to a single sex changing area and I can't say I disagree with him, his comfort matters too.

Is the reason that there aren't three spaces a financial one? I really can't understand why it doesn't make more sense to have a male bathroom, female bathroom, and unisex bathroom, unless it's for economical reasons? Is anybody able to inform me better about this?

TalkingtoLangClegintheDark · 12/06/2020 12:00

Trans women seeking to pass as cis should therefore be understood as marginalized people (due to their trans status) trying to escape oppression by passing as members of a less marginalized group (cis people of either gender) than as privileged ones appropriating a marginalized group’s identity.

I think this is a quote from one of the links zscaler posted. I thought it was worth highlighting the wee sleight of hand to be found here.

Do you see how the writer here has just entirely erased the history and reality of sex based discrimination, marginalisation, oppression?

They have posited females as less marginalised than males if those males wish to be seen as women. The implication that it works both ways - “cis people of either gender” - that there is no material difference between a male person identifying into womanhood and a female person identifying into manhood in terms of power, privilege and marginalisation experienced by either the trans person or the group being identified into.

I don’t think lies come much bigger than that. It’s a real whopper.

And it’s what the whole of transactivism is based on. A huge, grotesque, insulting, inhumane lie. A lie rooted in a contempt for women and women’s lived experience so utterly deep and chilling that it’s no wonder libfems fall over themselves in an attempt to deny to themselves that this is what is actually happening.

It’s not pleasant to recognise just how deep misogyny still goes in the world we live in. It’s painful and uncomfortable to be confronted with the truth and reality of how very, very second class our status still is as women, even here in the western world, never mind those parts of the world where women’s inferiority and sub-human status is actually still codified into law as well as manifesting in the most inhumane cultural practices.

It hurts. It eats away at your soul, it makes the world an ugly, hostile place, it diminishes your sense of agency. It can be truly overwhelming. So I get why so many women make the choice to look the other way and pretend none of this is real, pretend the battle has been won and sexism and misogyny only exist as a superficial legacy of a distant past, if at all.

You only have to look at how very many women reject out of hand the term “feminist” for themselves, seeing it as a dirty word, an embarrassment, an extreme position that only those hard-bitten, man-hating harridans would claim rather than a logical, default position for any woman who doesn’t consider herself less human than men.

I get why people like zscaler lie to themselves. Denial is a very valid psychological defence against trauma - it’s probably the most basic coping mechanism there is. And just like there’s a trauma inherent in growing up and living as part of a race or ethnic group that has been profoundly dehumanised over generations, there is a trauma inherent in growing up female, living your life in a female body, in a world where misogyny is so entrenched, so far-reaching, so all pervasive that it’s simply part of our atmosphere, the very air that we breathe. A trauma that will probably be unconscious, most often; but a trauma nonetheless.

The sheer cumulative weight of man’s inhumanity to woman across the millennia is almost too much to comprehend. Maybe it actually is too much to comprehend, just as the sheer scale of the inhumanity of transatlantic slavery or the Holocaust defies human comprehension.

But whether we apprehend it or not, it lives on, and it lives in us. And some women - many women - most women - resort to denial as a way of coping with it. The fact we have made some advances over the last century and are now, on paper at least, equal citizens here in the UK, and that many women have pretty decent lives these days, relative to our foremothers, makes it easier to gloss over that trauma. And why wouldn’t you, if you can? Who wants to actually dwell on trauma? Who wants to pick around in all that gross and yuck and horror? We all just want to live our best life, as they say, and for the majority of women that doesn’t include turning a laser-like focus on all the ways women have been harmed by men and continue to be harmed by men, the world over.

But it’s there. All the time. Whether we’re focusing on it or not. Even today, even here. The horrific levels of sexual violence. Of domestic abuse. Of street harassment. Of women murdered by men they loved. Girls sexually harassed in schools. The pay gap. The lack of proportionate representation. The ongoing lack of real power. The fact that the 90% of the world's wealth is still concentrated in male hands. The stereotyping that is still rife, the way girl babies are still socialised massively differently from boy babies, by people who aren’t even aware they’re doing it. The lack of focus on women’s achievements through history. The media bias. The vicious, vicious misogynistic abuse experienced by high profile women on the internet. And by women without a high profile. The rape myths, the appalling rape conviction rate, the consensual sex murder defence, the sometimes hideously inadequate maternity care, the devaluing of jobs traditionally carried out by women... I could go on and on!

And that’s before we even come to FGM, child marriage, “honour” killings, all of which happen here too. And then there are the countries where women are still denied basic human rights, where womenhave to have male guardians, where women and girls are gang raped as punishment for a transgression by a male relative. There are the historical and recent cases of women being raped and impregnated en masse as an act of war; and too many outrages through history to name, like the horrendous mass rapes of German women by Soviet soldiers (and American and French and British) at the end of the war, something which is almost never spoken about and whose victims, many of whom died, are never recognised or commemorated in any way.

All these factors shape the world we live in, whether any of them happen directly to us or not. They all shape our unconscious attitudes and our sense of who we are, our position in the world. And women have been told for such a very long time that we are not fully human, and are not entitled to fully human rights.

Transactivism denies all this. Transactivism says that we are less marginalised than males appropriating womanhood. It says we are privileged relative to them. It denies our disadvantage and denies their male privilege, the benefits they got from growing up in a world that never questioned or threatened their humanity on the basis of their sex. On the basis of other issues, yes, maybe; but never on the basis of their sex.

Because the male is the default human in the patriarchal world, and the patriarchal world is the one we all live in; and all males internalise that while growing up, and retain that legacy, however much they may claim to reject their maleness.

So yeah. Transactivists lie. Women who don’t want to face the full extent of misogyny in the world also lie. Women have always colluded with their own oppression; again, it’s survival. Like the women who perform FGM on the next generation of girls, having been through it themselves.

We all lie to ourselves about some things. We all do what we can to survive. But some of us won’t lie about this, not if you emotionally blackmail us, not if you call us names, not if you treat us with contempt, not if you repeat your catechism of “trans women are women, trans men are men, non binary identities are valid” till you’re blue in the face.

You can’t make us lie too, just to make you feel better about your own lies.

Sorry (not sorry).

wrongsideofhistorymyarse · 12/06/2020 12:10

You can’t make us lie too, just to make you feel better about your own lies.

Love this.

MMN123 · 12/06/2020 12:12

@AMemeByAnyOtherName

Actually it's not an issue at all that men might be uncomfortable with that solution. Men is not a protected characteristic in law. We don't have women's spaces to be equal. So we have womens spaces to protect us from men - our protected characteristics is sex (note: not gender). Men do not have men only spaces to protect them from women, men only spaces are merely a co-incidental byproduct of the creation of single sex spaces for women.

So while men may feel uncomfortable with that solution, they need to show tolerance and they need to adjust their behaviour so that transwomen feel safe.

That may well mean that if they see a woman alone in a toilets they choose not to enter. They might need to wait outside for a few minutes if they feel uncomfortable. I think that's ok. I think reasonable men would think that's ok.

What isn't ok is expecting women to solve a problem with vulnerable men being frightened of violent men, but giving up our single sex spaces, that were created to protect us as women from violent men. Transwomen matter. Men must look after them better.

MMN123 · 12/06/2020 12:15

And yes there is a financial issue - if you have mens and womens now, mixed sex will mean they get rid of both and create just mixed sex. They are not obliged to have three, they only need one. So one is cheaper than two or three.

If they were obliged to just convert the mens into gender neutral and not pay for a third space, that would be the best balance. And plenty of women are screaming from the twitter rooftops that they support their trans-sisters so transwomen need not worry that they will be alone with men there - the womenfolk who want to act as human shields will be there too. And some men might prefer to hover outside until the womenfolk have gone before entering and that's ok.

justanotherneighinparadise · 12/06/2020 12:17

Trans women don’t want gender neutral spaces, they want to have free access to women’s spaces.

Some of them want to ‘pass’ as women and be accepted as a true woman based on their beauty and femininity alone. Some know they’ll never pass so want to force acceptance through new laws so regardless of how masculine they look and of course regardless of genitalia, they cannot be denied access to a sex segregated space.

If they wanted gender neutral spaces there would be zero resistance and this issue wouldn’t exist. If they were happy with the word ‘trans woman’ then they’d be zero resistance and this issue wouldn’t exist. The issue exists because they want the word woman to mean something else entirely to what it ever meant before and they want any biological reference to something that is inherently female (ie menstruation) to lose its basis in biology and become gender neutral.

Imagine waking up and being told that everyone needs to now call a dog a cat and cats are now going to known as furry bastards. If you dare call a cat (sorry a furry bastard) a cat (shit, sorry a furry bastard!) then you’re now a heretic and could lose your job over it. That’s quite a sudden gear change there and lots of people decide to just no longer talk about cats as they can’t be bothered to play the linguistic Furry Bastard game. Lots of people always thought cats were furry bastards so find it pretty easy to accept and write about felines all day long on Twitter along with all their pussy- loving friends. Then of course you have the people who just refuse to comply. Who are they to say that dogs are now cats and cats have a new name? Dogs have a specific set of physiological and physical characteristics completely different to cats. To fuck with that and errrrr here we are.

MMN123 · 12/06/2020 12:21

@justanotherneighinparadise

Quite.

But that is the vocal minority who must be ignored. I do believe most transwomen would accept gender neutral spaces alongside women only spaces (to which they don't have access).

And that is what we must keep saying. As long as some women use those spaces - and they will - then the problem is solved.

If that doesn't solve the problem then any reasonable person can see that is because the transwoman objecting is being spiteful. Because if they fight on the only way it will end is having no women only spaces. So they will never get what they want. Unless what they want is to harm women. And that can't be what they want, surely?

justanotherneighinparadise · 12/06/2020 12:27

The most vocal are rarely ignored unfortunately. We see that every day of our lives. They are capitulated to and tend to get their way, that’s why they do it.

AMemeByAnyOtherName · 12/06/2020 12:38

So the issue is largely that a small section of the transgender community feel that access to female spaces is a badge to earn towards their womanhood? But if I'm right with what you're saying, most transpeople do not feel this way?

I struggle to understand why a transwoman would insist on using a women's bathroom, if not for the fact that they are worried for their safety if they have to share a bathroom with males, as then the likelihood of them being attacked is increased ten fold. Yet that same logic isn't being applied to why women want to protect their single sex spaces?

Would it genuinely help if some women 'identified' as genetic women that do not want to share their spaces with genetic men? Is respect for self-identification the real sticking point?

I feel so uncomfortable even asking these questions because I'm worried it is going to be seen as over simplifying, over critical and intolerant. But I really wish I could get answers to things like this, surely there are people with solutions out there? Because at the moment it seems as though the majority of the backlash is coming from people who don't have answers and don't want to find any?

McTits · 12/06/2020 12:45

I’m struggling to understand this too. It is a biological fact that there are 2 genders, male and female. If a person feels that they don’t identify with their biological gender then they can change this with surgery etc. A man cannot just decide that he identifies as a woman because as long as he is physiologically male then he is still a man. Well he may do this but the fact still remains that he is biologically male. I do not see anything wrong with JK Rowling’s comments. The trans community is not helping itself with their outrage and response. You cannot argue with nature! It also makes a mockery of their alleged persecution when they are so openly vile about people who dare to disagree with them. We are all entitled to our opinion and I’m starting to feel that the situation in this country is becoming a bit too police state for my liking.

ShebaShimmyShake · 12/06/2020 12:51

I just can't. How many times have we been told that men can't help lusting after very young girls or acting like pigs Because Nature. And then, on the one issue that could involve male-bodied people not getting what they want, suddenly Nature doesn't know what she's doing? Even though said men are still not lusting after these women?

It's not trans women, they're not the problem, they deserve their rights and protection like anyone else. It's predatory men pretending to be trans women, and we women AND trans women getting no protection from them, because Nature exists only when it suits men. And she can be overcome with a statement that she doesn't count when that's expedient.

If your response to a woman on social media is to threaten her with your dick, you're not a woman. Not even if you prefix it with "lady". You're no lady and you're no woman.

justanotherneighinparadise · 12/06/2020 12:58

I’m sure it’s a very real concern where to toilet publicly if you are dressed femininely and yet own a penis. It would make sense to use a female or gender neutral toilet. I don’t think any of us have any real concerns about genuine trans women using women’s toilets.

We have HUGE problems with giving ALL men the right by law to access women’s toilets and changing rooms without having to have changed anything at all. They don’t have to be taking hormones, they don’t need to have had any surgery, they don’t even need to be wearing women’s clothes. They can just say they are a woman and their entry is unbarred. That’s fucking scary.

wrongsideofhistorymyarse · 12/06/2020 13:12

I don't want men in women's toilets. No matter how bloody vulnerable. Woman as a class are more vulnerable than men as a class. This is for men to solve, not telling women to put ourselves at risk.

ShebaShimmyShake · 12/06/2020 13:13

No, I don't care about toilets, we would all be in single cubicles. I don't care about changing rooms, if they're unisex changing villages like in my gym, that's also individual cubicles.

I care about the definition of woman being literally anyone who decides that today they are one, and what that means for crime and violence statistics, sex segregated sport, women's prisons and refuges, female patients or care home residents who want personal care or medical procedures delivered by a woman, women-only sessions in gyms (very important for some religious communities) and so on. I'm not anti trans, I'm pro women, and that kind of deranged system doesn't protect trans women either.