Excluding anyone on the basis of biological difference demonstrates a spectacular failure of empathy; worse, it reduces women to their reproductive systems, which is surely something we should be trying to move on from.
I find this take utterly bizarre, even coming from someone with a DSD who may understandably feele excluded by definitions of womanhood which focus on potential childbearing.
"Woman" is just a word that means adult female human. It's the human equivalent of the word "doe" in deer.
Saying so doesn't make me feel "reduced" to my reproductive anatomy, it's just a simple statement of fact. There is far more to me than being a woman. In fact I would say that most things about me have nothing to do with a woman. You can be a doctor, a Muslim, a cat person, a Capricorn, an ENFP, Spanish, a swimmer or a West Ham fan and all of these things contribute to making you who you are but none of them have anything to do with being a man or a woman. The only thing being biologically female reduces you to is being part of the category of people who are not male.
If you want to define women as being something other than female, what is it?
Because if you're going to talk about dresses and makeup, or even being more likely to be a victim of sexual violence, well yeah, I find that extremely reductive, and not inclusive of all women or exclusive of all men.
And even if you think we need a word for all people who do not believe themselves to be men (which I personally don't think we need a word for) but that we don't need a word for all people who actually are biologically female, fine. But trying to stop people who actually are biologically female from having the words to describe themselves which do not include people who are biologically male is abusive.
With gender and sexuality becoming increasingly fluid, feminism should aim to be more inclusive rather than less: welcoming trans men and women as well as non-binary, queer, intersex and gender-nonconforming people. While it may be true that trans women do not have the exact same lived experience as cis women growing up, cis women do not know what it is like to grow up as a trans woman, to be born in the wrong body and experience transphobia.
Why is feminism the only social justice movement that is expected to include and centre others?
Trans people already have their own movements. They have their own trans rights movement. They've also hitched the T onto the LGB and pretty much taken over the gay rights movement. Why do they need feminism as well? Why does feminism need to include them?
I believe feminism should include all women, even those who don't believe they are feminists and those who don't believe they are women.
If a trans man has an unwanted pregnancy, should they be able to get an abortion?
Yes, of course. Therefore, feminism includes them.
Feminism can't be about either female people or people who identify as women if it is expected to include both trans women, who are male, and trans men, who are female but do not identify as women. If it is for and about female people, it doesn't include trans women. If it is for and about people who identify as women, it doesn't include trans men (except it does, because they are still affected by most of the issues feminism is concerned with).
So let's be honest here. When you say feminism should be inclusive of trans people, what you are really saying is that feminism is for both women and trans people (because everything must always be for trans people), and in the event of a conflict of rights between these two groups, you must prioritise the trans people.
That makes it, er, not feminism anymore.