1) "biological males" is still based entirely upon using general rules regarding chromosomes and applying it as a universal truth 2) it ignores intersex people 3) gender confirmation surgery is reconstructive, not cosmetic and especially if you know anything about functionality post surgery 4) "real women" is another term that's been coined solely to diminish the validity of trans identities 5) it's a "no true Scotsman" fallacy All "real women" have xx chromosomes and have menses and can have kids While ignoring prepubescent people, post menopausal people, etc. 6) and you can't even prove most trans people's chromosomes unless you phenotype them. Making the assumption might be right most of the time but I could tell you that there's nobody breaking into cars in a downtown parking lot and more often than not it's true, doesn't mean there's actually scientific backing to that assumption
It's a universal truth that men are men and women are women. I don't know why you think that can be argued against. The idea that gender expression can be a bit more fluid is one thing, but you're trying to change biological reality. There's being progressive and then being disingenuous.
Like, the idea of bringing intersex people into it is just dumb. That is an unfortunate deformity. It's not a new sex. It does not redefine sex. When people bring it up, they act like intersex people are fully function hermaphrodites or something. It's a series of conditions, some worse than others.
It adds nuance. No, I'm not saying intersex people are a new sex. I'm saying they'd still have to fit somewhere in the spectrum between male and female. And guess what? That means that xxy people would be classified as either male or female. And even then there's some who might have androgen sensitivity and never develop a penis. It adds nuance and that's precisely why it gets brought up, to demonstrate that "xx is girl xy is boy" is not some universal truth and that all people are only one are the other, it's that there's far more configurations that fit under both or either.
No, it means there are some deformities in humans. It has nothing to do with the wider discussion of males and females. It's disingenuous to bring them into this topic of discussion. And honestly, chromosomes really do not need to be brought into the discussion at all. If you have a penis, you're biologically male. If you have a vagina, you're biologically female. Someone of either sex can choose to live as the opposite sex. At the end of the day, that is all that is happening. I will call any trans person by their preferred pronoun, but that does not actually change the underlying reality.
Transpeople should not be allowed to play segregated competitive sports as it introduces unfair conditions. The majority of people will not want to actively date them. The only thing society should do is not shame transpeople for living how they want to live. It should not have to bend over backwards change reality.
So you criticize that intersex people are unrelated, then ignore chromosomes to bring up genitals. Sayoria has a vagina, thanks for verifying she's a woman. <3
And then you bring up sports and society which are unrelated. What the fuck. ---