I’m expressly not. I’ve never claimed to be female. Just a woman.

Oy vey, there you go again. When you claim to be a woman, you are divorcing "woman" from being female, one of the core defining characteristics.

To be a woman, a person has to meet three essential criteria - be an adult, be human and be female. A person can't be a woman without meeting ALL three of these criteria, without having ALL three of the essential core characteristics. By claiming you are a woman, you are saying a woman can be a male adult human just as much as a female one. Which is fundamentally changing the definition of woman and erasing and eliding all the ways in which women are a distinct, separate sex to adult human males.

This is telling women that we are not distinct or different from males. Worse, it's telling us that we are simply an idea in men's minds, figments of male imagination.

You may not have invented it but you are saying biology should control our whole lives.

Can you show me where I or any other "GC" feminist has said any such thing? I believe biology determines sex - just as biology determines other basics like our need for water, food and air - and just as biology means we all are mortal and that whilst we alive, we are vulnerable to disease and injury.

But except in specific situations where biological sex is a factor - such as in health care, sports, safeguarding and facilities and provisions meant to accommodate male or female anatomy and physiology - I don't believe that people's options in life should be limited or controlled by their/our sex. I'm all for men doing child care, being SAHDs and working as nurses and women not having children, and working as police officers and air traffic controllers. If men truly could get pregnant, carry a baby to term, undergo labor and childbirth, and breast feed, I'd happily have shared the burden with the man I procreated with.

At the same time, however, I believe that sex is an important physical reality that matters a great deal to most people, that it's immutable, that it can't be waved away by choosing to "identify as" the opposite-sex, and that it has consequences that affect our lives in myriad ways large and small from soon after conception to our dying days. Whereas you prefer to take the position that the physical reality of your sexed body is far less important than your desire to have a body of the opposite sex, and that what matters most is the identity claims you make about yourself based on what you wish were true rather what is objectively, verifiably and measurably true.

Moreover, you appear to believe that cosmetic changes made to the human body can turn a male person into the opposite sex - or at least into a outwardly-appearing facsimile of the opposite sex that in your opinion is close enough to the real thing in the ways that count to you as to be pretty much the same, but again "the same" only in the superficial ways that matter in the eyes of some males.

And they are allowed to fix them without being persecuted.

People who identify as trans today are able to get all sorts of extensive cosmetic body modifications paid for by government-funded national and state health services and/or by private medical insurance. All they need is a diagnosis of "gender dysphoria" - which in countries like the USA and many European nations is one of the easiest Dx's to get nowadays, and is also easy to get in places like the UK and Canada by going to private HCPs rather than through the state health care system. Moreover, when trans people make these body modifications, even the most superficial ones, they are widely and effusively praised and celebrated for it. This has been the case for quite a while now.

When Bruce Jenner became Caitlyn in 2015, Jenner immediately got featured on the covers of glossy magazines, given a TV show, and was showered with awards, including "woman of the year" and the Arthur Ashe "courage" award. How is this persecution?

When a career criminal with multiple convictions and incarcerations for fraud and theft (including of social security and welfare checks from the elderly and poor) who never worked an "honest" job named Kricket "Thunderpussy" Nimmons became the first person to undergo "MtF" surgery on the genitals to affirm Nimmons' identity as a woman that was fully paid for by NY State Medicaid in 2015, Nimmons' story was covered in a lengthy, fawning story and video, complete with professional photo styling, by the NY Times that was featured on the front page of the "paper of record." Nimmons also got a NYC subsidized apartment, government financial support and special health services because Nimmons is black, identifies as trans and has HIV. Nimmons got paid to be a professional "trans advocate" by a taxpayer-funded organization too. Moreover, Nimmons got free legal representation from not just the ACLU, but from a "white shoe" Park Avenue law firm. How is this persecution?

The NYT reported that because Nimmons was habitually non-compliant with the medical regimen meant to keep Nimmons' HIV in check and also did not comply with the post-op instructions after the "sex reassignment" surgery Nimmons got for free courtesy of taxpayers, Nimmons has required extensive hospital stays that could have been prevented - and also had to have the "SRS" redone. All at taxpayer's expense. How is this persecution?

Even back in the 1970s males who identified as trans weren't necessarily "persecuted" for it. When acclaimed historian, journalist, adventurer and father of 5 James Morris became Jan and wrote the best-selling 1974 memoir Conundrum, Morris was praised and accepted. Before Morris died in 2020 at age 94, Morris said never once in nearly 50 years living as someone publicly known to be trans had Morris suffered any discrimination or mistreatment for the identity Morris adopted and the surgeries and other body mods that Morris underwent.

Similarly, in the 1970s when ace male athlete, respected physician and father Richard Raskin, who grew up with every kind of white male privilege imaginable, became Renee Richards, persecution did not follow. Not even when one of the things Richards did immediately after "becoming a woman" was to sue - and win - the right to play professional women's tennis at a time when women were just starting to get a chance to have our own sports leagues. How exactly does this amount to "being persecuted"?

By contrast, people with disabling physical health conditions and mental health conditions that aren't "gender dysphoria" have to go through enormous hoops and intensive scrutiny in order to qualify for government financial support programs, medical interventions and equipment - and depending on the jurisdiction, people with disabilities often or customarily have to do this at regular intervals throughout their lives in order to keep qualifying for the programs they rely on.

Similarly, people with truly diseases that are severely life-limiting and life-threatening have to go through extensive diagnostic testing and provide tons of proof in the form of paperwork, scan films, lab results, etc and go through physical exams, personal interviews and sometimes even home visits in order to get their treatments and accommodations covered by public health systems like the NHS or private health insurers. But even then, most people have access to only some of the treatments available, rather than the treatment they prefer on demand. Moreover, before getting cleared for invasive and costly treatments like surgeries, many people have to try all other less expensive and non-invasive treatments first.

I don't believe anyone should be "persecuted" for having a physical or mental illness, or because they decide to claim they are something they are not. But the self-pitying way you constantly claim that trans people are uniquely put upon and that you suffer pain and persecution far worse than anyone else in the world is tiresome - and it doesn't stand up to scrutiny.