No, mate, I’m going to define woman as an adult human female who belongs to the only sex, of the two, able to grow and give birth to a child. I’m sorry if you think a woman is anyone who feels they are an adult human female, but that’s an absurd and circular definition. A transwoman is a man who identifies as a woman, that’s all.
Apart from your strawman argument I’ve never heard someone argue that an infertile woman ceased to be a woman, so that’s irrelevant. And yes, women who feel they are men are able to give birth… because they are women. There are no birthing people, all of them are women. Whether they like the label or not, it’s an accurate label, it mean adult female human — which they are.
The dehumanising term “birthing people” instead of “mother” only applies to one category of people — women, the vast, vast, vast majority of whom are not disconnected from their sexed body (i.e. women with gender dysphoria who would presumably want to avoid womanly things like childbirth, you’d think). Hence, this half of humanity (what you call ciswomen are just women without a disordered relationship to their female body, nothing notable about that) is protesting this idiotic label. This is all about avoiding hurting male feelings by letting them pretend womanhood is a notion in their head and not a bodily reality. If you don’t understand the biological difference between the sexes and why men and women are distinct and cohesive categories with no overlap I can’t help you. (No, you can’t change sex through cosmetic surgery).
The distinction between men and women is the logic behind any differential treatment of the two. (Yes, two, men and women with disorders of sexual development are just that.) There are women being assaulted in prison and injured in contact sports for this rubbish ideology. And having dehumanising, reductive labels applied to them (“birthing person” instead of “mother”) to appease a tiny proportion of at most 0.006 of the population to begin with. If a transman wants to call herself a “birthing person” no one is stopping her. There’s no need to tar other women with this unwanted label.
My “oldness” is 65, please treat me like other people who are actually, biologically 65 whose “oldness” (inner sense of age) just so happens to align with their age. Cisaged people, if you will. Oh, no, I know oldness and age are different, but let’s pretend “65" is and has always been defined by metaphysical oldness and not biological age. Why aren’t the transabled (body integrity dysphoria) humoured this way to the detriment of actual amputees (the cisabled)? If “not all people who give birth are women” why not say rubbish like “not all amputees are missing a limb”?
But golly, thanks for the warning, I totally thought I was only a baby incubator until you came along to reassure me women aren’t being erased by the pretense that some men are women, and forcing non-men women to be reduced to “birthing people”, “menstruators”, and “uterus-havers” and other dehumanising nonsense so men with “woman” gender don’t feel excluded by language the way they are precluded by physical reality.