The inclusion of men who identify as women into women’s sex-segregated spaces has already harmed women (assault, loss of sports scholarships, caved in skulls in MMA fights). Continuing the false narrative that “woman” is a feeling inside a man’s head (one with a paraphilia or body schema issue, the two neurological underpinnings of gender dysphoria for being dissatisified or disconnected from ones sexed body) and not a bodily, inescapable reality for half the population harms women, and erases the acknowledgment of a material difference between the sexes.
1 in 50 male prisoners in the UK are identifying as women because they want access, soon it will be all of them. You can look up a case where men gained access to women in prison en masse, you ought to be able to guess what they did to them. Also, men who have sexually and fatally offended against little girls have been granted access to further victims in prison to validate their notions of being a woman. Aw, how nice and inclusive. There is a reason for sex-segregated spaces, it protects women from malfeasant men (of any proclaimed gender identity) who would otherwise take advantage. Behaviourally and physically it isn’t as though “woman” gendered men are any different to other men, apart from superficialities like clothing or cosmetic surgery (not all that common, that last one). You cannot change your sex, the sexes are different.
Even after HRT, men who have gone through puberty retain a massive advantage in sports. Even after gender affirmative cosmetic surgery they retain the male pattern of criminality, they are equally likely as man-gendered men to commit violent (including sexual) crimes. I’m happy to write all the citations for you, if you have trouble Googling these academic journal or newspaper articles. But I’m guessing you aren’t willing to think beyond buzzwords and mantras.
Dehumanising language to refer to women so men who identify as women won’t feel ‘excluded’ means women are reduced to their bodily functions. Women are not “menstruators” or “bleeders” when they have their periods, they are still women. When they have babies they are “mothers” or “women” not “birthing people” (as per the article we are commenting on), they are “women” not “uterus-havers”. It’s cute that you’re okay with this when absolutely none of the things I’ve mentioned has the possibility to harm a 60-year old man.
It’s nice to be airy-fairy about “inclusion” and personal “truths”. I’m explaining how this negatively impacts me and all women (“biological” women since you think there’s some other kind) and you accuse me of lashing out at men. You’re more willing to believe a man is a woman than you are to believe an actual woman about erasure and the other dangers of gender identity ideology.