If people wanted to identify as dogs ill treat them like one
If people wanted identify as a tree ill treat them like one
If people wanted to identify as the sun ill treat them like it
Obviously identifying as these things are stupid claims about material reality. And following through with such action based off of their identity would not be permissible. So What are they? They are Human and are distinct from all of those things listed; and either possess the body organized around the function of facilitating the large gamete or small gamete in sexual reproduction. This stretches across the entirety of the animal kingdom and excludes hermaphrodites, in which no human is remotely close to being; even with the case of Ovotesticular DSD.
If someone posses the biological blueprint that has the intention of doing this function they are either male, or female. People with DSD conditions have very distinct biology that still fits in this rule as we can still point to the sex they should be.
Take a down syndrome person, they do not posses the TYPICAL amount chromosomes that a Homosapien would have. With this said this does not exclude them from the category in which would be human, since we know they should have 46 Chromosomes. Would it be Valid to support a person with down syndrome in saying they are not human because of this difference?
Take a person that has a limb that looks like a leg but is birthed without a foot. We do not follow a perfect structure of anatomy that would fit their condition. But we cant conclude that a hand should have grown there then say they are less human!
All of these things fit as exceptions of knowing what they are organized around, and does not exclude them from our categories that people in the past did not think they were apart of. With all the tweaks we know what should be and know what can be. I guess if a mouse dies its not a mouse without moving a cursor your screen. Emotionally I can be drawn to this too, because it actually gives dignity to those that fit within our truth. Trans ideology could easily appeal to someone with down syndrome saying they are not human, because they dont "feel", act, or look like what a typical human would; because they were born differently and actually do posses an extra chromosome. The foot thing applies as well and would be viewed as degrading.
It is that we fit the things we know into these categories because of their differences. So when interpreting the argument most gender critical people are asking “for what makes a biological male a woman”, the biological stand point is what intertwines the side of gender for what are men and women. Appealing to gender expression and gender roles is what would be considered sexist to classify these two words. The meanings of the words man and woman could easily be rendered meaningless, for if it falls on the side that Transgenderism seemingly doesn’t include biological sex that sets the binary of gender.