No. This is classic straw manning and intentional misunderstanding, demonstrating the necessity of my post. You are not actually arguing agains the Gender Critical or TERF position. You are arguing against your fantasy of it, because otherwise your hatred and attacks are unjustified.
Your argument depends on pretending that “female” means “currently has a full, functioning, typical reproductive system.” That is not the claim that I or any GC feminist or TERF has made. That is your straw man. You either a misunderstand, lack comprehension or afraid that an honest conversation will expose your bad faith and shallow arguments. Your own cognitive bias has brought you to your incorrect conclusions about my position, not my actual position.
You are confusing a sex category with a checklist of typical traits.
“Female” does not mean “has every typical female trait,” “has functioning ovaries,” “can get pregnant,” or “has no medical variation.” It means a human being of the sex organized around the ova-producing developmental pathway.
A woman with a hysterectomy is not an exception to being female. A menopausal woman is not an exception to being female. An infertile woman is not an exception to being female. A female person with a DSD is not an exception to being female. These are female human beings with atypical development, injury, illness, infertility, age-related change, or medical history. They are in fact proof of being female since only a female can have a hysterectomy, cease menstruation or have a disorder of female sex development.
That is not special pleading. That is how biological categories work. The existence of members in a category that are at a different developmental stage than other members of the category do not erase the category.
The people you claim are being excluded from the category “female” are not females with atypical traits. They are males. That is the relevant distinction.
And no, disagreement with gender-identity ideology is not “anti-trans.” You can believe trans-identified people should be treated humanely, protected from violence, and allowed to live ordinary lives without also believing that sex categories must be redefined around identity.
As for healthcare, people have different views. But objecting to medical transition for minors, weak evidence standards, compelled affirmation, or the removal of safeguards is not the same thing as hating trans people. Calling every boundary, definition, or safeguarding concern “anti-trans” is just a way to avoid arguing the point. It is all deflection and projection to protect fundamentally bad ideas.
You think that the position that sex is real is anti-trans. I think the position that sex can be overwritten by subjective gender identity based on sex stereotypes os anti-woman and sexist. Deal with your misogyny and leave me out of your sexism -- yours is the gender essentialist position, not mine.
As stated, the entire reason for this thread is because of constantly having the argument mischaracterized and lied about by trans activists acting in bad faith. You are simply proving my point.