#transdialogue

For years we were told to stay quiet. To be kind. To let ourselves be redefined by people who don’t know what it’s like to live as a woman from birth. We were told that biology is bigotry, that boundaries are exclusion, that recognising material reality is hate speech.

We were gaslit into thinking that saying “women are adult human females” was somehow controversial. That wanting single sex spaces made us violent. That acknowledging the differences between male and female bodies made us fascists. All while actual women were being shouted down, threatened, and blacklisted for saying the most basic truths.

But guess what. People are done pretending. The backlash is here and it’s spreading like wildfire.

In the UK, self ID laws are being rolled back. In Europe, feminists are reclaiming their language and holding their ground. Courts are beginning to recognise that feelings don’t override facts. Female athletes, prisoners, rape survivors, lesbians, and young girls are speaking up, louder than ever. And they’re not apologising for it anymore.

And the best part? You can see how badly they are losing it. The tantrums, the threats, the incoherent screaming online. Every time someone utters a basic truth like “only women give birth” or “men have physical advantages,” they spiral into a meltdown. If your ideology shatters with one sentence, maybe it was never built on anything solid. The louder they yell, the more obvious it is they know they’re losing control.

This isn’t a fringe reaction. This is a wave. And it’s not about hate. It’s about drawing the line. It’s about saying no, you don’t get to colonise womanhood. You don’t get to dismantle decades of feminist progress in the name of a gender identity that changes based on mood and makeup. You don’t get to silence women forever.

The attempt to erase sex was always doomed to fail. Because sex is not a costume. Woman is not a feeling. And reality doesn’t care how many times you scream transphobe. When the consequences start landing on real people, real bodies, and real lives, the spell breaks. And that’s exactly what is happening.

So keep mocking us. Keep calling us dinosaurs or bigots or whatever your script tells you. It doesn’t change the truth. It only makes you look more desperate.

I believe in freedom of self-expression. Deeply. The more people feel free to express themselves fully, the more joy and creativity we’ll see in this world.

That’s why I want to say this clearly: acknowledging the difference between biological sex and gender doesn’t contradict the value of self-expression, it reinforces it.

Biological sex is real. It’s not a feeling or a vibe. There are two: male and female, determined by chromosomes (XX and XY). These biological markers give rise to different physical traits. Whether we like it or not, some of these traits make one sex more physically dominant, and that has real-world consequences, especially for safety.

Now, gender is something else entirely. It’s the set of roles and behaviours society has historically assigned to people based on their sex. But being a woman doesn’t mean liking pink or having long hair. And being a man doesn’t mean you can’t express softness, sensitivity, or creativity.

So when a boy realises he loves wearing pink, growing his hair, and dancing in glitter, why should we jump to the idea that he was “born in the wrong body”? He wasn’t. His biological sex doesn’t limit his ability to express himself. He can be fully himself as a boy. Expression should be free, not boxed into stereotypes that demand a new gender label every time someone steps outside them.

In the UK today, if someone wants to be referred to by a different gender, they can do so without needing medical or legal approval. That’s their right in a free society. If it makes people feel happier and more aligned with themselves, I don’t believe it’s anyone’s place to stop them. Live your life. Be who you are. No one should feel shame or rejection for that.

But here’s the line we need to draw: the law.

When legal rights, safety, and services start referring to gender instead of biological sex, we step into dangerous territory, especially for women. You cannot identify into a sex class that has been oppressed, violated, and silenced for centuries, and expect to instantly access the same protections, services, and safe spaces.

85 percent of women aged 18 to 24 in the UK report having experienced sexual harassment (ONS, 2021). This is not about feelings, it’s about structural vulnerability. Women, as a biological sex, are at greater risk. And biological sex-based spaces like refuges, hospital wards, and changing rooms exist to protect that vulnerable class. They matter for safety and for mental wellbeing.

To those who say “trans women aren’t a threat to women,” I ask: how do you make women feel safe? Telling women they’re irrational for feeling unsafe is just another way men have historically told women how to feel.

And to those pointing out that trans people are a small minority, around 0.5 to 0.75 percent of the UK population, I say this: women are more than half. Women’s rights are not a side note in the pursuit of inclusion.

I recognise that making clear distinctions between gender and biological sex might feel threatening to some trans people. That’s not my intention. But we need to be able to talk openly, respectfully, seriously. Right now, many women are afraid to speak for fear of being called bigots. That’s not progress. That’s suppression.

In the name of inclusion, we’re forgetting common sense.

“Do you even know any trans women? Have you seen them? Right! They’re women! Which bathroom should they use?”

That’s the kind of argument I hear all the time. And here’s my honest response:

No, trans women are not women. They are trans women. That doesn’t mean they deserve disrespect or dehumanisation. But it does mean they are not biologically female. We need to stop confusing kindness with denial of reality.

And no, not all trans women “look like women.” Not all trans people are conventionally feminine, and many don’t want to be. In fact, the ones who are most discriminated against are often those who don’t pass. Those are the people who are often denied jobs, safety, and housing.

So what are we really saying here? That a trans woman should be allowed into women’s spaces if she looks good enough? If she looks soft enough? Small enough? Feminine enough?

Is that our standard now how someone looks?

That’s not inclusivity. That’s aesthetic discrimination. And it’s deeply unfair to everyone: to trans people who don’t or can’t “pass,” and to women who are told their safety should depend on how polite or feminine someone seems.

What we need is clear, factual, respectful categorisation. One that doesn’t rely on how someone looks, but on stable, objective criteria like biological sex. That way, we protect the people who are most vulnerable, instead of relying on vibes and visual cues.

This isn’t about hate. It’s about creating systems that are just not aesthetic, not performative, not based on flattery or fear.