Many critics of transgender individuals claim that we reject the truths of science and biology, but in reality, it is they who do so.

In the past, numerous trans women have stepped away from these so-called "debates," realizing that their attempts to educate gender critics about their lived experiences and the evidence supporting them were largely ignored. Although various members of the gender-critical community have sought dialogue with trans individuals, it has become clear that they are not interested in facts. Instead, they tend to assert their beliefs loudly, often resorting to insults and aggression that have never been instigated by a transgender person. They have created a false narrative, clinging to pseudoscientific claims and biased studies propagated by fellow critics, while we simply allow them to exist in their bubble of misinformation. They resist any evidence that contradicts their emotional investment in an ideology that fosters their prejudice.

Rather than engaging in constructive discussions, these critics often echo far-right rhetoric, launching unwarranted attacks fueled by a deep-seated animosity toward transgender individuals. They have constructed an alternate reality in which they align themselves with flawed science and biased research, disregarding the wealth of accurate information available. Their selective acceptance of data is aimed solely at reinforcing their prejudices.

As a transgender person, I've never encountered anyone in our community who denies the fundamental principles of biology. While anti-trans critics frequently focus on chromosomes and genitalia, they overlook the complexities of the human experience and the diverse ways we develop as a species. Just as we appreciate the uniqueness of fingerprints, they fail to recognize the distinct paths individuals take in expressing their gender. Instead, they demand conformity, showcasing a “Be like me” mentality.

One of the recurring arguments from those who harbor animosity toward transgender women is centered on safety. They argue that trans women should not be allowed in locker rooms, public restrooms, or even hospital wards, claiming to protect others from potential harm. This sweeping generalization seeks to paint the entire transgender community as dangerous and casts these spaces as breeding grounds for sexual offenses without any basis in reality. They often resort to emotional manipulation, framing their arguments around "protecting little girls," which is a well-worn tactic designed to stir fear and garner public support.

This narrative is a fabrication, a delusion they maintain to justify their disdain for transgender women. The inconvenient truth remains that transgender women are statistically more likely to face threats and violence in these public spaces—a direct result of the gender-critical movement. The panic instigated by these critics has also rendered such environments unsafe for cisgender women who may not conform to traditional notions of femininity. The backlash against transgender identities has had far-reaching effects, inflicting harm on cisgender lesbians and others who do not fit societal expectations. The damaging consequences of this ongoing war against trans identities extend beyond the transgender community, yet the critics remain unmoved. Their animosity is unwavering, using biology as a smokescreen for their prejudice.

Historically, this method of scapegoating has been employed by various groups seeking to justify their superiority. For instance, QANON used similar tactics to vilify opponents, particularly Democrats and liberals, suggesting that high-profile figures were involved in heinous acts, resulting in real-world violence predicated on false narratives.

The quest for supremacy has been a persistent theme in societal interactions. Throughout history, men have abused women, claiming they were too weak for civic engagement, while white individuals oppressed people of color by labeling them as inferior. Religious texts have even been misused to justify slavery and the mistreatment of marginalized groups.

In the realm of sports, the narrative around biology has been weaponized to create divisions, with some arguing that physical attributes provide unfair advantages. This echoes the historical stigmatization of homosexuality, where gay men were labeled as weak or mentally ill, resulting in a cascade of derogatory stereotypes and social exclusion.

The relentless struggle against marginalized communities often stems from deep-rooted prejudice and a desire for dominance, cloaked in claims of righteousness. For centuries, dominant groups have sought to use biology as a weapon, oversimplifying complex human experiences into a binary of right and wrong based on personal discomfort.

Sex is a biological reality we all share, but it is diversity in expression that characterizes humanity. Unlike sex, which is biologically determined, gender is a fluid social construct that varies significantly across cultures and eras. Modern society has become excessively rigid in enforcing gender roles, often prioritizing external expectations over individual authenticity.

Reducing individuals to their biological characteristics diminishes the rich tapestry of human existence, overlooking the myriad paths each person travels in understanding their identity. Transgender women, for example, are acutely aware of the biological differences they face, and yet they are not defined solely by their biology. They understand that not all individuals assigned female at birth can experience pregnancy or childbirth, and it is unjust to use biology as a weapon against their identities.

Biology and autonomy are distinct. Biology encompasses the characteristics we are born with, while autonomy reflects our journey of self-discovery. We cannot control our genetics, but we can nurture our identities and shape our experiences. Our physical forms may be subject to change, but our consciousness continually evolves as we engage with the world.

My biology does not encapsulate my identity; it is merely the vessel I inhabit. I am not accountable for my biological traits any more than someone is for their handedness. History has shown that even seemingly trivial differences can lead to persecution, as evidenced by the discrimination faced by left-handed individuals.

Just as my essence transcends the limitations of biological design, so too does the ability to define oneself. Happiness and fulfillment are not granted based on conforming to biological norms; they arise from aligning with our true selves. Each person has the right to explore their identity, free from the constraints imposed by societal expectations.

My biology does not dictate my gender nor define who I am. While it may have been easier had my biology aligned with my gender identity, I embrace this complexity as part of the human journey. I am an independent being, shaped by awareness and courage, living authentically regardless of external approval.

As we collectively grow in self-awareness, many are beginning to grasp the vastness of what it means to be human.

And those restrictive rules?

They were meant to be challenged, and through that defiance, we all thrive.