There is quite a few incoherent things about it. You cannot "define what a woman is", but you can "identify as a woman" (what do you identify as?). You cannot

There is quite a few incoherent things about it. You cannot "define what a woman is", but you can "identify as a woman" (what do you identify as?). You cannot really say why being trans-gender is okay, but being "trans-abled" (so called amputee identity disorder) is not. Nor is being "trans-racial" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypatia_transracialism_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypatia_transracialism_controv...). Even though we have long believed that race is more socially constructed than gender. The whole concept of "gender studies" as it is now is one of the least scientifically sound academic fields (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grievance_studies_affair https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grievance_studies_affair). The field is full of people openly questioning the very idea of trying to be an impartial researcher in search of "truth" and instead treat it as an activist project (https://hipatiapress.com/hpjournals/index.php/generos/article/view/1683 https://hipatiapress.com/hpjournals/index.php/generos/articl... - an example of a paper that in plain text advocates for using male students of feminist studies as "viruses" spreading the good news). Most of the theories are unfalsifiable anyway - and are no more scientific that angelology or hamartiology.