Plenty of people think things are coherent that, upon conceptual analysis, collide into a reductio ad absurdum around every corner. There are honestly so many p

Plenty of people think things are coherent that, upon conceptual analysis, collide into a reductio ad absurdum around every corner. There are honestly so many problems with it, but let's go off the top of my head: - Self-identity: There is nothing special about sex/gender as a property that distinguishes it as a special case for self-id from other empirical properties of human beings, such as height, eye color, or hair follicle shape. Barring special criteria, if we allow self-id for one property, we must allow it everywhere. Everything goes. - If one truly believes that gender is distinct from sex, then what motivates one to "identify" as something else? - Many if not most transgender individuals emulate the opposite sex and their associated gender stereotypes. Surgically-implanted breasts and facial hair are secondary sex characteristics—their presence has nothing to do with gender. How those characteristics are presented or hidden are gendered expressions, but not their mere presence. - Epistemically, we only know what it is like to be the sex we are. We can attempt to understand "what it's like" to be the opposite sex, but we can never know. Therefore, one can "identify as" something else, but that something else is just a facsimile.