Gender logic

Many people get very emotional, and as is very often the case, very illogical when it comes to the current gender debate. Clearly it's a complex and emotive issue, but, looking at particular cases in the light of simple syllogistic logic may often help us see the wood for the trees (this is a double entendre), for example,

1. A Man says "I'm a Woman".
2. This "identifies" him as a "Woman".
3. Which means his "identity" is "Woman".
4. The "identity" is "valid".

Let's unpack this syllogism,

• #1 is simply false, men are not women, by definition.
• #2 and #3 are the fallacy of reification.
• #4 confirms this.

Note: Reification (also known as concretism, hypostatization, or the fallacy of misplaced concreteness) is a fallacy of ambiguity, when an abstraction (abstract belief or hypothetical construct) is treated as if it were a concrete real event or physical entity.

Also note, "trans" doesn't appear anywhere in the process, it's irrelevant.