Evan Urquhart

By pushing anti-trans attitudes that focus on biology, they're able to target women with anti-feminist, biological essentialist attitudes, without cis women realizing they're the real target.

Their focus on procedures that make trans men infertile (this is always talked about in the context of fertility of "girls" and "daughters"), reinforces the idea that womanhood must always aim for motherhood. For them, it is the only legitimate purpose and role for a woman.

At the same time (but louder) they stress women's vulnerability to male predators in bathrooms, and their athletic weakness compared to cis male athletes. They pretend this is about trans women. It is not. It's about reinforcing cis women's inherent vulnerability and weakness.

Added all together, we have a coherent worldview: Women are their biology and nothing more. They are weaker than men and in need of male protection. Their purpose in life is motherhood, and the state has a role in maintaining their fertility regardless of their wishes.

This is an ideology that masquerades as scientific truth, built on misleading half truths. Nothing about the biological ability to carry a pregnancy entails a moral responsibility to do so, much less that it is one's only legitimate purpose or function.

Female bodies are, on average, shorter and less muscular than male bodies due to the action of a specific hormone, testosterone, on mammalian biology.

Nothing about THAT implies that... well... ANYTHING. It doesn't mean women are unable to protect themselves, physically, that they can't participate in athletics without segregation, or that sexism stems from biology and can never be eradicated. ALL of that is soc, not bio.

Am I saying that the religious right doesn't really hate trans people, that it's all a ploy to hurt cis women and they don't really care about us at all? No, they hate us. They'd be happy if every one of us is closeted, criminalized, or dead.