Men do not lose their power by changing their clothing, or wearing makeup. To imply that male privilege is dependent on how men feel about their bodies and how they choose to decorate them is the same as saying that women can change our status in patriarchy by altering our looks.

It's an inverted argument. Men who adopt femininity claim to be oppressed because they get a small dose of what women experience on a daily basis, compounded by law, by violence, by history.

Somewhat ironically, males who claim a desire to be treated "like a woman" then declare they are more oppressed than women, because in the process they are assaulted or killed.

It begs the question: What, exactly, do they think being "treated like a woman" means, if not an altogether dangerous way to be in a patriarchal society? Being treated like a woman inherently means being excluded, or being harmed, or objectified.

Objectification is the end goal for men who misappropriate our existence. If we're optimistic, they hope that being treated like a woman means they can gossip about fashion, share a bathroom without men, and other "privileges".

Not the stark reality of existing in a female body.

When men ask to be treated like women, then experience violence, they say they are more oppressed than women.
Men presume their lives and experiences to be the default, carrying more weight, even to the extent that when they pretend to be us, their pain matters more.

Men adopt our identities and still declare themselves the victims of the system that granted them the privilege to appropriate us.

When men accuse women of being exclusionary, they are entirely ignorant to the past 6,000 years of history which, through men, excluded women.

Women should not feel guilty about calling a man what he is. We have a history and culture of our own. Women are the excluded sex. They burned her, enslaved her, experimented on her, locked her in asylums, bound her feet, broke her body and erased her name.

Men don't want a part of our reality. They only want to be objectified. To be told they are sexy.

The fantasy they project onto women is the image they have become jealous of, like Narcissus reflecting back on a pool of water, with mirrors all around.

Men who self-objectify are not identifying with women at all, but his own projection of us, so that we are twice removed: "cis women", doubly othered, and the man who falls in love with the false image, doubly removed from himself and the world.

No wonder there is so much anger in transgenderism. Men who call themselves women already hate their bodies, dehumanize women, and unleash a narcissistic anger against women who won't validate them.

Women are the excluded sex.
Recognize. We were excluded from public life, education, bodily autonomy, and free will.

Men taking up the term "exclusionary" is the tactic of an abuser.
They excluded us. Fuck them.

No male is entitled to women's attention, or identity.

Men who claim to be the most oppressed women leverage our own pain, history, language, and violence done to us in order to enter themselves, to remind us "cis" women of our place, to re-educate us to deference towards male projections of how we should be.

They steal our lives.

No male wanted to "identify" as a woman when the feet were bound. When the stake was lit. When the slave was raped. When the woman was bought. When the vote was not won. When property was not granted. Now, men identify as "women"; porn has them turning sex into a projection.

A lot has been said to women by well-meaning men about giving sympathy to men for their desires or bodily discomfort.
To them, I say, fuck you.
Men identify as women and never with women.
Our bodily discomfort never mattered.
Anorexia, child birth, rape, torture - all porn now.

Andrea Dworkin said: Any violation of a woman's body can become sex for men; this is the essential truth of pornography.

Now that media is increasingly more realistic, an essential truth women have to face is that men believe in their fantasies more than our humanity.