"Anti-trans revanchists have centered their battles in wordplay — if you can call it that. J.K. Rowling, in a recent tweet..."

"... noted that 'people who menstruate' were once referred to as 'Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?' (She meant 'women.' There’s that wordplay.) She also argued, 'If sex isn’t real, the lived reality of women globally is erased' and 'erasing the concept of sex removes the ability of many to meaningfully discuss their lives.' Ms. Rowling’s linguistic wizardry cloaks her political goal, to assign gender purely by sex, and therefore relegate trans-ness to a closet under the stairs. It should be noted that trans people do not generally believe sex is not real; indeed, discomfort with the sex of our bodies is a frequent challenge for trans people. Ms. Rowling knows this, since she knows what the word 'trans' means. Words hold power, and it’s no surprise that pushback to a rising trans presence has come in the form of definitional conservatism. But the battle extends beyond language, and Ms. Rowling’s semantic battle has been taken to new theaters by the Trump administration. From our schools to our hospitals to the federal work force, the administration has pursued new rules that define trans people out of existence. This is an attack on trans lives. As with Ms. Rowling, the language of the proposed rules is the language of bodies: the social roles of 'man' and 'woman' are the only two available, and we are all assigned one at birth according to our bodies..... When you use words like 'male' as shorthand for those privileged by the patriarchy, you leave trans women uncertain whether you have our backs or — like the Trump administration and J.K. Rowling — you are trying to write us out of existence. It’s impossible to dismantle the patriarchy while wearing a 'pussy hat.'"

Writes Devin Michelle Bunten, who is an assistant professor of urban economics and housing at M.I.T. in "Sex Does Not Mean Gender. Equating Them Erases Trans Lives/Embracing the experiences of trans people means leaving old vocabularies behind" (NYT).

I had some trouble understanding the aphorism "It’s impossible to dismantle the patriarchy while wearing a 'pussy hat.'" But I think I get it now, so let me help you with it.

The idea is to get people to think in terms of gender and not sex, with "sex" understood to refer only to the physical body — notably, the genitalia. A pussy hat represents and flaunts female genitalia and therefore intensifies the conflation of sex and gender. The way to make progress — "to dismantle the patriarchy" — is to clarify the distinction between sex and gender and to stress the importance — in our social roles — of gender.