I think it's useful to remember that "man" and "woman" are words originally created by people to describe a perception of gender. The words themselves have no intrinsic meaning or value. Once we decided upon those two particular words, people who failed to conform specifically to them were not "wrong" or "incorrect." Rather we discovered that the words that were originally created to describe our perceptions were inadequate. Still, we find ourselves compelled to try and get people to somehow fit into these two narrow and flawed descriptors. When faced with this kind of inadequacy, we ought instead to be open to abandoning our old words and choose new ones, or maybe not use descriptors at all.
What we now have, in terms of gender, is a continuum along a male female axis, or maybe even a multi-dimensional problem that includes a sexual orientation. Drawing lines to show where a "man" ends and a "woman" begins will always and only be an arbitrary exercise. What's the real value in determining that one person who considers themselves to be a woman is not one, because we have drawn that line to exclude them? It's as if we have decided that language is more important than people. I disagree with that notion. Maybe the right answer to "what are you?" is really just "none of your damn business."
