Yeah, a lot of them are nutters who believe in all or some of those things. In many cases they're definitely similar to incels or MGTOW's in that their attitude to the opposite sex is broken. I definitely disagree with them that men can't understand what it is to be a woman.
I haven't seen much classism though, tbh. A decent portion of them seem to be radical leftists, actually.
I remember one time one them was saying fellatio is disgusting and fundamentally wrong, and that actually got somewhat more criticized than approved of, if I recall correctly. They definitely have an unhealthy view of men though. And also trans women. I think it's skewed by them mostly linking each other the worst possible examples. I also think many of them feel threatened by the idea of trans women passing. As far as I can tell, many literally fear they will be replaced as a class by trans women.
The whole debate just seems meaningless to me if people aren't willing to define what a woman or a man is. At least they are willing to do that.
So you say a trans woman is more similar to a cis woman than a cis man? That's fair enough, I don't think I agree though. As far as I can tell that is not true for their bodies, or for their socialization. This is especially true if we can assume that most trans women still do not undergo any SRS or hormone treatment. Then there's the brain. That is difficult to determine, you are right. But my current understanding is that there's a lot of overlap, like you wrote somewhere. So brain gender doesn't seem to correlate that well with sex, if that is true.
Look, bigots on the right say trans women are not women to invalidate their feelings or decisions. But I don't think it's inherently wrong to question whether someone is a woman or not.
In your reply you quoted my post and inserted the cis prefixes before man and woman. I'm perfectly happy to use them. But in assuming and specifying that I meant a cis man, are you not implicitly making a difference between cis and trans men or women?