Then could you clarify how you want people classified when it comes to crime and law enforcement specifically?

Trans women are women; trans men are men: now we have no idea whether trans individuals are disproportionately the subject of violence. This seems like a bad idea.

Trans women are trans women; trans men are trans men: seems reasonable, because , but possibly blinds us to issues of body morphology. For instance, we might miss if people with female morphology were at extra risk of violence in traditionally male spaces.

Transitioned trans women are transitioned trans women; untransitioned trans women are untransitioned trans women; transitioned trans men are transitioned trans men; untransitioned trans men are untransitioned trans men. Maximum information about significantly different categories, but maybe creates distinctions that feel disrespectful.

Transitioned trans women are women, untransitioned trans women are men; transitioned trans men are men, untransitioned trans men are women. This follows body morphology accurately, but fails to account for gender or trans-targeted violence, so seems like a bad idea.

Women are women, men are men, trans women are men, trans men are women. Hyper-regressive and blind to hatred. Seems like a terrible idea.

This covers pretty much the whole spectrum, doesn't it? Which one do you think is appropriate? It's not at all clear to me, anyway, from your post.