On the face of it, it may seem that the problem lies in discussing biology, since "we must not be limited by our biology." Such assertions appear appealing: we are more than our bodies, biology is not destiny and so forth. Yet if we cannot talk of biology, we cannot mention the word trans either, since what is seldom mentioned is that the category 'biological sex' is in fact a prerequisite for the terms trans and cis. Any mention of the words 'trans' and 'cis' is referring to biological sex. The basis of the dichotomy is precisely the relationship to one's own biological sex. Those who remain in the sex they were born in are now known as 'cis', while those who want to 'cross over' to the other sex are known as 'trans'. When defining cis, the Swedish Secretariat for Gender Research writes without hesitation that those born with a vagina are women, just as Mathilda Aokerlund writes unambiguously about being "born in a specific sex." Thus, the proverbial bathwater is flowing back just as quickly as it was washed down the drain and what is now considered 'problematic' is not talk of biology but an analysis of power based on sex.