Why atheism is inherently anti-trans

Why do so many secular liberals support trans-genderism? It just struck me that a materialist can´t support trans-people. On the materialist perspective, the mind is a product of the brain. Further, there are biological differences between male and female bodies. For instance, a male body is literaly soaked in male hormones. This affects the brain. And the brain gives rise to the mind. Therefore, a mind in a male body *cannot be* "female". A male person *cannot have* "female" experiences. Indeed, on a materialist perspective, the whole notion of "female mind in a male body" is incoherent and incomprehensible. What could such a concept even *mean*? 

What do we call a human who claims to be a bat, since he "experiences himself as a bat"? Batshit crazy, I suppose. A human can´t have bat experiences, unless he has telepathic contact with a bat mind. Which is impossible. At least if materialism is true. And even if a human *would* have such experiences, *he is still a human*, not a bat, since a materialist must define "human" in a biological way. At most, he is a human whose mind has been possessed by the mind of a bat. But what is true of humans who claim to be bats, must also be true of men who claim to be women. Without mental telepathy, these men simply can´t know how it feels to be a woman. Therefore, they can´t use their feelings or subjective identity to prove that they are really women. 

Materialists believe that there is no such thing as race. That is, there is biologically or materially no such thing as race. "Race" is a social construct. But if so, trans-racialism is also a social construct. Now, materialists accept "Black" and "White" as valid categories, while admitting that they are socially constructed. But if so, they must logically also accept the category "trans-racial", which is just another socially constructed concept. (Or could become one, if enough people chose it to be so.)

Thus, materialists must oppose the claims of trans-people, but accept those of trans-racials. Yet, virtually all materialists take the exact *opposite* position. Why is this?

Now, there is one way in which trans-genderism could be coherently defended. Let´s assume humans have immortal souls. Let´s further assume that the souls are gendered. Let´s finally assume that a female-gendered soul incarnates (or re-incarnates) in a biologically male body. This would presumably cause the person so constituted to subjectively feel lika a woman, while biologically being male. 

Good luck proving that proposition. 

Of course, such a belief system is protected under the First Amendment. So trans-women would still be safe from persecution from the federal government, if they declare themselves to be a religious minority. But of course, they wouldn´t have, say, the right to affirmative action, which I assume isn´t available in the United States on strictly *religious* grounds. Nor would they have the right to federal money for gender surgery, since Jews and Muslims don´t recieve such money to get circumcised. They would also have to pay for their own hormones, since Catholics don´t get federal grants to pay for the communion wine. On the other hand, a Church of Christ Trans-Gendered would be exempted from paying taxes, including (I suppose) on donations from private citizens. They would also be able to serve in the US military, which I assume can´t bar any recruit due to religious affiliation... 

Is this text serious? Or I am just trolling you? I suppose that´s up to you to decide.