Depends on how clear you want to make it. You could say an "MTF child" or something to be maybe a little more clear. Not sure what the most appropriate would be. But if you do what you're saying, I think the phrase you want is "transgender woman ((girl?)"

But if you do what you're saying, I think the phrase you want is "transgender woman ((girl?)"

This is how I've heard it as distinct from "genetic girl" or GG.

Speaking as one, "genetic girl" feels like a weird label (not least because genotype and phenotype don't always line up, even biologically). Is "cis" too niche?

Cis is totally niche, but "biogirl" or "genetic girl" is bad. And in the case of genetic girl, quite possibly inaccurate (as there are many XXY or XXXY people out there)

Huh. It's not a complicated concept, right? I suppose using it implies a certain degree of awareness of cis-ness as something other than "normal" which is more awareness than most people have.

I think the phrase you want is "transgender woman ((girl?)

It's this, because you refer to the gender the person currently identifies as. In this case, a girl.

Also, I often read that the -ed on "transgendered" is not correct; it's just "transgender," no -ed.

And finally, it would be "trans girl," two words, if you wanted to use that shortened form. Not "transgirl," one word. (Although I see "transman" a lot, so I think it's one of those terms that's evolving.)

but "biogirl" or "genetic girl" is bad.

The term I hear a lot recently is male-assigned-at-birth/female-assigned-at-birth (MAAB/FAAB).

female-assigned-at-birth

Hmmm...I don't think I like that, either. "assigned" is not the word I'd use, as it makes gender for me something put on me by other people (with the subtext that I've passively accepted it), which seems antithetical to the whole point of the thing.

"recognized" or "acknowledged", I could get behind.

"assigned" is not the word I'd use, as it makes gender for me something put on me by other people (with the subtext that I've passively accepted it), which seems antithetical to the whole point of the thing.

But isn't that basically what happens at birth? The kid can't decide. In most cases, physical anatomy is clear, and so the gender that corresponds to anatomy is assigned. When the doctor says "It's a boy!" that's pretty much gender assignment. It's just that in most cases, internal and external match up, so in those cases, no one chafes at being assigned a gender.

No, the kid can't decide, but isn't the argument that gender is somehow intrinsic to the person? That if, for some reason I'd been "assigned" maleness, I would have recognized this as inaccurate at some point? I think of "assigned" as like classrooms or work groups: something artificial. I also think of the opposite of "assigned" as "chosen" (and choosing to be something other than what you were assigned is often seen as a heroic act: bucking tradition, rising above your station, etc), and that seems like dangerous territory to go into.

I think of "assigned" as like classrooms or work groups: something artificial.

Yeah, but I think that's the intent of the phrasing -- ze was assigned gender X at birth, but hir true identity is gender Y. (Or it may X after all, but the initial assignment isn't what determines actual gender.)