and probably no trans 'men' since that wasn't a thing then
Sort of. There have always been women who've had to take on a male role in order to be taken seriously in a male world.
you seriously gonna play
Yes, because it happens. Mythologising the Stonewall riots is gonna happen because it's well worth mythologising. There are however photos and yes, some were trans, even if they did only present that way 'sometimes' because 'sometimes' was the only option they had. Nevertheless, there are plenty of photos of the weekend they were mourning Judy and those photos do show trans, dykes, poofs, straight-acting fags and anyone else who fought back (and won).
You may have strong views on it all and I'm not overly impressed myself by depraved straights who try to colonise LGBT, the bald divorced straight suburbanites who grow their hair long at the back, put bad makeup on and say they're lesbians. They're exhibitionists and fortunately there are few of them. Unfortunately bigots seize on them and the end result is yet more beatings, yet more killings of effeminate men who can't pass as straight, genuine 'third sex' people in Manila, Mumbai, Rio, Lagos, Moscow and yes Warsaw wherever who if they're lucky enough to get a job, cut hair, wiggle their tucases in bars and do blow jobs to buy cheap food. And the ones who beat or kill them are straight-identifying guys who get a hard on at night thinking about other guys and are so repressed that they express that as hate rather than love.
If transgender women are women, why do we call them "transgender women" instead of just "women"?
You're slowly getting it.