[eganist]

Regardless, it misses the distinction between biological sex v. a mind's gender identity, and solely by the sheer quantity of neurons and possible interconnects, it's impossible to say that every person's brain strictly aligns with one of two modes of operation. (if anyone who specializes in gender studies knows more on this topic and believes I'm summarizing this—or even stating the problem—incorrectly, please step in; this isn't my specialty)

In fact, it's only appropriate to say that every brain is unique in how it processes the self and the world, and that while for the majority of people it's easy or even innate to identify with certain characteristics, there are minorities for whom this isn't the case.

We need to express inclusive empathy where we can, even if the only reason for doing so is to make sure that when we fall outside societally defined structures, we ourselves can also continue to be respected. Ideally we'd do so because we're trying to be good people, but my point is, even a selfish person should reach the same conclusion.

[layer8]

We should also acknowledge that language more often than not works in approximations and generalizations, and usually everyone still understands what is meant. There needs to be some flexibility on both sides.

[dmix]

This is an important point and it's lost in these debates.

The new cool thing is to pretend context/intent doesn't exist, that words and expressions should always be looked at in isolation. Even though it's a fundamental part of language and how the brain perception systems work to contextualize and loosely categorize everything based on the current set of information in a particular scenario.

Words/language is messy, highly flexible, and rarely strictly defined. For good reason.

Mostly so people can win internet arguments and feel superior/victimized.

[jimbokun]

Because sex is not gender.

Biological sex is binary. Gender is a social construct that may or may not coincide with biological sex.

[anon291]

If you have no distinguishing organs that produce sexual cell lines via meiosis, and have never ever had such organs, then you are functionally sexless. This seems like a reasonable position to take. Given our understanding of embryology and development we may try to piece together what would have happened had something not gone awry and base our judgement on that. But if we don't know, then it's hardly unreasonable to simply say 'I don't know'. However, we are not being asked to acknowledge that we cannot know for some individuals, we are being asked to accept those with obvious organs and gametes of one sex as individuals of the other.

[762236]

Hormones help regulate the brain and there are sex differences in the hormones. I have a hard time believing that someone can be in the wrong body, as the brain is a part of the body.

[eganist]

> Hormones help regulate the brain and there are sex differences in the hormones.

Does every cell in every body react to hormones etc. the same way? There are differences between each and every person on the planet in terms of how each cell in their body reacts to things like hormones, neurotransmitters, and other signaling molecules that manifest either subtly or extremely. Anything from a person's height to their temperament to their hunger (literally, or figuratively e.g drive) can vary based on the production of and reception of these transmitters, and every single person's body varies in every facet of the above based on environmental and genetic considerations.

> I have a hard time believing that someone can be in the wrong body, as the brain is a part of the body.

That's an empathy thing.

[762236]

That doesn't mean that those other considerations are stronger than the hormonal differences due to sex. The sex differences for testosterone are large.

> That's an empathy thing.

You're welcome to empathize with my inability to believe that someone can be in the wrong body.