I look forward to seeing that Peter. For me I'm a little past the debates,'is there's such a thing as...' forums.
In amongst all the chit chat children are being harmed.
Guess I'm a little more like a sweary Billboard Chris than a H.Joyce or Stella.
Seeing this destroy so much in such a short time means I have ended up in a hard-line position, that this is mental illness,that I don't even believe adults can fully consent too and it needs stopped. Keep up the great work and love to you and your clan from sunny Scotland.
Doctor in Wyoming, suing state for abrogating his first Amendment rights, stating clearly how this "care" is not grounded the way all other medical care is, that is, based on well-structured studies:
👍 You see that noted Substacker and gay columnist Andrew Sullivan has been thinking of voting for Trump as a result of the Levine case?
"Rachel Levine Must Resign: A case study in politics and ideology overruling science. With children as victims. .... I have to say that the news this week has made me reconsider voting for Kamala Harris."
Though you may have to open his post in an incognito browser window since he's something of a grifter in putting it behind a paywall. But I have a PDF of it if anyone is interested.
I think I did hear about it. Many gay men and lesbians are disconnecting from the TQ. Now I'm documenting the many men who "identify" as women while serving time for murders of women. Eg, Marcelline Harvey (Harvey Marcel) who killed 3 women and is now in the women's section at Rikers in NYC. Most famous right now is Skylar DeLeone, (John Jacobson Jr) who is serving life in San Quentin for killing 2 men and a woman. Harris intervened specifically to make sure CA taxpayers fund his surgeries, now done. He continues to sue to get into the women's prison estate. One more from CA, Kier Anderson, who strangled his wife, Jennifer, 2 death as their 2 young daughters slept. I actually know enough about her to include her experience in my data. She'd be trans widow #66. The rate of violence of these men continues to be just over a third committed sexual assault and/or physical assault. One other detail I've learned is the case study Ray Blanchard and the other 3 Horsemen of the Sexpocalypse used to "prove" there might be a father-son genetic tendency evaporated. Sam Kaye, that son, has now detransitioned. He was "Maya" for 25 years and regrets it all. I'm locked out of X now because (I believe) Blanchard reported me when I gave him that information. Just as well.
Rather "bizarre" phenomenon at best, though I've periodically argued that it speaks to how we all develop our senses of self, and how the process can easily go off the rails and into crazy town. Something that ethologist Konrad Lorenz went into some detail on in his "Civilized Man's Eight Deadly Sins" -- highly recommended:
Lorenz: "The analysis of the organic system underlying the social behaviour of man is the most difficult and ambitious task that the scientist can set himself. .... Far from being an insurmountable obstacle to the analysis of an organic system, a pathological disorder is often the key to understanding it. We know of many cases in the history of physiology where a scientist became aware of an important organic system only after a pathological disturbance had caused its disease." [pg. 2]
In the same vein, you probably know of transwoman Anne Lawrence's "Shame and Narcissistic Rage in Autogynephilic Transsexualism":
Can't say that I've more than skimmed it, but one can sort of see how being disabused of one's delusions will often lead to that "rage". Interesting that "she", among some few other transwomen and transmen, has remained more or less sane in the face of that:
Wikipedia: "Lawrence is a transgender woman. She uses 'she' pronouns for herself. Lawrence is a proponent of Ray Blanchard's etiological typology of transgender women and personally self-identifies as autogynephilic. She has described having autogynephilic feelings and gender dysphoria from early childhood."
Anne Lawrence, "she" is also the father of a couple of children and had his medical credentials taken away when other hospital staff observed him feeling up the genitals of a woman under anesthesia. She was Muslim and he said he was curious whether she still had intact clitoris and labia. There's always a seamy underside. He and Blanchard are desperately trying to prop up the diagnostic terms Blanchard made up. Thanks.
"seamy underside", indeed. But not quite sure exactly what your beef is with Blanchard, though he seems somewhat flaky himself, particularly in having been a member of WPATH some 20 years ago:
However, I wonder if you watched any of Peter's interview of Mia, particularly their efforts to "steelman" the WPATH "arguments" from 9:00 to 15:50. Highly recommended if you haven't. But you don't seem particularly willing to consider defining gender as separate from sex, though they make a reasonable argument in favour of that dichotomy -- see my comment here for a few details:
I'm NOT saying you "think sex is correctly also called 'gender' ...." I'm saying -- Mia and Peter are saying -- that "sex" and "gender" are typically DEFINED to refer to different aspects of human behaviour and physiology, although they're rather vague on the specifics. That's why they accept that, for example, males (sex) can have feminine (gender) aspects of their personalities.
But finally took a look at your Lime Soda film, though, at an hour and a half, I'm not likely to watch much of it. Anything you think might be of particular interest or relevance?
Watch the film. How very dismissive. You do not cease to amaze Steersman. No wonder some call you a sexist. You don't care to know what women went through, what men like Blanchard don't bother to find out when they are "transitioning" a man.
Yes, I completely agree with your confusion..."If they genuinely believe they are doing good, why won't they talk?"
They genuinely believe in they've earned the accolades, they genuinely believe they've earned their bonuses, they genuinely believe their patients genuinely believe... and that, to them is enough.
One of the more important interviews of yours I've watched.
It's good to know there are many like Mia out there, trying to turn this crazy train around.
Your position of "if they truly believe they are right, they should want to talk and debate", from an adult and logical standpoint makes sense. However, we are - on the whole - no longer there as a society and larger culture. We are now in a time where adults have codified and installed extreme conformation bias, as truth and "right". Our government, corporations, academia, healthcare systems/schools, and families operate and exist on extreme adolescents levels of confirmation bias.
It'd be an understatement to call it straight institutional delusion.
So, just as a child will tell you that their favorite stuffed animal is a real person and has thoughts, dreams and eats ice cream, they will not debate you when pushed on the falsity. At best they will either continue to create a narrative supporting the fantasy (lie) or completely shutdown in anger or dejection. Prior to that, they truly believed they were right and what they knew was 100% true.
You did a very good job steel manning the conversation. I'd hoped she would have closed the loop on her premise about the vulnerable being preyed on, during times of weakness - this is the argument of the children, who are perpetually vulnerable, weak and do not have the ability to make informed decisions - especially when those decisions are based on ideologies and agendas that are not grounded in long standing, proven truths, but the extreme conformation biases of opportunists who reap not only profits, but power, influence and control.
Unfortunately we, as a society, have moved away from the once predominant convention of protecting the most vulnerable, to exploiting them.
I was actually kicked off Medium in 2021 for this question in an article I wrote: "How would the “medical experts” who support “trans” activists’ claims—and who have a huge financial stake in the “Sex Reassignment Surgery Market”—which is expected to to hit $1.5 bn by 2026“—treat children with body integrity identity disorder (BIID), which numerous medical studies and “patients liken to gender identity disorder:...Patients’ anatomy is at odds with...internal sense of self, causing intense discomfort.”? Would they repeatedly validate little Jenny and Jamal’s ideas that their left leg was “wrong” and should be amputated?" https://irislee.substack.com/p/medium-where-we-tolerate-trans-intolerance
You're in good company with those who've fallen afoul of "The Tranish Inquisition" at Medium:
"Inauthentic Selves: The modern LGBTQ+ Movement Is Run By Philanthropic Astroturf And Based On Junk Science; How the LGBT community got suckered by Big Business and Big Philanthropy."
The bottom one from Holly Lawford-Smith likewise. And from some 5 years ago. And according to my bookmarks, the top one from "Sue Donym" -- an amusing pun -- is from August of 2018. Both still "under investigation" -- pretty "thorough" if that's the case ...
Seem to recollect there are a couple of others at Medium in the same boat -- mostly from "TERFs" being critical of transloonie nutcases. Kathleen Stock for example:
"Doing better in arguments about sex, gender, and trans rights"
The clarion Mia trying to talk with Dr. B. in adhd-philo-mode while jet-lagged made me laugh more than once. As usual, I am so grateful for everyone's work and voice on this (and other) topics. ❤️
You and Mia are to be commended for your "efforts to steelman WPATH arguments". Likewise for Mia's and Michael Shellenberger's WPATH Files report -- hope there are a bunch of "doctors" over there worried about getting their arses sued off.
However, I kinda think you both dropped the ball at a number points, at least in the "Genspect/WPATH steelman" section. For instance, at about 11:24 you both more or less accept that there are masculine women and feminine men, and that those individuals qualify as "gender non-conforming" [Mia @ 12:06]. From which one might reasonably suggest that you would probably accept a definition for gender as "sexually dimorphic personality traits and behaviours". You might note that the late great US Justice Anton Scalia more or less endorsed that view and its difference from sex:
Scalia: “The word 'gender' has acquired the new and useful connotation of cultural or attitudinal characteristics (as opposed to physical characteristics) distinctive to the sexes. That is to say, gender is to sex as feminine is to female and masculine is to male.”
A very large part of the problem is that too many transactivists insist on using "male" and "female" as genders.
But, Peter, where I think you go off the rails is in this bit at about 13:50:
"okay they believe in the existence of a gender identity which I do not so they believe that there's something that resides within us all that is called a gender identity it's like a psychological sex or something a soul a gender Soul residing within you. There's no scientific evidence for this it's just an a Bonkers idea that someone came up with"
Not much evidence of any honest effort to "steelman" the concept, though I'll concede it's not easy to do so. But you might consider this analogy, my paraphrase of an article in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy on "personal identity":
SEP [paraphrased]: "Outside of philosophy, [gender identity’] usually refers to [sexually dimorphic personality traits] to which we feel a special sense of attachment or ownership. Someone’s [gender identity] in this sense consists of those [feminine and masculine personality traits] she takes to 'define her as a person' or 'make her the person she is', and which distinguish her from others."
Somewhat apropos of which, I just ran across this, an excerpt from transwoman Deirdre McCloskey's "Crossing, A Memoir"; "From Donald to Deirdre: How a Man Became a Woman — and What It Says About Identity":
Kinda think "she" is madder than a hatter in some ways, but still some useful insights into "her" "feminine gender identity":
"You become a woman [a gender] by being treated as one of the tribe. Nothing else is essential. Being Dutch is being treated as Dutch. You can be a masculine woman, as by some stereotypes many women are, yet still be treated as one of the tribe. No piece of conventionally feminine behavior is essential if the overall effect makes you accepted in the tribe. Biology is not decisive. Big hips, small frame, high voice, hairless face, sexual interest in men, more-than-male amounts of sympathy and readiness to cry: We all know women almost anywhere who vary on these dimensions, in this direction or that, but who are still part of the tribe."
Not to give you (much) of a bad time there Peter, but I really don't think you DID make their arguments.
You just rejected -- right out of the chute -- any "substance" at all to the concept of "gender identity". You explicitly said, "There's no scientific evidence for ... the existence of a gender identity; it's just an a Bonkers idea". How is that any "steelmanning" of the concept?
And you apparently didn't even bother thinking about my suggestion of "gender identity" being somewhat similar to the more or less tenable idea of "personal identity".
It's the stuff of nightmares it truly breaks my heart to see those children botched.
It's bad enough these surgeries exist for anyone,regardless of age.
But to allow it to be done to children, broken often abused children.
It makes me sick.
Agreed. Frankly, the conference was just too much for me. I could only attend in small chunks.
I tried to bring a bit of levity with my presentation (which should be release soon).
I look forward to seeing that Peter. For me I'm a little past the debates,'is there's such a thing as...' forums.
In amongst all the chit chat children are being harmed.
Guess I'm a little more like a sweary Billboard Chris than a H.Joyce or Stella.
Seeing this destroy so much in such a short time means I have ended up in a hard-line position, that this is mental illness,that I don't even believe adults can fully consent too and it needs stopped. Keep up the great work and love to you and your clan from sunny Scotland.
Doctor in Wyoming, suing state for abrogating his first Amendment rights, stating clearly how this "care" is not grounded the way all other medical care is, that is, based on well-structured studies:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKpAHP0GJlw&list=PLjMHBev3NsoUpc2Pzfk0n89cXWBqQltHY&index=1&t=857s
👍 You see that noted Substacker and gay columnist Andrew Sullivan has been thinking of voting for Trump as a result of the Levine case?
"Rachel Levine Must Resign: A case study in politics and ideology overruling science. With children as victims. .... I have to say that the news this week has made me reconsider voting for Kamala Harris."
https://andrewsullivan.substack.com/p/rachel-levine-must-resign-2d7
Though you may have to open his post in an incognito browser window since he's something of a grifter in putting it behind a paywall. But I have a PDF of it if anyone is interested.
I think I did hear about it. Many gay men and lesbians are disconnecting from the TQ. Now I'm documenting the many men who "identify" as women while serving time for murders of women. Eg, Marcelline Harvey (Harvey Marcel) who killed 3 women and is now in the women's section at Rikers in NYC. Most famous right now is Skylar DeLeone, (John Jacobson Jr) who is serving life in San Quentin for killing 2 men and a woman. Harris intervened specifically to make sure CA taxpayers fund his surgeries, now done. He continues to sue to get into the women's prison estate. One more from CA, Kier Anderson, who strangled his wife, Jennifer, 2 death as their 2 young daughters slept. I actually know enough about her to include her experience in my data. She'd be trans widow #66. The rate of violence of these men continues to be just over a third committed sexual assault and/or physical assault. One other detail I've learned is the case study Ray Blanchard and the other 3 Horsemen of the Sexpocalypse used to "prove" there might be a father-son genetic tendency evaporated. Sam Kaye, that son, has now detransitioned. He was "Maya" for 25 years and regrets it all. I'm locked out of X now because (I believe) Blanchard reported me when I gave him that information. Just as well.
Rather "bizarre" phenomenon at best, though I've periodically argued that it speaks to how we all develop our senses of self, and how the process can easily go off the rails and into crazy town. Something that ethologist Konrad Lorenz went into some detail on in his "Civilized Man's Eight Deadly Sins" -- highly recommended:
Lorenz: "The analysis of the organic system underlying the social behaviour of man is the most difficult and ambitious task that the scientist can set himself. .... Far from being an insurmountable obstacle to the analysis of an organic system, a pathological disorder is often the key to understanding it. We know of many cases in the history of physiology where a scientist became aware of an important organic system only after a pathological disturbance had caused its disease." [pg. 2]
In the same vein, you probably know of transwoman Anne Lawrence's "Shame and Narcissistic Rage in Autogynephilic Transsexualism":
https://annelawrence.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Lawrence-2008-shame-and-narcissistic-rage.pdf
Can't say that I've more than skimmed it, but one can sort of see how being disabused of one's delusions will often lead to that "rage". Interesting that "she", among some few other transwomen and transmen, has remained more or less sane in the face of that:
Wikipedia: "Lawrence is a transgender woman. She uses 'she' pronouns for herself. Lawrence is a proponent of Ray Blanchard's etiological typology of transgender women and personally self-identifies as autogynephilic. She has described having autogynephilic feelings and gender dysphoria from early childhood."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_Lawrence
Anne Lawrence, "she" is also the father of a couple of children and had his medical credentials taken away when other hospital staff observed him feeling up the genitals of a woman under anesthesia. She was Muslim and he said he was curious whether she still had intact clitoris and labia. There's always a seamy underside. He and Blanchard are desperately trying to prop up the diagnostic terms Blanchard made up. Thanks.
"seamy underside", indeed. But not quite sure exactly what your beef is with Blanchard, though he seems somewhat flaky himself, particularly in having been a member of WPATH some 20 years ago:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Blanchard
But his "typology" doesn't seem all that implausible or useless:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blanchard%27s_transsexualism_typology
However, I wonder if you watched any of Peter's interview of Mia, particularly their efforts to "steelman" the WPATH "arguments" from 9:00 to 15:50. Highly recommended if you haven't. But you don't seem particularly willing to consider defining gender as separate from sex, though they make a reasonable argument in favour of that dichotomy -- see my comment here for a few details:
https://boghossian.substack.com/p/the-truth-about-gender-mutilation/comment/73587788
Apropos of which, I was wondering about this comment of yours in another of Peter's posts:
Ute: "I don't know where you got the idea that I think sex is correctly also called 'gender.' .... "
https://boghossian.substack.com/p/billboard-chris-and-dr-colin-wright/comment/71148170
I'm NOT saying you "think sex is correctly also called 'gender' ...." I'm saying -- Mia and Peter are saying -- that "sex" and "gender" are typically DEFINED to refer to different aspects of human behaviour and physiology, although they're rather vague on the specifics. That's why they accept that, for example, males (sex) can have feminine (gender) aspects of their personalities.
But finally took a look at your Lime Soda film, though, at an hour and a half, I'm not likely to watch much of it. Anything you think might be of particular interest or relevance?
Watch the film. How very dismissive. You do not cease to amaze Steersman. No wonder some call you a sexist. You don't care to know what women went through, what men like Blanchard don't bother to find out when they are "transitioning" a man.
Yes, I completely agree with your confusion..."If they genuinely believe they are doing good, why won't they talk?"
They genuinely believe in they've earned the accolades, they genuinely believe they've earned their bonuses, they genuinely believe their patients genuinely believe... and that, to them is enough.
You are so lucky to have Mia speak with you. She is so good at explaining these issues! 🇨🇦😻
One of the more important interviews of yours I've watched.
It's good to know there are many like Mia out there, trying to turn this crazy train around.
Your position of "if they truly believe they are right, they should want to talk and debate", from an adult and logical standpoint makes sense. However, we are - on the whole - no longer there as a society and larger culture. We are now in a time where adults have codified and installed extreme conformation bias, as truth and "right". Our government, corporations, academia, healthcare systems/schools, and families operate and exist on extreme adolescents levels of confirmation bias.
It'd be an understatement to call it straight institutional delusion.
So, just as a child will tell you that their favorite stuffed animal is a real person and has thoughts, dreams and eats ice cream, they will not debate you when pushed on the falsity. At best they will either continue to create a narrative supporting the fantasy (lie) or completely shutdown in anger or dejection. Prior to that, they truly believed they were right and what they knew was 100% true.
You did a very good job steel manning the conversation. I'd hoped she would have closed the loop on her premise about the vulnerable being preyed on, during times of weakness - this is the argument of the children, who are perpetually vulnerable, weak and do not have the ability to make informed decisions - especially when those decisions are based on ideologies and agendas that are not grounded in long standing, proven truths, but the extreme conformation biases of opportunists who reap not only profits, but power, influence and control.
Unfortunately we, as a society, have moved away from the once predominant convention of protecting the most vulnerable, to exploiting them.
I was actually kicked off Medium in 2021 for this question in an article I wrote: "How would the “medical experts” who support “trans” activists’ claims—and who have a huge financial stake in the “Sex Reassignment Surgery Market”—which is expected to to hit $1.5 bn by 2026“—treat children with body integrity identity disorder (BIID), which numerous medical studies and “patients liken to gender identity disorder:...Patients’ anatomy is at odds with...internal sense of self, causing intense discomfort.”? Would they repeatedly validate little Jenny and Jamal’s ideas that their left leg was “wrong” and should be amputated?" https://irislee.substack.com/p/medium-where-we-tolerate-trans-intolerance
Yup. Hence one problem with "hate speech".
You're in good company with those who've fallen afoul of "The Tranish Inquisition" at Medium:
"Inauthentic Selves: The modern LGBTQ+ Movement Is Run By Philanthropic Astroturf And Based On Junk Science; How the LGBT community got suckered by Big Business and Big Philanthropy."
https://suedonym.substack.com/p/inauthentic-selves-the-modern-lgbtq
https://medium.com/@sue.donym1984/inauthentic-selves-the-modern-lgbtq-movement-is-run-by-philanthropic-astroturf-and-based-on-junk-d08eb6aa1a4b
And Australian feminist philosopher Holly Lawford-Smith likewise:
"Is it possible to change sex?"
https://web.archive.org/web/20190502004710/https://medium.com/@aytchellis/is-it-possible-to-change-sex-8d863ce7fca2
https://medium.com/@aytchellis/is-it-possible-to-change-sex-8d863ce7fca2
The top link to the Medium article has been taken down and is in error or under investigation. Shame.
The bottom one from Holly Lawford-Smith likewise. And from some 5 years ago. And according to my bookmarks, the top one from "Sue Donym" -- an amusing pun -- is from August of 2018. Both still "under investigation" -- pretty "thorough" if that's the case ...
Seem to recollect there are a couple of others at Medium in the same boat -- mostly from "TERFs" being critical of transloonie nutcases. Kathleen Stock for example:
"Doing better in arguments about sex, gender, and trans rights"
https://medium.com/@kathleenstock/doing-better-in-arguments-about-sex-and-gender-3bec3fc4bdb6
https://archive.ph/AYk5F
Fortunately I thought to archive some of them, though, sadly, not all. 🙂
But I seem to have evaded "The Tranish" Inquisition" there, so far any way::
"The Tranish Inquisition clearly shows the Orwellian nature of our electronic Agora":
https://archive.is/RJCqO
https://medium.com/@williamray/the-tranish-inquisition-clearly-shows-the-orwellian-nature-of-our-electronic-agora-42883c79a180
But you might have some interest in one of mine there that I haven't yet "ported" over to Substack -- in the works:
https://medium.com/@steersmann/reality-and-illusion-being-vs-identifying-as-77f9618b17c7
She needs to speak directly to adolescent girls.
The clarion Mia trying to talk with Dr. B. in adhd-philo-mode while jet-lagged made me laugh more than once. As usual, I am so grateful for everyone's work and voice on this (and other) topics. ❤️
Thank you.
We saw what doctors did to amasse wealth during covid .. this is their new cash cow.
You and Mia are to be commended for your "efforts to steelman WPATH arguments". Likewise for Mia's and Michael Shellenberger's WPATH Files report -- hope there are a bunch of "doctors" over there worried about getting their arses sued off.
However, I kinda think you both dropped the ball at a number points, at least in the "Genspect/WPATH steelman" section. For instance, at about 11:24 you both more or less accept that there are masculine women and feminine men, and that those individuals qualify as "gender non-conforming" [Mia @ 12:06]. From which one might reasonably suggest that you would probably accept a definition for gender as "sexually dimorphic personality traits and behaviours". You might note that the late great US Justice Anton Scalia more or less endorsed that view and its difference from sex:
Scalia: “The word 'gender' has acquired the new and useful connotation of cultural or attitudinal characteristics (as opposed to physical characteristics) distinctive to the sexes. That is to say, gender is to sex as feminine is to female and masculine is to male.”
https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep511/usrep511127/usrep511127.pdf
A very large part of the problem is that too many transactivists insist on using "male" and "female" as genders.
But, Peter, where I think you go off the rails is in this bit at about 13:50:
"okay they believe in the existence of a gender identity which I do not so they believe that there's something that resides within us all that is called a gender identity it's like a psychological sex or something a soul a gender Soul residing within you. There's no scientific evidence for this it's just an a Bonkers idea that someone came up with"
Not much evidence of any honest effort to "steelman" the concept, though I'll concede it's not easy to do so. But you might consider this analogy, my paraphrase of an article in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy on "personal identity":
SEP [paraphrased]: "Outside of philosophy, [gender identity’] usually refers to [sexually dimorphic personality traits] to which we feel a special sense of attachment or ownership. Someone’s [gender identity] in this sense consists of those [feminine and masculine personality traits] she takes to 'define her as a person' or 'make her the person she is', and which distinguish her from others."
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/identity-personal/#ProPerIde
Somewhat apropos of which, I just ran across this, an excerpt from transwoman Deirdre McCloskey's "Crossing, A Memoir"; "From Donald to Deirdre: How a Man Became a Woman — and What It Says About Identity":
https://www.deirdremccloskey.com/gender/dee.php
Kinda think "she" is madder than a hatter in some ways, but still some useful insights into "her" "feminine gender identity":
"You become a woman [a gender] by being treated as one of the tribe. Nothing else is essential. Being Dutch is being treated as Dutch. You can be a masculine woman, as by some stereotypes many women are, yet still be treated as one of the tribe. No piece of conventionally feminine behavior is essential if the overall effect makes you accepted in the tribe. Biology is not decisive. Big hips, small frame, high voice, hairless face, sexual interest in men, more-than-male amounts of sympathy and readiness to cry: We all know women almost anywhere who vary on these dimensions, in this direction or that, but who are still part of the tribe."
What a shame WPATH folks didn't come and speak to me. Then they could have made their arguments so I wouldn't have to...
Not to give you (much) of a bad time there Peter, but I really don't think you DID make their arguments.
You just rejected -- right out of the chute -- any "substance" at all to the concept of "gender identity". You explicitly said, "There's no scientific evidence for ... the existence of a gender identity; it's just an a Bonkers idea". How is that any "steelmanning" of the concept?
And you apparently didn't even bother thinking about my suggestion of "gender identity" being somewhat similar to the more or less tenable idea of "personal identity".