Thanks hangingaround I am on my phone, so struggling to do quotations. Bronner clearly confuses symptoms and side effects in that statement.
Hormones have been used in contraceptives, HRT, preventing miscarriage (DES - disastrous results) - none of these trigger gender dysphoria or make one more or less a women. One simply is a woman if one is born female. All of these hormonal treatments were/are for biological issues around being female - preventing pregnancy, easing the symptoms of menopause, preventing miscarriage (progesterone is used now).
I guess the question is whether you see hormonal treatments for gender dysphoria as simply an extension of this, to change the biological processes completely. (Not possible as adults will always have the physical markers of sex, so you have the question of transing children - highly ethically dubious)
Or whether you see some hormonal interventions (such as to prevent/promote pregnancy) as justified, but not others, depending on a range of factors (a woman’s decision to use hormonal contraception does not impinge on anyone’s same sex space, for example).
Or whether you take the view that hormonal treatments are about (mostly male) power and control over women and financial gain for the pharmaceutical industry, and do damage to the environment and eco-system of the planet?
That could all be clearer, I know, I am trying to work out my own thoughts on this.