The kind of “girl” that a boy who identifies as a girl thinks he is

[MyAmpleSheep]

How do people who celebrate the transitioning of five year old children know that the kind of girl a boy who identities as a “girl” identifies as is the same kind of girl that a girl who identifies as a “girl” is?

Other than than from what he sees girls doing, how can a boy “know” what being a girl is, to be sure he is one?

is it posited that there is an innate sense of boy:girl that exists outside of the experience of seeing and being the presence of others?

If a child was “raised by wolves”, could they be trans? If that child had a male body and reached the age of 20 never having seen or met or known of the existence of women is it possible for them to grow up with dysphoria? When eventually discovering the other sex would they suddenly recognize “they had been born in the wrong body”?

It's like on Reddit when someone said 'is neovagina same as regular vagina' (to actually own, not fuck), and a bunch of people saying it's the same. Like how tf would you know it is? Or even assume it would be?!

This is the kind of twisted logic that obfuscates isn't it.

Its not the same and can never be the same because a vagina develops naturally as part of a female body.

A neo vagina is surgically constructed in a male body from other tissue originating in that male body.

They are not the same.

Even if they were indistinguishable in look, smell, taste and function, they would not be 'the same'in any normal understanding of what 'the same' means - because they are a surgical add on to a male body.

When words mean whatever you say they mean, all bets are off.

If a boy identifying as a girl is not doing so because he has a girl's body (he hasn't), and also not identifying with the girls he sees on the basis of their appearance and behaviour, then what is he identifying with?. You can't just "identify" in a vacuum.

If what he feels is a dislike of or alienation from some of his body parts, then why is it different from any other pathological rejection of body parts?

If that isn't what he feels, but it's also "not about stereotypes", then what exactly is he rejecting when he says he isn't a boy?

No, I can't prove that no sheep can fly until I throw the last one off a cliff either.

What about women with CAIS? Are they allowed to talk about their vaginas? Or is that not allowed either?

Maybe not, but it doesn't need to be conscious. Children and adults pick up on micro expressions and body language.

When survival depends on keeping in favour with an adult, you can train a pre-verbal child to behave how you want, and that training may not even be conscious in the adult.

Experts like who? WPATH? Harry Benjamin, who had weird ideas about testicles and had one tied off because he believed it would give him more energy?

Please don't insult our intelligence.

?

Which part of develops naturally as part of the human body did you miss?

Which doesn't happen in women with CAIS. They typically have what's known as a "blind vagina" , that looks normal on the outside but actually has developed and requires surgical intervention if they want to be able to have penetrative sex.

This is not necessarily true. The vagina, because it is true vaginal tissue and not a 'neo-vagina', can often be dilated sufficiently for penetration.

What neurological structures are associated with gender identity?

Ok so if they're one of the people whose vagina only requires dilation they are allowed to talk about their vagina; but if they require surgical intervention it's not allowed ? Just trying to understand the rules..

It does develop "naturally". It may not develop "properly".

They are men, by the by.

You are the only person arguing whether people with DSDs can talk about their genitals.
How about you address OP's question: is it posited that there is an innate sense of boy:girl that exists outside of the experience of seeing and being the presence of others?

Women with CAIS are men?

Yes. They are XY. And that Y chromosome has effects outside of their androgens. In spite of the androgen insensitivity, they have greater height, longer limbs and a weaker immune system than they would have of they were a woman, all as a result of the Y chromosome.

Your only other way of defining them as women will be to refer to body parts that not all women have and a gender stereotype that not all women conform to.

OP has asked questions. @Lacksie and others are entitled to come on the thread to address them. It would, of course, be helpful if they did actually address OPs questions rather than diverging into DSDs - a common TRA tactic when the questions about gender identity get too difficult.

This is really upsetting and really not ok.

I know twitter/x is a cesspit, but there's someone there who posts under 'readsomepiagetplease' who has written a whole series of papers explaining how developmental psychology, a discipline with a proud empirical, experimental tradition, shows that talk of 'trans children' is nonsensical. Have a look.

So it's going to be another DSD thread then. What a shame.

Thank you.

Yes your comment is fair: the reason I'm not responding to OPs questions is because I spent an entire other thread trying to do so/ explain what gender incongruence is, and it was entirely futile. I shouldn't be here at all tbf but someone tagged me, and then the phrase about obscuring words and all bets being off if you call a surgically created vagina a vagina set me off. But it's fair to say it was an unhelpful derail,

It won't- I'll leave it there.