The entirety of trans ideology comes down to what the words boy/girl/man/woman actually mean.
I know society doesn't have a great track record for accepting people who differ from social norms, but I think consensus can be reached that if boys want to play with dolls and wear
dresses, then they shouldn't be demonised for doing so. Similarly, girls should not be forced to do those things. They shouldn't be encouraged to be "non-conforming" but they shouldn't be ostracized if they don't conform.
None of that, however, changes what the words boy/girl
mean. They refer to the biological characteristics the child is born with.
A boy who presents as feminine is still a boy, just as a girl who presents as masculine is still a girl - simply because the words boy/girl are used to refer to people's bodies. That's just how language
works.
That some people might not feel comfortable in their bodies is not a new phenomenon. There can be a variety of reasons why this is the case, childhood trauma being a primary one.
This sense of dysphoria is a psychological issue and should be treated as such. People who
have dysphoria should not be lied to and told they are really the opposite sex i.e. a boy should not be told he is a girl because that is not how the words are used.
Yes, personal identity can be a complex issue but the words boy/girl/man/woman are not that complex. They refer
to the biological sex of a person.
A person's identity is more complex than their body parts but if a person identifies as the opposite sex, it's simply a misunderstanding of how the words are used.
The likelihood is that they don't identify as the opposite sex, they just don't
feel comfortable with the sex they were born as - again, this can be for a variety of reasons.
Since they cannot change sex, their psychological discomfort should be treated.
But, you seem to have confused yourself again trying to follow the lines of reasoning.
The spork analogy speaks to your claim that ambiguous cases "break my theory".
My argument is that there are unambiguous cases of male/female
@ursa_solar@Cupcakedancer1@TheBossEyedOne@43752083470g@GCPaulM and therefore man/woman. The unambiguous cases don't break this theory in the same way, analogously, the existence of sporks doesn't "break the theory" that there are implements unambiguously referred to as forms and others unambiguously referred to as spoons.
So, people are assigned a sex at birth. Why are some people assigned male while others are assigned female? On what basis would a medical professional assume the sex of the child?
The reason is that certain biological characteristics are given the name male, while certain other biological characteristics are given the name female. A person who objectively has the given characteristics is called either male or female.
Males and females go through a
process of aging and development. Young females are referred to using the word "girl" while adult female persons are referred to using the word "woman".
People "assigned female at birth" have the biological characteristics of a female and are girls who will grow up to be women.