What are these studies? The metadata studies I've heard about say otherwise. That is, some studies say one thing, other studies say the opposite, and so it's impossible to really conclude anything by choosing a subset of the literature.
They talk about male babies who were sexually reassigned at birth and given female hormones. However many of them decided to reidentify as males later on life, showing that even with female hormones and a female upbringing, it was not enough to make them adopt a female gender identity.
I wouldn't say this is conclusive evidence. But I think it's enough to show that people should keep an open mind about this subject.
Can you show me some of these studies? I just pointed out the problematic lack of citations in the article and your dismissive comment alone isn't going to change my mind. If there's solid evidence one way or the other, I'd be genuinely interested to see it.
And even if they do happen to agree with actual good science, the few studies presented here still don't "explain" anything and this Live Science post is decidedly shonky science reporting (and calling it that is frankly generous).
