Caitlyn Jenner considering ‘de-transitioning’ ‘in the next couple years,’ author claims

a reply to: Freija

I didn't say anyone was intellectually deficient. I said they are ignorant of the facts of accepted and proven scientific and medical research and therapeutic protocols.

Ok. I was answering from my phone, making it a bit of a pain in the neck to copy, paste, and do the due diligence with the Lancet search tools. The following is data on transgender children. From what I have read/heard on the topic the jury is still out. There isn't a definitive answer on the topic--not by a long shot.

Within its clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of transsexual persons, the Endocrine Society suggests that for most children with GID, the condition will not persist into adolescence. Acknowledging that percentages differ between studies, the society maintains that "the large majority (75-80%) of prepubertal children with a diagnosis of GID in childhood do not turn out to be transsexual in adolescence." The society further elaborates its opinion on the matter: "Clinical experience suggests that GID can be reliably assessed only after the first signs of puberty."

My point is this: Let's say 75-80% of kids "outgrow" their gender identity questions as a RESULT of puberty. It would seem that any tampering with that process might change the trajectory of the child. Maybe the immediate impact of the drugs would be "reversible" but it's hard to predict what the tampering might do and what the act of tampering might change forever.

What is this "biology" you speak of? Chromosomes? Yeah, I have an XY combination or at least I think, it has never been tested but what the hell does something completely invisible in day-to-day life have to do with jack? Your inaccuracy claiming blocking puberty is irreversible clearly demonstrates you do not actually know what you're talking about so it is my right to consider your conclusions invalid.

Yes, chromosomes, I suppose. But there's a lot to being physically female or male beyond what resides in ones undergarments. When I say "biology" I'm using that is a short hand for the physiological differences between an anatomical male and an anatomical female. These, no doubt, are the result of the DNA, of course, but are far more than just "invisible" things. These are incontrovertible facts, like gravity, like entropy, that we, as mortals, cannot escape through any force of will.

The following is a link to the American Physiological Society with a quick rundown of all the differences between male and female beyond "the bits" so-to-speak:

www.the-aps.org...

What is it you disagree with? That I exist? Here, lemme pinch myself. Yup! I'm as real as the chair I'm sitting in and you can hardly disagree with my experience because well, my experience, my 61 years on this planet and my entire life seems to disagree with your opinion of what it is.

I disagree that it is in any way possible to truly, wholly, and completely swap ones physiological makeup from male to female (or vice versa) by force of will or surgeon's knife. While it is possible to live, socially, as a different gender, it is entirely impossible to fully become the opposite physiological sex. While socially, you may live very much as a woman, I simply cannot and will not agree that you are physiologically a female. It's nothing personal against you, as an individual, but it is beyond the realm of possibility for someone physically born as a male to physically experience being a natural-born-physiological-anatomical-woman. At best, transgender people can approximate the experience, but on the most fundamental level it is entirely physically impossible to be wholly and truly female in the physical sense. Again, I'm not discussing social identity, behavior, etc. That, is possible. And if that makes life a little more bearable, I certainly wouldn't beat anyone up over it... still, here, in this forum, because it's open for discussion, I must politely disagree that a man can ever become a woman in any hard-physical-reality sense.

And personally, I view the attempt to physically make the sex-swap a reality as futile at best and harmful at worst.

But I'm not going to go start a petition or try to close sex-assignment surgery clinics or bother anyone who's bent on giving it a go. (Unless they were close friend or family, in which case, I'd definitely express concern, say my peace and then give up/hope for the best for them.)

If you must know, I'm not even invested in the whole bathroom debacle as I'm 99.9% certain that people have been using the bathroom they identify with all along and cannot imagine how such laws would be enforced, anyway. It's not as though trans individuals popped into existence this year and suddenly must be dealt with through legislation. It's just more divisive identity politicking that hurts everyone.

And if you wish to base those opinions on something less than fact, that's perfectly your right to do so but don't expect me or anyone that knows what science and medicine has to say about this to do anything but criticize your conclusions.

I'd say the same. Science and medicine seem to point to some not-so-insignificant differences in the physiological make-up of males vs. females. If you have some links and study findings you would like to share to refute what I've put in this post, by all means, do... this is a forum for free-flowing ideas and information and such information could only enrich the process of exploration.

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: Freija

I didn't say anyone was intellectually deficient. I said they are ignorant

People on ATS think ignorant is a nice way of saying stupid. Because they're ignorant of the word (and probably stupid).

Ok. Really? Again, to say someone is ignorant is to suggest that person is lacking in understanding of the topic. In this case, apparently the ONLY acceptable way to have "understanding" is to either be supportive of transgender activities or actually BE transgender. To understand but disagree based on any other information is to be "ignorant"....Really? And where are all of these glorious and edifying facts about sex reassignment being such a good thing?

ignorant adjective ig·no·rant ˈig-n(ə-)rənt Simple Definition of ignorant : lacking knowledge or information : resulting from or showing a lack of knowledge Source: Merriam-Webster's Learner's Dictionary Examples: ignorant in a sentence Tip: Synonym guide Full Definition of ignorant 1 a : destitute of knowledge or education ; also : lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified b : resulting from or showing lack of knowledge or intelligence 2 : unaware, uninformed ignorantly adverb ignorantness noun

Other than that, I have to agree. The whole Kardashian clan appears to be batsh*t crazy with or without gender bending. Caitlyn may be a lot of things, but courageous and/or a role model = no. No. No. No. I saw her on Ellen speaking against gay marriage and nearly swallowed my tongue. I believe she even referred to herself as old fashioned. There's simply no consistency in that individual. The mental gymnastics required for that level of outright hypocrisy are breathtaking to behold. You can say what you will about the Pat Robertsons of the world, but at least that mean-spirited old canker is consistent. (Full disclosure, I wouldn't watch the 700 Club with borrowed eyeballs)

Certainly a better spokesperson would be in order.

I'm still a little irked that that hot mess was somehow declared woman of the year in any capacity. And I would be irked whether or not she was born with a penis. I can think of quite a few men, or possibly even camels or garden slugs, I'd give that award to before her...again, nothing to do with gender, just character.

a reply to: Annee

I doubt they're the norm, but there are those parents out there who do like to use their children to make political statements. Unfortunately, those are the sort that tend to find an otherwise unoccupied camera or bored reporter to tell their story.

They are out there, but not in abundance.

Hopefully most sane people can agree that tormenting a 5 year old into being excessively one gender or another against their wishes is pretty obnoxious by any standard. If little Johnny likes dolls better than trucks and you keep telling him to play with trucks or he's a sissy...you're just a terrible, terrible person. Same thing goes of Johnny like trucks and you keep stuffing him in a dress. Just no.

a reply to: mobiusmale

I only just about care enough to post that i couldn't care what Ms. Jenner does or doesn't do to her own body, or incidentally, who she would like to have sex with.

Aren't there slightly more pressing issues facing the world to talk about? How about a topic on a Kardashian arse or something?

Sheesh.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Agit8dChop
a reply to: mobiusmale

further proof this kind of practice is majority of the time resulting from mental illness.

It's not a mental illness.

Go look it up. I get tired of explaining.

60% of psychology studies can't be reproduced. There is NO WAY the "science" is in, sorry.

originally posted by: SisterDelirium

Ok. I was answering from my phone, making it a bit of a pain in the neck to copy, paste, and do the due diligence with the Lancet search tools. The following is data on transgender children. From what I have read/heard on the topic the jury is still out. There isn't a definitive answer on the topic--not by a long shot.

Within its clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of transsexual persons, the Endocrine Society suggests that for most children with GID, the condition will not persist into adolescence. Acknowledging that percentages differ between studies, the society maintains that "the large majority (75-80%) of prepubertal children with a diagnosis of GID in childhood do not turn out to be transsexual in adolescence." The society further elaborates its opinion on the matter: "Clinical experience suggests that GID can be reliably assessed only after the first signs of puberty."

The published Endocrine Society guidelines are six years old and new revisions are due out this summer still recommending puberty blockers at Tanner Stage 2 and HRT when it is deemed appropriate on an individual basis, removing the recommendation to wait until 16.

The 75-80% desist rate has also been proven to be false and will also be changed in the Endocrine Society guidelines to reflect that the research coming up with these numbers was based on bias by a "pray away the gay" research team who's clinic in Canada has now been shut down and run of town on a rail. Most clinicians say it is very rare for a child to desist or that they have never seen that happen in their practice. The End of the Desistance Myth

My point is this: Let's say 75-80% of kids "outgrow" their gender identity questions as a RESULT of puberty. It would seem that any tampering with that process might change the trajectory of the child. Maybe the immediate impact of the drugs would be "reversible" but it's hard to predict what the tampering might do and what the act of tampering might change forever.

Do you have a transgender child? If not, what business is it of yours to interfere with the decisions of the children, their parents and the team of doctors involved. Again, this concern of yours is fine as long as you don't think your opinions have any bearing on the decisions other families make. Knowing some of these kids and their parents, they're likely to tell you where to go and probably be less polite about it than I would.

Yes, chromosomes, I suppose. But there's a lot to being physically female or male beyond what resides in ones undergarments. When I say "biology" I'm using that is a short hand for the physiological differences between an anatomical male and an anatomical female. These, no doubt, are the result of the DNA, of course, but are far more than just "invisible" things. These are incontrovertible facts, like gravity, like entropy, that we, as mortals, cannot escape through any force of will.

Can you provide some practical example of this? It is pretty obvious you've never known someone that has changed sex. It is also possible that you have and had no idea you did? I have worked with and still work with people that have known me for 35 years with no idea of my medical history or that I'm anything but female. Incidentally, who I am as a person and my personality is one thing that has never changed and been constant my entire life and it makes no difference what I'm wearing or if I'm wearing anything at all.

The following is a link to the American Physiological Society with a quick rundown of all the differences between male and female beyond "the bits" so-to-speak:

www.the-aps.org...

Sigh. Apples and oranges because these comparisons do not compare what we are talking about.

I disagree that it is in any way possible to truly, wholly, and completely swap ones physiological makeup from male to female (or vice versa) by force of will or surgeon's knife. While it is possible to live, socially, as a different gender, it is entirely impossible to fully become the opposite physiological sex. While socially, you may live very much as a woman, I simply cannot and will not agree that you are physiologically a female.

Because I don't have a uterus and ovaries or are we still talking about other invisible things? Is my body completely physiologically female at the microscopic level? Of course not but for all practical purposes, you know like having sex and stuff, nobody has ever complained I wasn't female enough. You are splitting hairs that matter little in the real world.

It's nothing personal against you, as an individual, but it is beyond the realm of possibility for someone physically born as a male to physically experience being a natural-born-physiological-anatomical-woman. At best, transgender people can approximate the experience, but on the most fundamental level it is entirely physically impossible to be wholly and truly female in the physical sense. Again, I'm not discussing social identity, behavior, etc. That, is possible. And if that makes life a little more bearable, I certainly wouldn't beat anyone up over it... still, here, in this forum, because it's open for discussion, I must politely disagree that a man can ever become a woman in any hard-physical-reality sense.

And personally, I view the attempt to physically make the sex-swap a reality as futile at best and harmful at worst.

Whatever. I think people with misinformed opinions and attitudes do more than their own share of damage.

But I'm not going to go start a petition or try to close sex-assignment surgery clinics or bother anyone who's bent on giving it a go. (Unless they were close friend or family, in which case, I'd definitely express concern, say my peace and then give up/hope for the best for them

If you did have a close friend or family or any experience with this at all, you would feel differently. I've seen it a hundred times.

I'd say the same. Science and medicine seem to point to some not-so-insignificant differences in the physiological make-up of males vs. females. If you have some links and study findings you would like to share to refute what I've put in this post, by all means, do... this is a forum for free-flowing ideas and information and such information could only enrich the process of exploration.

Those that know me here or are familiar with my posting history know I have provided links upon links upon links and for right now, I honestly don't feel like being bothered. Do your own research but don't bother coming back with anything from Paul McHugh or Zucker and Bradley or a few of the others that will get shot down immediately.

a reply to: SisterDelirium

Ok. Really? Again, to say someone is ignorant is to suggest that person is lacking in understanding of the topic. In this case, apparently the ONLY acceptable way to have "understanding"

Nah. Try again. Read what you wrote, it doesn't make sense. Punctuation matters. Sad.

I had a another member call me a SJW. I was amused.

Go back through those links.

Go to bed.

Shh.

a reply to: Freija

The published Endocrine Society guidelines are six years old and new revisions are due out this summer still recommending puberty blockers at Tanner Stage 2 and HRT when it is deemed appropriate on an individual basis, removing the recommendation to wait until 16. The 75-80% desist rate has also been proven to be false and will also be changed in the Endocrine Society guidelines to reflect that the research coming up with these numbers was based on bias by a "pray away the gay" research team who's clinic in Canada has now been shut down and run of town on a rail. Most clinicians say it is very rare for a child to desist or that they have never seen that happen in their practice. The End of the Desistance Myth

It's so political at this point, I'm sure the tide will turn in favor of whatever is fashionable for the time. That said, HuffPo Queer Voices doesn't strike me as a particularly unbiased source of info. Beyond that, what is transgender? So much "gender" behavior links more with what society expects from a male or female rather than allowing that person to just be. What is an effeminate man or a masculine woman? Maybe some of these kids end up confused just because of unnecessary distinctions which have nothing to do with genitals in the first place.

Do you have a transgender child? If not, what business is it of yours to interfere with the decisions of the children, their parents and the team of doctors involved. Again, this concern of yours is fine as long as you don't think your opinions have any bearing on the decisions other families make. Knowing some of these kids and their parents, they're likely to tell you where to go and probably be less polite about it than I would.

Not that I know of at present. I've only met trans-gendered people in passing or as acquaintances. What business? Only that we're talking on this forum and I'm expressing a contrary opinion. The question, to me, seems to be at what age can a child make a decision as weighty as SRS? If the child can't make informed consent, then can the parents? If the parents consent, what are their motivations? These are legitimate ethical considerations. Individuals can "tell me where to go" because, I'm guessing, of strong emotions which somehow validate their position, because...emotions? I'm not interested in tantrum-throwing adults emoting all over the place. At what point can children consent to potentially life-altering treatment that is not life-saving (in some immediate sense)? 18 is the age of majority. Can a 10 year old opt our of puberty and have SRS? Do they really understand the implications at that age? Are actions on the part of the parent supportive or merely speculative? I can't imagine being locked into a decision I made at 10 about my future sexual health.

Can you provide some practical example of this? It is pretty obvious you've never known someone that has changed sex. It is also possible that you have and had no idea you did? I have worked with and still work with people that have known me for 35 years with no idea of my medical history or that I'm anything but female. Incidentally, who I am as a person and my personality is one thing that has never changed and been constant my entire life and it makes no difference what I'm wearing or if I'm wearing anything at all.

Socially, I have no doubt you act/live/interact as a female, but you're not female in the same way that I am or that my daughter is. It's just not the same life journey or experience. Beyond that, as things progress and perhaps more people have SRS, at what point do straight people looking to date/marry have the right to know the history? This obviously changes reproductive plans and may seriously alter the relationship. At what point does a transgendered person need to disclose the information to a potential mate? Yes, of course, I know some "cis" females can't have children...but that's not the norm. At want point does social experience reach a crossroads with physical reality?

Because I don't have a uterus and ovaries or are we still talking about other invisible things? Is my body completely physiologically female at the microscopic level? Of course not but for all practical purposes, you know like having sex and stuff, nobody has ever complained I wasn't female enough. You are splitting hairs that matter little in the real world.

If you don't have a uterus, ovaries, various other physiological aspects, etc. then you're not, physiologically, a female. And I don't want to hear about people who've had hysterectomies, because that's simply not the same. Being a convincing substitute is not the same thing. Again, for the purposes of marriage and family, at what point does a trans-person need to disclose their history as the other biological sex? Identity be damned, this might matter to someone who wants their own biological children or simply does not what to be a part of the LGBT experience. How about competitive sports, too? Men and women differ there, as well. Is it fair for a former man to compete against "cis" females?

Whatever. I think people with misinformed opinions and attitudes do more than their own share of damage.

Anyone who disagrees with anything LGBT right now is a misinformed, ignorant bigot, right? You can like it or not, but the physical differences between males and females are a reality. I would never and have never harassed anyone who was LGBT. I still don't agree with the lifestyle and don't think people can swap their sex. This isn't the same as intending anyone harm or wanting to stop them from doing whatever they're doing or even passing judgement about what sort of people they are overall or planning to ruin their businesses, etc. Again, the only person I can control is me....you, you. I'm also not a fan of tattoos, body-modification, BDSM, base jumping, atheism, housing cetaceans in amusement parks, reality TV, drug use, rodeos, raves, televangelists, smoking or alcohol. For the purpose of discussion, this is simply a matter of "here's my opinion based on my experience and x info"...take it, leave it, I'm not changing it to make anyone feel better or appear to be "on the right side of history" as people like to say these days.

If you did have a close friend or family or any experience with this at all, you would feel differently. I've seen it a hundred times.

Highly doubtful. I would never disown anyone or be cruel, but enthusiastically supporting SRS resides so far out of my mindset as to be imagining life on Mars. Agree to disagree and shut up, I would do. Drive them to the clinic, I would not.

Those that know me here or are familiar with my posting history know I have provided links upon links upon links and for right now, I honestly don't feel like being bothered. Do your own research but don't bother coming back with anything from Paul McHugh or Zucker and Bradley or a few of the others that will get shot down immediately.

Well, agree to disagree. I'm not going to dig extensively, because there's simply no escaping reality. We may not have asked for a " binary" world, but for the purpose of procreation and anatomical function, that's what we live in for now. Human technology is getting increasingly inventive about it, so I guess anything is possible.

a reply to: Domo1

Why is it necessary to agree with the LGBT crowd to avoid being "ignorant"? What is so terribly enlightened about applauding men for trying so hard to be women? I understand that imitation is supposed to be the sincerest form of flattery, but imitation is still imitation.

Why isn't it enough to simply coexist, do business with each other as coworkers, and carry on with life? Why must LGBT be rubber stamped by everyone as a great and wonderful distinction? Not everyone agrees. So what? It's not ignorant or uninformed or backward to simply say a certain behavior pattern/lifestyle doesn't really mesh with your personal outlook on life.

It's not a hate crime to disagree.

a reply to: Domo1

And I'm not going to "Shh" just because some keyboard jockey told me to as a result of his superior thought processes and grammar.

a reply to: mobiusmale

Its not uncommon for people who undergo surgical intervention to address gender or physical dysphoria to have a shock reaction after the fact.

Most people overcome this though.

The percentage of people who 'de-transition' after surgical intervention is somewhere less than 2% globally.

Most people though do not have the same level of exposure that Caitlynn has had both before and after transition. Also there has been a lot of negativity directed at Jenner from within the trans gendered community which probably hasn't helped.

Caitlynn has been living as a man for most of her life (She's approaching 70 at this point) and her patterns of behaviour and her identity is bound to have been formed and re enforced through that. Plus You have to understand that as a 66 year old her ideas of gender are probably outdated in a modern context and since transitioning those ideas have been challenged again and again, as she has been exposed to more view points from other trans gendered people.

So i guess its understandable that she might have some second thoughts.

However I completely agree that this topic has no place being discusses on ATS. Especially since she has officially denied the claim through her agent.

a reply to: mobiusmale

maybe she did this transgender thing for the extra $ in case she was found guilty in the death of the person killed in the car accident - Needed the money to settle the case... Or if she was found guilty she would be sent to a women's prison. Either way she's a disgusting fake like the rest of his family

a reply to: SisterDelirium

Don't Shh. Keep talking! You're entitled to your opinions!

I enjoy people I don't agree with!

This is why I have a crush on Annee.

originally posted by: redshoes
a reply to: mobiusmale

However I completely agree that this topic has no place being discusses on ATS. Especially since she has officially denied the claim through her agent.

Well, I think the topic in general can/should be discussed on ATS, or anywhere else...whether or not her agent has issued a denial of the report.

You say that only 2% of people who change sexes de-transition. I suppose that is positive in the sense that the vast majority of people who have gone through this process feel they made the right decision.

However, as it seems we are sliding the decision point ever earlier in life...pre-puberty, or even to six years old (?)...I have to wonder how much this statistic may change in the coming years.

As just about a minor consequence of the transgender discussion, the bathroom issue has become a hot topic of late - and it seems that President Obama, the Department of Education and the Justice Department are all weighing in today, with some kind of "order" to allow people to use whatever washroom or locker room they choose to, based on their gender identification (as opposed to their biological condition).

This is all causing a lot of fuss in the media and elsewhere.

My question, posed to the more learned on this subject than I here...just how many people are we talking about here in America. What percentage of the people born as one sex, are walking around identifying themselves as the other sex, and wanting to use that sex's facilities?

I ask this question sort of in the same vein as I am surprised at how strict the rules are now at schools (and other places) when it comes to peanut products. Growing up, I did not know a single person who was allergic to peanuts...but apparently nowadays this is a widespread problem.

Has the transgender issue always been so prevalent (in terms of the raw numbers of people with this confliction), or has something changed over the last 10-30 years?

originally posted by: mobiusmale
Jenner became the poster boy/girl of the transgender experience (if that is the right word). It looks as though he/she may become the poster person for why minor children (or their parents) should not be encouraged or pushed to go all the way over to the other side, if they are ...in some current time frame...finding themselves identifying with the gender opposite.

Halperin said while doing research for his book “Kardashian Dynasty: The Controversial Rise of America’s Royal Family,” several sources indicated Jenner is unhappy. “One source confirmed to me Caitlyn has made whispers of ‘sex change regret,’ hinting she might go back to being Bruce Jenner,” Halperin told the entertainment website.

Sex change regret...I wonder what percentage of people, who go through the full medical procedure, have serious misgivings after the fact.

The biographer said Jenner, 66, is allegedly interested in transitioning back for relationship reasons. “She’s still into women and wants to meet the right one,” Halperin stated.

This is a little mind warping...but maybe I have just not caught up to the overall anything goes modern mindset. He was a man who was attracted to women, but wanted to be one himself. So he changed sexes, but (now) she does not want to be with women as a woman...so she (currently) is transgender personally but does not want to be in a same-sex relationship. So, she is thinking about going back to being a man.

“She’s thrilled she has raised awareness about how transgender people have long been discriminated against but I think there’s a chance she’ll de-transition in the next couple years,” the writer said. “I don’t think it would surprise anybody in her inner circle. It has been much harder than she anticipated. My heart goes out to her and I know her true friends will be there to support her on whatever path she chooses.”

Jenner He Said, She Said

It must be hellish to be living in such a state of constant confusion as to who/what you are comfortable being...

If true I think it goes to show this type of behavior likely stems from mental disorder.

there's just no refunds on some deals

a reply to: SisterDelirium

Disagreement obviously does not imply ignorance, nor should it.

However we are talking here about a known condition that has been examined and explored by professionals who have published tonnes of research on the matter. It may seem 'wrong' or difficult to understand the condition and how it manifests and the effects of allowing it to go untreated, however, if you haven't read the research, can't support your argument with facts, (given that what we are talking about here is a fact of medical SCIENCE) then yes, I think that falls into the definition of 'ignorance'.

If you don't trust the medical establishment then you can make your own choices on your medical care. You have that right. But I'm afraid that having an opinion that is not informed does not give you the right to declare that accepted and approved medical practices are wrong for other people.

a reply to: redshoes

It may very well be a condition, but it's far from settled "science" in terms of what can or should be done about it. Beyond that, as this deals with minds and wills, the whole question rests at the outer limits of what science can accurately answer.

I find it really amusing that there's such an outcry for "facts" and "evidenced based treatment" regarding men who really want the Blue Fairy of modern medicine to make them a "real girl". As if scientists, by means of paper and ink, can bend reality to accommodate people's desires.

An anatomical male will never be an anatomical female. Ever. When they die and their bones are dug out of the earth hundreds of years later, their bones will identify them as physically male, whatever their soft parts were altered to be or social experience was.

I'm not saying this experience isn't distressing or that it is impossible to LIVE ( socially ) as a female. It's just not possible to fully become a true, physical female when one has been born male. A trans woman will never know the full extent of what it means to be born a "cis" woman. I'm sure that's frustrating for someone who truly believes they are female, but that doesn't make it any less true.

originally posted by: SisterDelirium

An anatomical male will never be an anatomical female. Ever. When they die and their bones are dug out of the earth hundreds of years later, their bones will identify them as physically male, whatever their soft parts were altered to be or social experience was.

I'm not saying this experience isn't distressing or that it is impossible to LIVE ( socially ) as a female. It's just not possible to fully become a true, physical female when one has been born male. A trans woman will never know the full extent of what it means to be born a "cis" woman. I'm sure that's frustrating for someone who truly believes they are female, but that doesn't make it any less true.

So what? Why is it so important that a transgender female has male chromosomes? So what if their bones say they are a certain biological sex? Why is it so important if a trans woman won't ever know the full extent of what it means to be born a cis-gender female (whatever that even means).

So what is your point? That because they will still have male chromosomes, they shouldn't bother living the life as the gender they identify with? What good will it do them to live a life that is not true to their identity? What good will it do them to be miserable in the bodies they feel have betrayed them? That might make you feel better, but it won't make them feel better. Why do you want them to be miserable their whole lives in bodies that don't match at all with their identities. At least with sexual reassignment surgery, they can look down and not see the penis that feels so foreign to them. If that makes them a happier person, what difference does it make that they still have male chromosomes?

And by the way, if you saw a naked transgender female whose transition was complete and very successful, you would never, ever, ever know that she was born a male without making her submit a chromosome test. And that transgender female would say she was close enough to being a real female to have made it worth the surgeries, hormones etc. And that's all that really matters here.