I won't be sending you money to comment on your other transphobic post, so I'm replying here.

To your comment, "Again, there's no empirical test for trans. It's based on self-reports." My reply is,

Firstly, that’s not a grammatical sentence. Are you so dismissive you refuse to give your adjective a noun so it can exist within sense?

Secondly, there’s no empirical test for gender at all. Obviously. That's really the whole point. The title of your post is either disingenuous or evidence of your confusion since no one is arguing that anyone is born trans because no one is born into a gender—it's imposed culturally. No one is born an asshole either; one becomes an asshole over time within the construct of social mores, norms, and ethics.

Thirdly, there’s no empirical definition for biological sex. I can tell that you didn’t follow the link and still don’t know what you’re talking about. It sounds like you don’t know what you don’t know and wouldn’t even be able to accurately frame the argument of people who believe being trans is a legitimate identity. That’s when one can realize a person is simply ideological and desiring so badly to have a public opinion over which other people will fondle and swoon. You can’t effectively debate something when you don’t understand the argument you’re debating.

The gender ideology is the original one that says if you have a penis you're a boy who will grow up to act like Y and if you have a vagina, you're a girl and you'll grow up to act like X. What else do you think that is if not a gender ideology? You think it's just nature for men to wear pants and women to wear dresses?