The study cited by the author doesn't seem to support the claim that "the brains of trans people are unique" at all: https://t.co/g23401h7Di

Perhaps the author was hoping no one would read the article and think about what it actually shows.

— James N. Anderson (@proginosko) May 2, 2023

"Unique" implies that 'trans' brains have some properties distinct from 'male' and 'female' brains. But the study shows no such thing.

Look at Figure 1. 'Trans' brains look to be well within normal distribution of 'male' brains, but skew closer to 'female' brains.

— James N. Anderson (@proginosko) May 2, 2023

That suggests there may well be some neurological basis for gender dysphoria. But I don't see any support at all for the "uniqueness" of "trans brains". Do you?

— James N. Anderson (@proginosko) May 2, 2023

That's part of it, but I also think that quoted statement is a tendentious interpretation of the data (which is already limited by the small sample size). Clearly there's overlap between "male brains" and "female brains" according to the metric used (again, see Figure 1).

— James N. Anderson (@proginosko) May 2, 2023

So why say "the brains of trans women ranged between cis men and cis women" rather than, say, "the brains of trans women were within the normal range for cis men but skewed toward the normal range for cis women"? Again, nothing "unique" to see here.

— James N. Anderson (@proginosko) May 2, 2023

We also need to admit that the entire study is framed by certain assumptions about the meaningfulness of 'cis' and 'trans' categories. It could be reframed without those categories, referring only to people who experience gender dysphoria.

— James N. Anderson (@proginosko) May 2, 2023