part two of my response:

What I think is the biggest problem when it comes to these studies, is that they seem to imply that having gender identity is related to gender dysphoria.

Gender dysphoria absolutely does have to do with having a gender identity, it seems likely that dysphoria is caused by incongruence between gender identity and assigned sex (which even if we lived in a utopia where no sex was assigned, some trans people would still experience dysphoria).

I think what you mean to say is that a trans gender identity does not require dysphoria to be present to be valid, which is of course true. The brain studies don't contradict this, at all, and are entirely consistent with this understanding of trans identity.

These studies are the basis of transmedicalism. Many ignore the fact that there are trans people who lack gender dysphoria, they also do not acknowledge the conditions that are problematic for their theories like nonbinary or genderfluid people because they ultimately do not have an answer for those, even though many of them have gender dysphoria as strong as binary trans people do.

Transmedicalists wish to deny someone like Jacob Tobia is a trans person, and I think that's silly and obviously false. I don't know why we're talking about this - I don't endorse transmedicalism, neither do you - we agree, can we move on now?

Conversion therapy is wrong, it’s very easy to prove why it is wrong without promoting lies about how gender identity works that invalidate or misrepresent the experiences of nonbinary and genderfluid people, who very much do share the same experiences in terms of dysphoria and euphoria as any binary trans people.

A lie is a falsehood with the intent to deceive, what I have shared is peer reviewed research and reproducible findings about brain sex which are not only false but represent the best current body of evidence to understanding how our brains relate to unconscious sex and gender identity. The fact that this evidence accords with studies that find conversion therapy is clinically ineffective only furthers the legitimacy of the working theory that gender identity (including genderfluid and nonbinary identities) is fixed and biological.

To characterize what I have said as a lie is honestly confusing to me, and again it feels like you aren't responding to what I wrote, and maybe you are unfamiliar with the actual research and evidence?

Saying that gender is locked in that is doing exactly that. Maybe instead of overthinking to the extreme and finding a reason based on biological existentialism for why conversion therapy is bad and wrong we should just point out the fact that one cannot change who someone is through coercion and abuse. It’s that simple.

Again, people engage in conversion therapy in earnest and not under coercion. Many forms of conversion therapy are essentially talk therapy to help patients try to be more comfortable with their assigned sex/gender.

Your claim that conversion therapy can be dismissed off-hand because it's coercive and abusive would not address cases where conversion therapy is not coercive or abusive, where it is engaged with earnest consent and a desire by a patient to alleviate gender dysphoria.

Like a genderfluid person who may feel strong dysphoria towards her penis, yet after a shift he may feel perfectly comfortable with it, or even possibly miss it when it is gone. Such situations don’t just “not fit” they challenge the merit of it altogether. These situations really need to be taken seriously, not brushed aside for acceptance, but actually looked at to re-evaluate the conclusions that were drawn otherwise.

Nobody is suggesting we brush them aside, and at this point I take offense that you mis-characterize what I have written as dismissive, debunking, or invalidating genderfluid and non-binary people. I engage in this discussion assuming that the conversation is grounded in good-faith on both sides, and I am starting to feel I can no longer carry on a conversation with you based on your responses.

I admit there were ways I should have worded things better to avoid miscommunication, so this is not entirely your fault, but I have tried to be patient and carefully parse what you have written and it feels like you are not offering me the same treatment at this point.

I do appreciate your willingness to engage with me, I think a lot of people feel communication with me is tedious and exhausting - it is a lot to read and think about, and these are not easy topics to discuss for lots of reasons, including that they impact us personally and we have stake in the outcomes.