I think it would be more productive to show how the author is incorrect instead of declaring his statement "a disgustingly transphobic opinion".

The DSM has always been political, though lately it's gotten worse. For the DSM-5, task force members were required to sign NDAs[1] Trans activists also tried (unsuccessfully) to get Dr. Kenneth Zucker & Dr. Ray Blanchard kicked off the task force.[2]

Due to the NDAs, we'll probably never know the full extent to which political pressure shaped the DSM-5.

1. https://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/18/health/18psych.html?pagew...

2. https://web.archive.org/web/20081024203348/http://www.gaycit...

> "We shouldn't keep shitty and harmful labels on people who are deeply struggling with their identity."

But the same argument could equally be applied to a group with a dysphoria that everybody loves to mock: furries. How would you make your statement work for a specific dysphoria and not every other dysphorias?

(Maybe it should work for every dysphoria? I'd be okay with that since it's a logically consistent viewpoint at least.)

But doesn’t there exist a plausible biological pathway for transsexuals to develop a brain structure similar to the opposite sex whereas no similar plausible biological basis can be proposed for having developed the brain of a fictional anthropomorphic animal?

I'm not sure how that's relevant. Setting aside that being plausible doesn't mean it's true, would you be less supportive of gender dysphoria if there were no plausible biological explanation for it? Alternatively, if there were a plausible biological pathway for people having species dysphoria, would you be more supportive of furries?

Isn't "brain structure [characteristic of a] sex" basically pseudoscience? We're rocking different hormone mixtures and maybe slightly different average skull sizes, but I'm under the impression that the later at least doesn't manifest in any measurable innate cognitive differences between males and females. That stuff went out the window with phrenology I think.

If you look at MRIs of human brains, you can determine the sex with pretty high accuracy. Researchers have even trained machine learning algorithms to differentiate with >90% accuracy.[1]

Researchers have tried this on transgender brains and come up with mostly noise. When they do find differences, it appears that the brains of trans-women are unlike cis-women. Ditto for trans-men.[2]

I am very confident that there is a ton of publication bias in any transgender research. If you publish a politically incorrect result, you risk your career.

1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30430711

2. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337026445_Predictiv...

> How would you make your statement work for a specific dysphoria and not every other dysphorias?

You seem to be implying that making the statement not work for other dysphorias would be desirable; what caused you to reach that conclusion?

I'm thinking of body integrity dysphoria: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_integrity_dysphoria

On one hand, viewed through the lens of cold logic, it's no different from reassignment surgery and therefore their desire to modify their bodies is valid. On the other, it's difficult to honestly say that they would not be severely harming themselves by doing so.