Small point of clarification–the quote I provided was produced by the American Psychological Association. It did not originate with the DSM-V (although the DSM-V probably has a very similar definition).
As for your question, I see your point. I suppose the assertion that “sex is assigned at birth” reflects the fact that prenatal sex discernment is associated with a higher error rate than is visual inspection of the genitalia at birth. But that’s just speculation on my part.
That can’t be known in the midst of the first few moments of life or by prenatal ultrasound.
Design of the neurological structures that may be concomitant with other features doesn’t seem like it would happen in the moments of or around the point of birth either.
Not trying to belabor a point, it just sounded very bureaucratic in that definition.
I’m not sure if this helps. This is from GLAAD, defining sex and gender.
Sex
The classification of people as male or female. At birth infants are assigned a sex, usually based on the appearance of their external anatomy. (This is what is written on the birth certificate.) However, a person’s sex is actually a combination of bodily characteristics including: chromosomes, hormones, internal and external reproductive organs, and secondary sex characteristics.
Gender Identity
One’s internal, deeply held sense of one’s gender. For transgender people, their own internal gender identity does not match the sex they were assigned at birth. Most people have a gender identity of man or woman (or boy or girl). For some people, their gender identity does not fit neatly into one of those two choices. Unlike gender expression (see below) gender identity is not visible to others.
Oh, OK. I do tend to use the words synonymously when they aren’t actually synonyms. I’m generally pretty brusque with the whole subject and don’t usually get too close to the entrance of the gender rabbit hole.
This morning I was thinking about a guy I worked with who was black (which is to say that his mother and ostensible father were black) but looked for all the world like a white guy. He had seething rage over listening at work to overt racism (which assumed he was white) and from a childhood spent with his fists up, defending himself as a hated other in a black neighborhood.
I assume the TG thing must be like that. In the “college kids say the darnedest things” vid upthread I thought “what if I said I was Chinese?” was an interesting question. Obviously they took it past what is reasonable (“what if I said I was 7?”) but the early parts were interesting to me. What if I said I was black, but I don’t look it? What if I say I’m me, but was born with male genitalia?
Another thing on my mind tonight is that I was just watching a video of Prince’s When Doves Cry and I thought, as I always do when I see him, about the women I’ve been listening to talk about how hot he is (now was) from as far back as I can remember, and how little I can relate. While I’ve loved his music and showmanship, I find him gender-indistinct, both in terms of his body, which looks female to me, and his manner and dress. He is therefore not of interest to me sexually. Same thing Johnny Depp - I just don’t see the attraction, though I can see that he’s pretty.
Like PP, I would score absolute pink on the gender scale. I am attracted to pure blue. Life is funny and not always linear, so why are we surprised by people who feel that they are not best represented by their bodies? What is inherently better or more natural about my preference for very masculine men, or theirs for someone like me?
Yeah. I was saying that I think North Carolina’s law about restrooms is too narrow, in part because I think chromosomes, hormones, secondary sex characteristics are all a big part of what makes us male or female, even though they aren’t readily observable at birth.
That isn’t even approaching the gender identity debate where we’re talking about something that is maybe impossible to “see” other than through self-report, at least with our current understanding.
The neural aspects of it remind me of a woman I used to work for doing concrete. She is lesbian, has pretty decent feminine features, but for all intents and purposes was totally a guy. The outstanding thing to me about her was the dissonance that pervaded her entire being. Like she really was a guy (and not just some fruity little twink like guy, a concrete busting, tail chasing guy) stuck in a female body.
She was even pretty good at math and had the extra long ring finger ratio thing going on.
I wonder whether there will be a shift away from very butch lesbian and very femme gay man to TG versions of the same person. Because I know people who, let’s face it, are not female the way I am or male the way Hockey is. I wonder if they’ve been trapped in gendered bodies and will now reject that frame for themselves.
We live in interesting times, that’s for sure.
Wow! You’ve met Temple Grandin? She’s pretty amazing.
Really though- I think that the surgical alteration is a big hang up for people and can be seen as deceptive. I really can’t question other peoples motives or self perception though. Neither of mine are usually very good or very clear most of the time, and that tints the lense which I view other through. For me it isn’t about trendy feel good stuff, its about knowing that I don’t always see things for what they are.
It’s your question, not mine. Thus, the onus is on you to define your terms. So if you really want me to answer it, you’ll clarify what you mean by that word.
On the other hand: If, after multiple requests, you continue to decline to do something so simple as explain what you mean with respect to a word you’re using, we’ll all know you’re not really asking a question, but are instead playing word games. Again.
Yes, I am saying that your gut feeling is wrong.
That definition of gender identity is circular.
So if we agree that transgenders are abnormal, is that somehow indicative of other traits or characteristics?
Like my sister. She is abnormal. Her IQ is way outside of the norm. She also has a diagnosed psychological disorder, schizophrenia with gnostic delusions. Some people say “Of course. People that are smart like that go crazy” like intelligence and crazy are somehow inextricable. From there its easy to make value judgements too, like people who are crazy do bad things, etc.
So where is this whole “abnormal” line of thinking going? Is it just being inquisitive or is there a distinct direction or point trying to be made or avoided?(both Push and ED).
Abnormally negative is largely how we determine what qualifies as disease and disorder. And sometimes even “positive” abnormalities are parts of disorders, as noted in your example.
And high IQs are overrated, even I have one 
Granted. I’ve seen you use it in these forums a few times. But are you schizophrenic?
Does it make you a bad person?
Schizophrenic, no. Not that disorders make someone a bad person. But definitely not without trade offs. I got a perfect math score on the SAT but it takes a lot of effort to function socially. If I were a kid today I’d probably get put on the autism spectrum somewhere.