By analogy there is plethora of issues of the same nature (bodily deformation, handicaps, mental health, bi-polar disorder, chem. transmitters biases in the bra

By analogy there is plethora of issues of the same nature (bodily deformation, handicaps, mental health, bi-polar disorder, chem. transmitters biases in the brain (congenital insensitivity to pain with anhidrosis), xenomelia, and one can go on on just infinite spectrum of such conditions - these are biological realities which are going to have psychological weight in a person's psyche). The issue is clearly (as argued in the article) a psychological one in the person's perception. But this is true for any condition. Anyone not self-perceiving to belong (be it real or just self-induced) to the social group(s) feels psychological forces, and coping with them are not trivial or automatically successful and there is nothing written in stone that such can even in principle be. I do not know any psychiatric study where such feelings can be objectively assessed to be based in biology [“biological factors cannot provide a complete explanation"], one such review can be found here [https://www.thenewatlantis.com/collections/sexuality-and-gender https://www.thenewatlantis.com/collections/sexuality-and-gen...] Therefore, and also from self-consistency of the article, the conclusion to basically withdraw explicit knowledge of a child its sex/gender (ie. from it semantic environment or arbitrarily perturbing such) is not going to do what the article supposes. On the other hand, promoting tolerance and acceptance of deviations (from a shifting and non-constant multi-leveled standards) is highly desirable. Those values should be taught in open ended manner. Well, it is a complex topic and being open in a public debate is a good sign on society (though mandating a speech or remove free speech due to such issues would be foolishness and a step in the wrong direction).