How is that in any way in conflict with what he said? You're just making an argument for more inputs.
Biological sex, hormone levels, etc.
Biological sex, hormone levels, etc.
Sex assigned at birth is in many situations important medical information; the vast majority of trans people are very conscious of their health in this sense and happy to share that with their doctor.
Which is not gender identity. As a result of being trans there may be things like hormone levels that are different than what you'd expect based on biological sex, which is why I say hormone levels are important, but how you identify is in fact irrelevant.
Regardless of that, you seem to agree that:
- Sex assigned at birth is important medical information
- Information about gender affirming treatments is important medical information
So I don't think there's much to worry about there.
I don't understand what your issue with it is, it's just another point of data.
I don't want to be treated like a cis woman in a medical context, but I sure do want to be treated like a trans woman.
Right… their gender they identify as.
So sex, and then also the gender they identify as.
You can’t hide behind an “etc”. Expand that out and the conclusion is you really do need to know who is trans and who is cisgender when doing treatment.