Transgender Issues regarding change of sex in the eyes of the law

Let me start by discussing gender identity. I think we can both agree that gender identity is defined by society and is basically in layman"s terms the way society categorizes us, being men or women. Now that we have that definition in place, I will prove your rebuttals are inadequate. My first argument about elitism was in regards to the ability to change your sex on a birth certificate. According to the transgender roadmap website, you require a vaginoplasty or orchiectomy, which are both expensive surgeries. I said that it would be unfair to require these procedures to have the right to change your sex on your birth certificate. This would make the procedure elitist not the people. The analogy I said was that it would be like owning land as a prerequisite to vote. The voters that owned land would not be elitist but the law would be. Therefore you have miss understood my argument and your rebuttal is inadequate. Moreover, in my first point, I was talking about the law specifically not how a person can become a man or a woman which brings me to my second point. A man who cross-dresses is not a woman; in fact many men who like to cross dress do not consider themselves transgender. Similarly many transgender people who do not change their genitals consider themselves to be the opposite gender they were assigned at birth. My argument was that it would be sexist to allow people to change their sex, because while gender identity and sex are not the same thing, I can not think of a way they are separated that is not biological or sexist. Sex and gender should be synonymous, because of my previous point. If a girl wants to play football she should be called a boy if she identifies as one? What is a boy? I thought women had the ability to play football as well. If a woman wants to do things that are considered masculine she should be seen as a man? If we allow these changes to happen we are basically agreeing with that statement. We are allowing people to change because of how they act or look, which perpetuates gender roles. If you can satisfyingly answer the question of what is a woman versus a man in a way that is not biological or sexist I will cede the argument. Otherwise your point that gender roles would not be perpetuated and the sexist agenda would not be advanced, making this claim not pertinent to the argument, is invalid. A man could cross dress, act femininely, get breast implants, and a vagina and he should still be seen as a man or male, because men and women should be treated equally, so the only difference I could notice would be through a scientific test that could identify their biological difference to a woman; a female. This brings me to my last point, scientific research. Sometimes people are afraid to be politically incorrect, and with all the idiotic fear mongering that is currently taking place against the transgender population, this fear has only grown greater. This fear causes people to dismiss important points and call them "baffling" without a second thought. I believe this is what has happened in this case. My final argument is about scientific research. While all healthy humans have blood, organs, and cells, they are not the same. Apart from the exceptions I mentioned in my original argument men have XY sex chromosomes and women have XX sex chromosomes. This is part of your DNA which literally makes your cells different; since you carry the same DNA in almost every cell. Also men are born with penises and women are born with vaginas which are considered to be different organs. In turn, their hormone levels are therefore different as well. These specific differences in our bodies create biological trends in research that have helped geneticist and other scientists create trends like the ones spoken in my initial argument. Your last rebuttal is this, "If it were a scientific study on gender specific topics or genetics related to specific genders, it may pose a problem, but their blood would determine what sex they were originally and they would be excluded from the study." This claim is invalid, because you have proved my point. I was not talking about all scientific research, but only that pertaining to a difference between men and women, which as you have said would pose a problem. Furthermore, while a blood test COULD in fact determine the sex, it would not be a simple blood test and it would be at an incredulous cost. The sex of most scientific subjects are taken from legal documents not blood tests; because doing it by blood tests would practically leave no time or money for the experiment. Therefore, you are in correct in saying that it would not affect the pertinent scientific research. In conclusion you have failed to prove my points invalid; however your rebuttals have been proven invalid. Allowing the change of sex on a birth certificate has an elitist process, is sexist because in perpetuates gender roles, and may harm scientific research. Thank you