+Why? It has to do with the parents of femininity and autogynephilia in the graph. Suppose that gay men are more feminine than straight men, and autogynephilia is the result of being straight plus having an "erotic target location error", in which men who are attracted to something (in this case, women), are also attracted to the idea of _being_ that thing.
+
+Then the value of the sexual-orientation node is pushing the values of its children in _opposite_ directions: gay males are more feminine and less autogynephilic, and straight males are less feminine and more autogynephilic, leading to two broadly different etiological trajectories by which transition might seem like a good idea to someone, even while it's _not_ that the two types have nothing in common.
+
+For example, among autogynephilic males, those who transition are going to be selected for higher levels of femininity, and in that aspect, their stories are going to have something in common with their androphilic sisters
+
+
+(Of course, it's also the case that the component factors in a liability-threshold model would negatively correlate among the population past a threshold.
+
+the factors of a
+
+, due to Berkson's paradox.
+
+But I'm claiming the