+With a _sufficiently_ detailed causal story, you could even dispense with the high-level categories altogether and directly talk about the consequences of different neurotransmitter counts or whatever—but lacking that supreme precise knowledge, it's useful to sum over the details into high-level categories, and meaningful to debate whether a one-type or two-type typology is a better statistical fit to the underlying reality whose fine details remain unknown.
+
+In the case of male-to-female transsexualism, we notice a pattern where androphilic and non-androphilic trans women seem to be different from each other—not just in their sexuality, but also in their age of transition, interests, and personality. Many authors have noticed this clustering of traits, [while disagreeing about the underlying causality](/2021/Feb/you-are-right-and-i-was-wrong-reply-to-tailcalled-on-causality/).
+
+[Veale-Clarke-Lomax identity-defence]
+[Vitale]
+[Serano 2020]
+[Blanchard]
+
+How seriously should we take the two-type typology?
+
+the simple story is a useful approximation even if you don't know how to pin down the more detailed story
+
+I think I do have a pretty good guess at what's going on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_graph ]