No, it is not. His parents said that he repeatedly, for years and years on end, told them he thought of himself as a boy. That does not fit into your theory at all.
Ummm....The kid is only 9 years old. There are not many "years and years" in there. In addition, children fantasize about all sorts of things. That does not mean that such fantasies will be carried into adulthood.
You seem to be fixated on "my theory". I can come up with multiple theories, all of them plausible, and the one I threw out is only one of them.
The scientific point for you to take away is that the conclusion that those anonymous "medical professionals" made is anything but certain.
**********************
What other "male-typical" or "female-typical" behavior would you test in a sexually immature lab rats? Would lack of "Come and mount me" behavior (as used in that study) be counted as data demonstrating that the sexually immature lab rat's brain had been masculinized? If so, then all the sexually immature lab rats will be classified as "masculinized".
Huh? The "mount me" position is distinct from a rat's normal position.
Precisely.
The "mount me" position is distinct from a rat's normal position............ BUT ONLY IN NORMAL SEXUALLY MATURE ADULT FEMALE RATS.
That is why the the scientific paper I quoted limited their lab rat test subjects that investigated the "Brain Masculinization" effects caused by androgen receptor defects in utero to sexually mature adult rats.
A sexually immature female lab rat will NOT demonstrate the "mount me" behavior.
You had previously asked, "So why not expand the definition to include children?".
That is the answer.
Because sexually mature mammals exhibit gender-specific behavior that can be measured and quantified reliably while the behavior of sexually immature mammals is so non-specific that no such reliable measurements can be made.
*******************
How would you classify "male-typical behavior" in a sexually immature girl?
Maybe... I dunno... referring to herself as a male? Acting as if she believes herself to be a male?
As opposed to referring to herself as a "Fairy Princess" or as having an imaginary friend?
What does a 9 year old boy or a 9 year old girl know about what it means to be a sexually mature 25 year old man or a sexually mature 25 year old woman.
If this girl is raised as a "boy" since the age of nine and, after puberty, discovers that she is sexually attracted to men just as would be expected in a normal sexually mature woman, what will her parents tell her then?
That she is a gay man trapped in a woman's body?
**********************
A child's "male-specific behavior" or "female-specific behavior", before hormones kick in, is extremely non-specific
That's just not true. The behavior of claiming to be of one gender or the other is very specific.
As I noted before, children can claim to be all sorts of things. Secondly, children have very little notion of what it will mean to be a "man" or a "woman" 15 years into the future.
To a child, gender means having different toys (sometimes), dressing differently (sometimes), liking different things (sometimes) and haging out with a different group of friends (maybe).
**********************
When it comes to rats, the normal male rats pretty much never display the "mount me" behavior, and normal female rats pretty much never try to mount other rats. That's why it's so shocking that the switch occurs in the experiment.
Only sexually mature female rats exhibit that behavior.
Sexually immature female rats do not.
Sexually immature female rats lack such behavior just as male rats, be they sexually mature or immature lack that behavior.
The designers of that experiment know that it requires sexually mature test subjects in order to meaningfully observe and quantify "male-specific" or "female specific" behavior.
You have yet to understand that point and have, in effect been arguing that those researchers should have been looking for "mount me" behavior in sexually immature rats since, in your opinion, sexual maturity is irrelevant to sexually-specific behavior.
**********************
Even if that is the case, why would that encourage us not to treat her like a boy during childhood, if that is how she would have the most comfortable childhood? I mean, if she's going to grow up and then one day, poof, she decides she's a girl again, what's the harm in treating her as a boy for now?
One of the basic tenants of child rearing is, "You have to remember who the adult is". The first rule of medicine is, "First, do no harm".
If my 9 year old daughter had believed herself to be a Fairy Princess or a mermaid, I would have done her no favors by insisting that her school treat her as such. That will only subject the child to much ridicule and future psychological difficulties.
If the parents want to make a future life as problem-free as possible, they will keep the issue on "low profile" mode until after her hormones make their daughter the final sexual product she will ultimately become.
In 21st Century America, that is not too difficult.
As I noted, my daughter dresses in boy's jeans because of the "slut factor" of current teen-aged girl's fashion. Her parents can dress her that way too. The girl can adopt an "either/or" name such as "Pat", "Casey", "Taylor", "Cameran", "Jamie" or "Reese". Her parents can keep her out of ballet tutus and put her into coed activities whether it be sports or arts. At "dress up" functions, her parents can dress her in slacks and ambiguous sweaters instead of dresses without being "in your face" about it and having her wear a little tie.
In that "low profile" way, the "girl" can live in her own world until her female hormones hit without burning the social bridges that will make her a social freak in her own home town if she wakes up one day realizing that she is sexually attracted to males and that she must be either:
1. A normal, sexually mature young woman.
or
2. A gay guy trapped in woman's body.
Having had a "low profile" sexual identity childhood allows her to choose Option 1 and having people comment how that tomboy "Jamie" has grown up to be such a lovely lady.
Having had a "high profile", "in your face" sexual identity childhood as a "Robert" sticks her with Option 2.
Socially, Option 2 won't get you very far.
I've had some lesbian friends and some of them were pretty cute. Claiming that I was actually a lesbian trapped in a man's body got me absolutely nowhere. ;-)