Now, regarding David Riemer. You should know that he wasn't reassigned until he was 22 months old. That is still a long time for male socialization during formative years. Money, the person heading the experiment, did many sexually inappropriate things to him that he did with other patients like show him pornography and ask him sexual questions, but in order to "teach him to be female", Money made Reimer and his brother act out sexual positions so Reimer would experience being in the receiving, submissive, feminine position. So, not only did he have prior socialization as a male his socialization as a girl was abusive.
Are you're saying his socialisation as a male for the first 22 months is enough for Reimer to reject female socialisation for the next 12 years of his life? I'm fairly sure the genders are treated more differently (a.k.a more social conditioning) during childhood than when you can barely talk.
Let's say it's true that your gender is mainly shaped by social influences during the first two years of your life. By this logic, if Reimer, a biological male, was treated like a girl for the first 22 months, then conditioned back to be male ever since, do you really think he would identify as a girl because of that?
By this logic, people also need to stop saying girls are discouraged from STEM in schools, because the societal influence at that age would be negligible compared to how one was raised during the first two years of his/her life.
Also, what does sexual abuse have to do with altering one's internal sense of self? I'm not aware of a correlation between being sexually abused and experiencing gender dysphoria.
Then you don't understand what gender expression is. There is no definition anywhere that supports your narrow view of it. It is simply the public expression of someone's internal sense of gender - behavioral or otherwise.
Fine. If you want to include symbols that represent masculinity and femininity as part of gender expression, then I will cede that there are aspects of gender (i.e. pink/blue) that are socially constructed. The differences in behaviour, however, are still mostly innate.
No. You're deliberately misinterpreting the data! Stop. The studies say that the male and female brain, on average, contain a nearly equal amount of male and female characteristics.
Where does it say that? Your study says the brain contains a mixture of male and female characteristics, but nowhere does it state they are equal.
How do you think they define 'male' and 'female' characteristics in the first place? By identifying regions which are more common in men, or women! Your study even states a few of these differences lol.
If this is true, then the differences between men and women, boys and girls, such as preferences over toys or discrepencies within STEM would be statistically negligible after accounting for social factors but they aren't.
What... it literally says that only 0.1% of boys play video games, play soccer, shoot guns and do absolutely everything that is considered stereotypically male. It does not mean that if you pick a particular area, e.g. soccer, there won't be statistical discrepancies between the genders.