Had you answered my original query with the first paragraph of your last comment, this discussion would have played out differently. I appreciate the wavelength:color::plumbing [uterus/gonads]:gender reference, what you are saying is that one’s cones/rods [neurophysiological states’] responses to exposure to electromagnetic wavelengths fail to explain the quales red, green, etc. So why ask about wavelengths when your focus is qualia?

Problem is that I am not concerned with the relationship between gonads and feeling male, or uteri and feeling female. Rather, I am asking for an elucidation of the content of the concepts male/female, notions which are loaded with normative elements absent in primitive concepts like red or green (or even, for instance, feeling thirst/hungry – which “means” I want water/food).

The referenced “feeling” or “relating to the world as” a gender [male/female] denotes that one’s behavioral predispositions are consonant with the behavioral dispositions deemed appropriate by ones society and culture to femaleness/maleness (concepts mediated by socially constructed gender roles).

So when dissonance is experienced by an increasing number of individuals, should our [educational?] focus not be modifying the cultural norms (gender, gender roles, etc): That is, stressing that predispositions to, say, to crying, sentimentality, playing with dolls, etc. does not necessarily mean that you are [feel/relate to the world as] female.

Rather than normalizing “sex confirmation” hormonal and surgical interventions; allowing transsexual “women” to compete in [biological] women’s sports, cohabit with [biological] women in prisons, and invade countless other domains which have traditionally been sanctuaries for [biological] women?

The problem is that "sex," "gender" and "gender role" have become hopelessly conflated by agenda driven ideologues. And the ambiguity generated by such conflation, though manageable for academic rhetoricians such as yourself, has often resulted s in bad policy decisions, and perpetuation of unproductive gender/sex stereotypes.

@Ted Wrigley I do not know whether the algorithm laets you know I responded if I fail to preface the response with an @TW. Just wanted to let you know that I did respond. Do have a look at the links I sent you along with my previous "hand waving," though, methinks you will find them interesting.