Your reasoning falls foul of the timeline fallacy: you assume that "knowing" comes before the "cracking".

To borrow from a transphobic author, nobody gets a letter from Transwarts on their 11th birthday to tell them they're trans.

For some people, it *is* a knowledge from a very early age: these are the trans kids of the world.

For others, it's not so clear cut. Knowing that "that sounds wrong" doesn't necessarily mean you know what the correct answer is, just that the one given isn't it.

There's also an astonishing lack of teaching on the subject. It's very easy to suspect you're trans, and convince yourself out of it. Many trans women report trying to "man up", or "waiting for puberty to end so that they become a man", only to find it hasn't worked and they still have that sense of wrongness when the idea they are a man is brought up.

For these people, the realisation of being trans comes after doing the research. Comparing notes. Etc.

But what I find particularly disturbing is your deference to Blanchardism. To suggest that trans women are merely men who fetishise being women, and that trans men are merely women who fetishise being men (a condition even Blanchard himself admitted he made up to not seem sexist) is to not only play the "unreliable narrator" card, but also highly disgusting. It is reminiscent of homophobia that sought to classify gay men as paedophiles and sexually promiscuous.

You also make use of the limited knowledge fallacy: to claim that something can't be true because it hasn't been known about for long. This is dishonest, because science is an evolving discipline. To suggest that gender identity can't be true simply because we've only known about it for a short time is disingenuous.

Lastly, the deference to a twitter poll is hilarious. I imagine that yes, when you polled your echo chamber then did indeed support your position. Well done you. #sarcasm

Your last sentence doesn't make full sense to me, but it looks disturbingly like you're trying to conflate gender identity with gender roles, which the article already established is not the case.