(8. Stasis theory) Id say this is a claim of value. The author is saying how defining other's identities is dehumanizing, which sounds like commentary on the morality of the issue (saying something is right/wrong; wrong in this case).

I think this section is good for (6. Genre) because it illustrates how the post is from the blog network and is more of an opinion piece (reflecting the views of the author). This form the text is taking is important to know because it is the views of one author, not necessarily the whole Scientific American. It is important to know that this genre is highly personal.

This line and the whole section is good for (5. Purpose). The author is directly saying that they want the audience to acknowledge transgender people are real and backed by science. This is the purpose of the article (to convince).

(4. Audience) This text eludes to who is reading the text/meant to read the text. It is likely that not actual middle schoolers are reading this, but many people in the audience probably remember learning about sex like this. Maybe the audience is those with conventional ideas of sex similar to this and those who have been possible swayed by the bad actors listed prior (trolls and politics). In other words, people uneducated on the issue

Here is the author and editor, good one for (2. Author). It is important to know the author because it is stated directly later that the article reflects the author's views, not that of the Scientific American. Knowing the authors views helps us understand any bias. The work is published on Scientific American, and it is important to know the bias of the publisher as well.

This text is good for (7. Context) as it cites some real world events relating to the issue. The events give us some context about the time and place the text was written, also helping us understand why the author wanted to write it.

This part is good for (3. Exigence) as it eludes to the motivation the author had for writing the text. The author was likely writing this to try and convince people that bad actors are giving trans people a bad name, when in reality their experiences are backed by science.

1. This text is evidence of (1. Subject) because it explains the main idea of the text. It sets the stage for what will be happening, the author using scientific research to explain and validate the transgender experience.