As sweet as-pie
Well-Known Member
It's not. Correlation shows statistical association, but does not provide any evidence at all about the reason for that relationship.
I would give the famous example on when correlation was misused, but I'm aware that's been discussed enough on this site that it's been asked not to be discussed, so you're probably aware of it.
Two things could be correlated for any number of reasons. A could cause B, B could cause A - but that's rare and correlation will not tell you which one caused the other. A and B could be completely unrelated and correlation is a coincidence. A and B could be both linked a dependence on C (or C + D + E + ...).
It goes on, but can be summarised by saying "correlation is not evidence of causation". I thought this was something everyone had drilled into them at school.
Obviously I know that correlation =/= causation but the fact that a link has been found surely shows that being autistic and having gender dysphoria is linked, whether it's caused by being autistic or not, there's still a very obvious correlation and it shows that we need to investigate into why that is. It just hasn't been investigated yet.