This article is TERRIBLE
First of all, androgyne is a queer gender identity; androgynes are NOT cissexual. What the actual . . . ? Also, adrogynes can have body dysphoria . . .
I think you are either wrong or wildly exaggerating. I'm androgyne and have been interested in gender issues for many years and found it relevent and helpful. Did you take out a reference to be "cissexual"? Because it only appears in a pull-quote at the moment, not in the body of the text. I take it cissexual is being used as the opposite to transsexual, that latter generally referring to people who feel discomfort with their physical sex attributes. I agree with the suggestion they are more "cis"sexual than "trans"sexual, because most androgynes are more or less comfortable with their physical sex and don't, eg. take hormones or have genital surgery to change it, though the article states that some may wish to. That is a different issue to gender identity, which is about how you feel about your inner identity in terms of being a man, woman or in-between/mixure, and/or how masculine or feminine you feel. If the article had said androgynes are cisgendered then that would have been wrong, but I don't think it's wrong to say that they are (often) cissexual. Liv J (talk) 22:26, January 20, 2013 (UTC)
I checked, and all the "nonsense" so politely referred to by this unnamed contributor in their edit said, was that : Some, but not all, androgynes are cissexual; they feel comfortable in the bodies they were born with. This seems to me to have been an entirely unobjectionable statement, especially as it explicitly says "some, not all". Also the article now looks stupid as it has something in a pull-quote at the bottom that is not mentioned in the text. So, I propose putting something like the removed phrase back, unless the anonymous contributor wants to add something sie prefers..Liv J (talk) 22:36, January 20, 2013 (UTC)