If it's an intake form for an eye doctor appointment, it won't tell you dick all.
Where are you getting your information?
Results: Sex and sex hormones influence the lacrimal system, eyelids and blinking, corneal anatomy and disease, aqueous humor dynamics and glaucoma, crystalline lens and cataract, uveitis and retinal disease, ocular circulation, and optic nerve anatomy and disease. Systemic conditions, particularly autoimmune disease, and conditions that are unique to women, such as pregnancy and menopause, further illustrate the effects of sex hormones on the eye. Gender-based differences in ocular conditions and disease should be considered within the context of the underlying physical and social environment.
Skimmed the paper on Scihub. It looks like it's mostly a review of other studies that either show statistical correlations or are about hormone levels. I.e. it directly supports their point that sex is just being used as a proxy for the thing that you really want to know. (And most of it seems irrelevant for someone with healthy eyes getting a new pair of glasses.)
Proxies for the thing you really want to know are pretty useful when you can check the proxy cheaply and the thing you really want to know is (comparatively) expensive to test.
Like, I don't think the world would be better if we routinely gave cismen pregnancy tests, would it?
Again, we're talking about forms here. If you have a reason to want to know if someone has a uterus or might be or become pregnant, you can just ask that. Forms for things where this is important usually do anyways. Sometimes gated on an "if you answered female to the above..." which actually compounds the problem for some people who are not neatly categorized that way.
Likewise, asking a cis man if he is or might be pregnant should not be a horrible thing to do, nor a problem for record keeping, though like I alluded to in my initial reply here, it does sometimes cause confusion or even confrontation to ask them.
Comments
Where are you getting your information?
Results: Sex and sex hormones influence the lacrimal system, eyelids and blinking, corneal anatomy and disease, aqueous humor dynamics and glaucoma, crystalline lens and cataract, uveitis and retinal disease, ocular circulation, and optic nerve anatomy and disease. Systemic conditions, particularly autoimmune disease, and conditions that are unique to women, such as pregnancy and menopause, further illustrate the effects of sex hormones on the eye. Gender-based differences in ocular conditions and disease should be considered within the context of the underlying physical and social environment.
[0] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19811761/
Skimmed the paper on Scihub. It looks like it's mostly a review of other studies that either show statistical correlations or are about hormone levels. I.e. it directly supports their point that sex is just being used as a proxy for the thing that you really want to know. (And most of it seems irrelevant for someone with healthy eyes getting a new pair of glasses.)
Proxies for the thing you really want to know are pretty useful when you can check the proxy cheaply and the thing you really want to know is (comparatively) expensive to test.
Like, I don't think the world would be better if we routinely gave cismen pregnancy tests, would it?
Again, we're talking about forms here. If you have a reason to want to know if someone has a uterus or might be or become pregnant, you can just ask that. Forms for things where this is important usually do anyways. Sometimes gated on an "if you answered female to the above..." which actually compounds the problem for some people who are not neatly categorized that way.
Likewise, asking a cis man if he is or might be pregnant should not be a horrible thing to do, nor a problem for record keeping, though like I alluded to in my initial reply here, it does sometimes cause confusion or even confrontation to ask them.