Since the early 20th century, scientists have been seeking explanations to pathologize gender and sexuality, but only those identities deemed deviant. There’s been no search for the heterosexual gene or the cisgender neurons in the brain.
I will certainly advocate against such definitions as defined by science to essentialize difference to biology. I won’t discount the possibility that there may be a biological variable that contributes to the construction of our own sense of gender or sexuality, but it’s not the sole pillar and foundation of our identity.
Gender and sexuality are socially constructed forms, and in saying it’s constructed I’m not implying that it’s artificial; rather, it’s simply distinct from biology.
Socially constructed identities aren’t illusory, but the treatment of socially constructed ontologies imbedding them in biological essentialism is fallacious. It only serves to exemplify the scientific community’s desire that gender and sexuality be cast in biological determination, as it means that that is something that might be cured, treated, or tested for.
I don’t require any explanation to legitimize my sense of self.
I’m a transsexual, I’m a woman, I’m a lover, a friend, a daughter, a student, a hard worker, an avid reader, a prankster, and an artist.
All of those previous identities are constructed and maintained by social interaction and myself. They belong to me, they are my own, and have been fostered and grown since I was a child, influenced by a wealth of information and environmental factors, and none of them are solely biological.
I’m also a human being. That is, however, biological.