I think both being social constructs of social animals, there is probably same shared neurology or biology, or psychology in our actions around our gender, culture and race.

However, as a construct, we don’t deem a white person who grows up in black culture to be black. We don’t consider a tomboy, who climbs trees with boys to be a boy (despite the name).

We know that people change their accents and language subconsciously around different subcultures, like code switching.

From a biological standpoint, we don’t really understand the purpose of being trans or gay. There are theories about nurturing and village raises a child etc. However, we know that transition gives better lives to trans people, similarly, we know gay people don’t respond well to conversion therapy. For someone like Rachel, it seems to be a fantasy and the general thinking around that is enabling it feeds into the fantasy and encourages unhealthy thought processes, rather than the opposite in transition for trans people. However, I’m. It sure that psychologists or psychiatrists would agree, or if that’s just pop psychology.

That doesn’t make her beliefs invalid. However, they are not common enough to have a recognised course of action. In the end, as it’s all a construct, can’t we just let her be who she wants to be if it’s not hurting anyone and we don’t know any better? I’d agree that those who are using her for comparison aren’t doing so in good faith.