So biology and social construct are indivisible, when defining gender (or sex). Relatively formless biological urges are shaped and channelled by social forces, but the biology must exist first. The socially determined elements can be resisted or interrogated or altered, but they grow out of the incontrovertible, predetermined fact of the biological sex/gender. Cut off from its roots, the social construct becomes a free-floating, morphing tissue of nothing: the shape without the substance. It ought to cease to exist, be reabsorbed into the simple fact of biological sex. That, surely, would be the sign of a free and fair society, where it was no longer significant which gender you were.
Yet this is not what is happening. The social constructs of gender are being cultivated and sustained by those claiming to reject them most, presumably so they can have something to fight against. Codes of dress, behaviour and expectation are said to be artificially imposed, but insurmountable. Activists describe a world of rigidly and obsessively segregated gender or racial stereotypes, and by doing so, by denying that there is any flexibility or tolerance in society, they reinforce gender and racial segregation. Then they can enjoy themselves condemning it, calling everyone else to account, without working towards effective, inclusive solutions.
They are flailing at shadows and, in the process, wounding those around them, those closest to them, those willing to listen.