Thanks for the link @Italiangreyhound, it was interesting. I saw someone refer to money when discussing social constructs on a post the other day and thought it was a good vehicle for explaining. Money is a far less abstract concept than gender identity, it interfaces with the physical world in a far more direct way.
When writing a thesis in the social sciences, students need to explain how reality is understood in relation to what is being discussed (they take up an ontological and epistemological position). So, if they have studied/are writing about 'motivation', they may declare there is something called motivation and it is a universal reality (this is a realist stance). They may take up a relativist stance and state that motivation is a social construct, that society has a shared understanding of what is being talked about when we discuss motivation, but this does not make it an objective reality. Here, the construct/word 'motivation' didn't exist, would we experience it? Perhaps we would replace it with notions of laziness, fatigue, procrastination etc.
Both stances state that 'motivation' is real. One states that it relates to a universal truth, the other states that reality is socially constructed.
I find the debate about gender identity fascinating- and the 'transwomen are women' idea. As much as my students grapple with understanding ontology and epistemology (the study of what reality is and how the various takes on reality can be explored), these FWR discussions make me aware of how the idea of ontology and epistemology provides great scaffolding for making sense of, and exploring these ideas. It provides great fodder for teaching it as well - the students are interested in the topic.
The fascinating thing, well to me anyway, is that we can (and do) take up different ontological stances depending on what we are talking about when it comes to social phenomena (less so when talking about the physical world). Different perspectives can pack a real punch (e.g people stating that dyslexia is a label given to people who experience difficulties something that society places value on v it is a medical condition)
I, like most people, believe sex is a universal truth, the observable physical properties involved lend themselves to this. Some TRAs try and state that it is socially constructed. I am not sure that they will get far with convincing others of this because observable physical properties are involved.
In the case of gender identity, I think of it as a 'relative reality' not a realist one, but I don't think of it as made up. Some people do have a gender identity, the fact I don't, or haven't noticed I have one, doesn't make me question this. It makes little sense to me to say GI doesn't exist. Many TRAs seem to be making the case for GI being a universal truth, but again, I don't think this will get far because of the level of subjectivity involved.