I've finally now caught up on this thread and it's great to see that has stayed on track as a thoughtful place to share different viewpoints. Kudos in particular to the OP for handling the Chirping that came in around page 6-7ish by continuing to keep the focus on the various questions that have been coming through since then.
@VanishingVision @TroubledWatersTW thank you for answering my question. I'm aware it was a few pages back now but I wanted to take time to think about your (well considered) responses. To recap: I asked about the meaning of "gender identity" if it wasn't about having a "gendered soul".
Troubled, you're right that I did read your answer as an explanation of a gendered soul. However, I fully accept that you don't see it that way.
Vanishing, I felt the same reading your answer (and again, fully accept you don't see it that way) but, just as with Troubled's response, your words had me reflecting a lot on how difficult it must be to experience intense dysphoria about your body in a society that pushes us into behaving a certain way because we're male or female.
For me, the biggest difference between your position and the "GC" position is that the latter doesn't read body dysphoria through a lens of gender identity at all i.e. as far as I can tell for "GC" people, if someone has genuine, intense feelings about their body being wrong in some way the root cause will always be related to something like cognitive processing/sensory issues (autism), response to sexual trauma, response to parental/societal expectations, internalised homophobia etc.
Seethlaw said something that really resonated for me on this point, by replying to Chirpy that nobody is telling you what your gender is because they don't believe you have one. That's it for me in a nutshell.
However, I do accept that many people do believe they have a gender, irrespective of whether they think of it as a gendered soul or not.
For me, what's more important is finding a way to:
a) accommodate people whose gender (identity) differs from their sex alongside people who don't believe in the concept of gender (identity) at all - or who do believe in it but think it's less important in some situations e.g. many people who believe TWAW don't want TW in women's sports. The SC judgement confirms that the EA already achieves this.
b) provide good, neutral support in healthcare for anyone who believes that they have a gender identity that differs from their sex and who finds this distressing. I'm realistic that for some people this may involve medical transition at the end of neutral exploration, as long as they have been fully screened (and treated) for underlying root causes (including fetish), are realistic that they have not actually changed sex (in biology or in law) and are fully aware of the implications and risks re their future health. Unfortunately though, I don't believe that neutral exploration pathways currently exist.