>The claims only work if the ideas separating the actual biology and social constructs are defined.

Funny you're getting downvoted for some rather common sense critiques. She's lumping like 20 different things into one word - gender - entirely so that she can dismiss it. The background seems to be that she doesn't trust ANY attempt to quantify or define anything relating to sex and sexuality because it's been used as a tool of oppression in the past. Thus it should be all vague as hell, and ultimately left to the individual based on their feelings.

Yes, there's some very silly cultural fluffy elements of gender. But there's fluffy elements of anything that we consider culturally important. But there's also hard biology that she is doing her damndest to sweep away.

It's hilariously anti-science - effectively saying humans are born as blank slates, that biology plays zero role in our personalities, and that nature does not follow any rules. She also does not engage in any kind of scientific testing of her grand pronouncements since she doesn't come from a science background, so writing giant opinion pieces is all she's good at.