This is a very reductionist view of human sexuality. Even if you disagree with the GP it can't be right to describe our feelings about gender and sexuality as "neurological medical conditions" that are "treatable". Psychological reductionism of this type has not been good for humanity in general, and I don't see any reason to pick it up for this issue.

We're discussing gender, not sexuality(in the standard sense of sexual orientation). The term "transsexual" is somewhat misleading, yet I think it's the best term available for what I'm talking about.

You might not think it's right to describe my feelings about my gender as a treatable medical condition, but I'm one of the ones actually undergoing this treatment right now, and benefiting greatly from it. I think it's very descriptive and appropriate to refer to transsexualism as a treatable medical condition.

We're born, we suffer and sometimes die, we sometimes get medical interventions using drugs and surgery and this usually results in substantial, sustained improvements in our happiness and functioning. That's pretty much the definition of a medical condition.

Reductionism sure is useful when properly applied, as any engineer knows.

Transsexuality is a treatable medical condition. Someone's gender identity as woman, man, genderqueer, etc is, of course, not completely reducible to neurology or biology and has very significant social, historical, and subjective aspects.

Specifically, for myself: I'm a transsexual - i.e. I have a fairly rare neurological developmental condition that I'm undergoing treatment for.

But, much more importantly, I'm a woman - and that's something much harder to define, something indescribably precious and wonderful, yet taken for granted and commonly denigrated.

There are a number of people who identify as genderqueer, as having gender identification that shifts over time, as crossdressers, as drag kings and queens, as on some point on a spectrum, as a third sex, or in a number of other ways that are not as simple as "I was assigned the gender [male/female] at birth, but I am really [female/male], so I have transitioned/am transitioning/will be transitioning." Supposing that either people are cisgender (were assigned their correct gender at birth) or transgender (assigned the opposite sex at birth) IS reductionist. Transsexuals, however, are people of which that case is true, and the fact that this is not true of others doesn't change that.