In which case it is not culpable because it is innate, unchosen. The claim to have been 'born this way' often made in connection with LGTB is a two-edged sword. You cannot complain about say those nasty religious people who oppose LGBT because the same explanation applies to their hostility - namely it is innate. Random biological predestination.
The problem in this thread is, if you are considering this from a rights angle, you have two sets of claimed rights that are in conflict with each other. Who gets the casting vote to decide whose rights trump the others?
Do I believe that cruelty is biologically in AS's genes? No I don't - it's figurative - it means that I believe cruelty has become easy to her and she's comfortable with it to the extent that she enjoys it.
Beyond that error, there is considerable overreach because you are addressing me as though I am someone who says 'born this way' or 'born in the wrong body' because I don't. New born babies have such limited sentience that they can not know that they are straight or gay, cis or trans.
It's not that people who say these things are lying; it's simply a useful shorthand for saying, I've always been this way - meaning since the time that they had that level of self-knowledge. The born in the wrong body statement is not literal either - it's figurative, a shorthand to help people who struggle to understand what it must be like. The more mature explanation of incongruence is a more sophisticated and accurate explainer of what it feels to be trans. Gender identity is in that sense innate, but not in the literal sense of programmed in a person's DNA and congruency is certainly not pre-determined by the action of a fictitious other worldly being.
Throughout the history of the Earth all lifeforms have undergone evolution and the process continues - humans are not an exception, our bodies have parts thought to be vestigial through evolution that should be continue to exist will ultimately disappear. We can not stand in the way of evolution. As a result 'nature' however you care to define it loves diversity; but many humans seem to be the only species that do not.
Human rights are concerned with the rights of humans to live their own life of self-determination. There is no right for people to interfere in that right or to remove it. There is no such thing as women's sex-based rights in equality law - that is a fiction. There is no actual conflict in human rights law concerning gender identity and biological sex, just the pretence that there is. The claims are false. Don't believe me? Read the texts.
Women do have certain legal rights that are available to them, such as the right to breast feed their child wherever they like, but that is not found in equality law as a sex-based right.
We are free to choose our own path. We are required to accept that all others are free too and we are required to respect those people and the law that makes it so. Human rights law is being maliciously misrepresented by those who are keen to promote their own rights and even more keen to remove the rights of others to the extent that they wish to repeal human rights legislation.
