Gender patterns of transgender people A historical, cultural and sociological reconstruction through the experience of social and health professionals.

This paper aims to illustrate the research path and methodological aspects of the study of sexual normativity with reference to a specific population of the LGBTQ+ universe, namely binary and non-binary transgender people in the Italian context through the analysis and historical reconstructions of the path of gender afirmation, in daily life and in the narrative proposed by the main old media. The decision to orient the focus of the analysis on transnormativity is related to the observation of an important research gap present in the scholarly literature, which has so far analyzed the processes of the construction of sexual normativity in mainstream society - and, as a result, has produced several studies and theorizing on heteronormativity and the male homosexual population (or homonormativity) - while conspicuously leaving out noncisgenderist sexual identies (transgender, genderfluid, agender, etc.). Following up on these premises, specifically, the following research questions were set: what are the reference gender models that guide and direct the identity construction of transgender people? And what are those of binary and non-binary people? how do these models reflect aspects atributable to mainstream sexual normativity (mainly heteronormativity and cisgenderism) furthermore, what diefrences are evident among these reference models in relation to various socio-demographic and identity aspects (how do they vary according to age, educational qualification, gender identity status, and sexual orientation). In order to try to answer the questions of the research design, a survey was conducted, using a biographical approach, through the administration of semi-structured interviews with privileged witnesses working in the field of gender reafirmation pathways in the medical, clinical and legal fields, in order to reconstruct the chronological and cultural stages of the construction of transnormativity from the enactment of State Law 164/1982 to the present day. In contrast to this perspective, new, increasingly fluid, complex, and diefrentiated demands are emerging, which have generated debate on the one hand and tension both with mainstream society and within the LGBTQ+ community on the other. This further fragmentation of cis-heteronormative criteria could, for some, pose a threat