This is such a poorly constructed argument. Alright, let's rebut this.
(I'm going to assume that the laws/codes vs codes/norms distinction is between sex and gender (and writing/speaking a language), because this argument's construction is so fucking poor that I'm left wondering what the actual fuck he means by it.)
First, both written and oral speech are governed by laws and authority, else we wouldn't have laws against slander (which is spoken) and defamation (which is written.) Not off to a good start there, Billy.
Second, the word "sex" (the noun) is a word that describes the differences between the male and the female. This is not governed by laws and authority, nor is it governed by norms, nor is it a social construct. Males have characteristics females don't have, and vice versa. This is not simply a matter of genitalia, but also physiology and psychology. In other words, you can hack your dick off and drink estrogen like water, but your thought processes and skeletal structure (to name two) are and will remain distinctly male.
Third, the word "gender" was made up by a psychologist named Dr. John Money who wanted to prove that sex was fluid. He would conduct a series of horrifying psychological experiments on the Reimer twins, which resulted in both boys taking their lives. While gender as a word has become increasingly commonplace, its typical usage refers to the same thing the word "sex" does: the differences between males and females.
Fourth, language (written and spoken) is governed by codes, rules, and authority, else we'd all be speaking Ebonics. But given how Billy mangles the French language, I doubt he cares much for such rules.
Finally, a "Social Construct" is an idea that is created an accepted by people in a society. For example, the belief that claiming to be a woman makes a man into a woman is a social construct. The differences between the sexes is objective science.
