Does this mean you accept the Blanchardian model of gender?

I don't get what you mean by "the Blanchardian model of gender." If you are referring to Ray Blanchard, he's a psychologist whose focus has been providing clinical services to, and studying and writing about, grown men who wish they were women. Blanchard has also obtained insight into, and ideas about, such men's experiences and psychology when they were boys, though I don't think he has worked with or studied children directly. His Twitter bio describes him thus:

Researcher in sexual orientation, paraphilias, & gender identity disorders

Though it would be more accurate if he added "among males" at the end. Because I don't think he's ever studied females, treated female patients or paid much or any attention to female people. His interest in "gender identity disorders" in females seems confined to the recent wave of "ROGD" amongst girls and young women. But previously, he's shown no professional interest in female people apart from the different ways that some female individuals, and the female sex as a whole, are factors in the life histories and psyches of his male patients and study subjects.

I don't believe Ray Blanchard has proposed any kind of "model of gender," much less one so novel and distinct that it would warrant the tag "Blanchardian model of gender." He seems never to have questioned, much less carefully examined with a critical eye, the sex stereotypes that constitute gender at all, in fact. Blanchard is very much a sexist, or genderist to use the current term. He's also a male supremacist who seems utterly blind to the existence of, experiences of and views of girls and women; he sees girls and women as his male patients see us - as projections of male fantasies; as objects of male desire, animus, envy and covetousness; and as service humans whose purpose is to be useful to men. He does not understand that we are human beings in our own right who exist apart from males' projections, desires and feelings.

Blanchard said on Twitter a couple of weeks ago that he'd just realized that "gender critical" means being critical of gender itself, meaning the sexist sex stereotypes, roles, social norms, rules of conformity and hierarchical power relations that dictate and, presume the inevitability of, male superiority, dominance and importance and female inferiority, subservience and insignificance. On 13 August he tweeted:

I stumbled across this concise definition of “gender critical” this morning. It implies that the “gender critical” position is not solely (or primarily) about transsexualism but is also a theory of the origins of sexually dimorphic behavior in normal human males and females.

This is the definition he was referring to:

Gender critical: those who believe biological sex is real, and in humans bimodal, but gender is merely a social construction. They criticize the belief that people are intrinsically gendered, and they criticize traditional heteronormative gender roles.

Of course, there's a glaring error in the above definition: "gender critical" people believe that sex is binary, not bimodal. But that aside, it's very telling that until mid-August 2021 Blanchard was operating under the wholly mistaken impression that the "gender critical" position is "solely (or primarily) about transsexualism." Which means Blanchard must have been asleep in the 1960s, 70s and 80s when the women's liberation movement was in full flower, and he is thus wholly unfamiliar with the core ideas of second-wave feminism. And which also means that Blanchard hasn't been paying any attention whatsoever to what feminists have been saying in the so-called "Terf wars" of the past decade either. One woman responded:

Is your post in earnest? You only just realised that? I am still amazed at the number of people who seem to be deeply embedded in this debate but haven't taken the time out to understand what the GC position is.

Blanchard did come up with a typology of male transsexualism/transvestitism in which he posited that the men who wish they were women are heterosexuals with autogynephilia (AGP) or homosexuals with internalized homophobia (HSTS). This typology is usually presented as an either-or, but I believe that those who think Blanchard's typology has merit have always observed that many homosexual men who identify as women are also AGP, and that this is especially the case of HSTSs today. But Blanchard's typology of men who wish they were women can hardly be described as a "model of gender."