Talk:Gender dysphoria

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gender dysphoria article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9Auto-archiving period: 365 days

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Gender dysphoria. PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles) The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine. Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Psychology C‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. LGBT studies C‑class This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBT studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBT studiesLGBT articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Sexology and sexuality C‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Medicine: Psychiatry C‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Psychiatry task force (assessed as High-importance).

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Gender dysphoria. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Gender dysphoria at the Reference desk.

A fact from Gender dysphoria appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 2 March 2007. A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2007/March.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present.

The discussion from here has been moved as i posted before; interesting, but not discussing the article itself.

Cis gender is not an actual term that is widely used. I believe it should not be used in this entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.121.165.241 (talk • contribs)

The term cisgender (one word, just like transgender) is being used much more frequently as trans issues are being discussed more openly. Most people who are unfamiliar with the word cisgender are, in fact, cisgender. An encyclopedia is a place to learn and broaden one's intellectual horizons. For this reason exactly the word cisgender (as a single word) should certainly be continued to be used. More importantly, the word cisgender is important to counteract the stigmatization of transgender people as being 'other.' Instead of discussing transgender people as opposed to "normal" people, the word cisgender is important to describe people who, unlike transgender people, do not feel incongruence with the sex they were assigned at birth. The pathologization of transgender identities is perpetuated by the obscurity of the word cisgender, which would certainly not be helped by omitting it from an article of what it means to be transgender. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baeddel (talk • contribs) 06:48, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. As you point out, Baeddel cisgenders largely are not using the word to describe or identify themselves, and as you also point out, are largely unfamiliar with the term 'cisgender'. Since the word was assigned to them by the trans community without broad range input or consent by the people it is used to describe, and 'cisgenders' do not apply the word to themselves, then it should not be used to describe that group in a broad-based article based on public consensus. Yes, it is a term used in the transgender community, but is not used by cisgenders themselves to any but a small degree. In that facet, it is not politically correct to call a group of people by a name that they had no input into, and may even reject. Since the word cisgender is not material to the article's information about GD, and in fact, is referring to people who do not have GD, it should not be included in this article unless the general public reaches a CONSENSUS of opinion to use it in describing themselves and it falls into COMMON USE. This is per Wikipedia guidelines. Awolnetdiva (talk) 07:45, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Awolnetdiva, since cisgender is a neologism, I do think that we should generally avoid that word on Wikipedia; this is per MOS:Neo and WP:Neo.

On a side note: I WP:Pinged you because you are not very active on Wikipedia and I want to make sure that you get my response. There is no need to WP:Ping me to this page, though, since this page is on my WP:Watchlist. Also, I WP:Indented Baeddel's post, and your post, in this section. Flyer22 (talk) 07:59, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The word cisgender has been in use for over twenty years, and is now in common enough use that it's been added to the Oxford English Dictionary. Funcrunch (talk) 15:05, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's still a neologism, and the general public has never heard of it; when we can use clearer language, but without offending transgender people, we should. Flyer22 (talk) 22:22, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cisgender IS the non-offensive term, adopted in part to avoid more widely used language that othered transgender people ("normal woman," "biological man", etc.). Not only is the term gaining more and more familiarity as more people use it, such that (as noted above) it is now in the OED; but it also has its own page on Wikipedia, which is linked upon first use to ensure people unfamiliar with the term have the meaning, and it is ALSO one of the category divisions used on both the side and the bottom of the page. It may be a neologism, but it's one coined out of necessity and it is quickly becoming the standard in the discussion of trans vs. non-trans identities. Ariamythe (talk) 15:37, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ariamythe, I know why the term cisgender was adopted, but I still stand by my posts above regarding it. The average person doesn't know what it means, and, considering that I've used it in discussions when trying to educate people on transgender issues, only to have those people even more confused upon hearing it and many of them still not wanting to use it afterward, I definitely have experience with just how underused it is. As for its offensiveness, well, if you go by the current state of the Cisgender talk page, you will see some people calling the term cisgender offensive; some of them are likely WP:Trolling. And you can see from the Cisgender article, that use of the term is criticized in addition to being accepted. Flyer22 (talk) 15:49, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not against ever using the term cisgender on Wikipedia; it's rather that I am more so for clearer language (layperson language) being used when it can be reasonably used. As someone who deals with anatomy Wikipedia articles, other medical and biological Wikipedia articles, WP:Technical, WP:Jargon and MOS:Neo are guidelines that I am often aware of. As another option, a person can also WP:Pipelink cisgender with clearer language. Flyer22 (talk) 16:06, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm openly against using the prefix cis- on this page. This is a psychological topic before it is a transexual topic, and should be handled with as objective view as possible rather than one that panders to feminism and those who hold to gender theory. I wouldn't call it a neologism so much as slang or a sort of argot. Not to mention just because it's been around a while doesn't mean it should be used in a descriptive article, especially if it can be considered polarizing and or caustic. I can cite at least a handful of people that i know who are sour about being suddenly forced to use gender/feminist theory approved terminology. Just because it is accepted by a few does not make it a standard, relevant, or appropriate. Dabrams13 (talk) 19:10, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not merely slang or argot. Terms like "cisgender" have been used in formal psychology papers about transsexualism. Also, the Oxford English Dictionary accepts it even if you do not. ~ Röbin Liönheart (talk) 14:44, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can someone explain why gender dysphoria redirects to gender identity disorder? They're very different topics.

Gender dysphoria refers to the distress and impairment caused by a conflict between gender identity and sex that (some) transgender people experience (APA .pdf of definitions for those unsure), while gender identity disorder is an outdated diagnosis that pathologised merely being a transgender person in the same way that being a homosexual person was previously. Gender identity disorder is no longer included in the DSM or used by the APA and many other groups.

See for example: Human rights campaign news article from December 2012

The APA's "Answers to your questions about transgender people, gender identity and gender expression": "Is being transgender a mental disorder?"

The NHS page for gender dysphoria

While the term gender identity disorder is still currently in use by some remaining groups, there is a very clear distinction between it and gender dysphoria. The term gender dysphoria has also seen extensive (and I would say growing) use over a long period of time. Surely it should be addressed separately?

If people are against a split there should definitely be changes to this article to highlight the controversy over the use of GID and shift the emphasis to gender dysphoria (probably including title), as the parts of GID not related to gender dysphoria or the history of GID specifically belong in/are already covered in Transsexualism (e.g. the section on legislation). Flower f5a9b8 (talk) 18:52, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Flower f5a9b8 (talk · contribs). The vast majority of WP:Reliable sources show that gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria are not very different topics; they are generally the same topic with different names, and, in the case of the DSM-5, a slightly different approach. Gender dysphoria is in the DSM-5, and it only differs from its previous listing of gender identity disorder by name and slightly different criteria. As you can see, we have included both titles (gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria) in the Gender identity disorder article and we address the controversy over gender identity disorder being considered a mental disorder...and the DSM-5's use of the term gender dysphoria instead of gender identity disorder because of the stigma associated with the gender identity disorder term. Refer to the #Updates required to reflect DSM-5, #The current title treats trans people's identities as a disorder and #Requested move 02 September 2013 discussions for why we treat both topics (gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria) under one title and use the gender identity disorder title for the article. Flyer22 (talk) 19:08, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response. I don't agree that they are the same topic with a different name. Usage of GID implies that all transgender people have a mental disorder. You ask for reliable sources, the APA link I provided states that "identifying as transgender does not constitute a mental disorder". Since they frequently use the term gender dysphoria this is a clear example that the topic being referred to is different. To reiterate, my understanding is that gender dysphoria refers to the distress transgender individuals sometimes feel (dysphoria literally meaning the inverse of euphoria), while GID refers to being a transgender individual. I'd like to note that for this reason GID is controversial for more than just the wording of the name and also that there is very little on the topic of controversy in this article. I can only see one or two lines that barely go into any depth at all.

I'm afraid I don't see anything in the links you provide to past discussions that addresses my points. I don't believe this would fall under WP:POVFORK because proponents of GID have this same understanding of gender dysphoria. The POV split is on whether or not GID should also be used. For example during their Medical Necessity Statement WPATH refers to "the clinically significant distress and impairment known as gender dysphoria that is often associated with transsexualism". Flower f5a9b8 (talk) 20:48, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, Flower f5a9b8 (talk · contribs) (I'll cease pinging you via WP:Echo now since you'll likely check back here for replies without that). In the aforementioned discussions, others made similar comments to yours; read the The current title treats trans people's identities as a disorder discussion, if you haven't already. A similar usage of gender dysphoria is addressed there. Though the term gender dysphoria can be used without reference to any diagnosis, and sometimes to simply indicate gender variance, it is usually used in reference to a diagnosis. Not only was this term matter thoroughly discussed above, it was thoroughly discussed at WP:MED (which is noted in one or more of those linked discussions above). And the WP:Consensus that resulted from these discussions is that the terms gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria are usually used interchangeably, as shown on Google Books and on Google Scholar. The DSM-5 has taken a slightly different approach; see this source, for example. Gender dysphoria is diagnosable in the DSM-5 and is essentially the same thing as gender identity disorder, but with a different name and slightly different criteria -- by this, they do try to get across the point that gender identity disorder is not something accurately or automatically described as a mental disorder; this is clear from the Gender identity disorder article. Also see what an editor stated in the #Status as a disorder section above. We mention the APA in the Diagnosis section, and they, as in their DSM-5 text, do not state that gender dysphoria is different than, or completely different from, gender identity disorder. And for us to state that they are relaying that...it would be a violation of the WP:Synthesis policy. I reiterate that the APA are diagnosing the same condition, but in a slightly different way. In the History section, the text currently begins with: "The term gender identity disorder is an older term for the condition. Some groups, including the American Psychological Association (APA), use the term gender dysphoria."

You stated, "Usage of GID implies that all transgender people have a mental disorder." Not everyone, including not every transgender person, agrees with that. For example, some transgender people explain the matter as a disorder of the body rather than as a disorder of the mind when informing a person of GID; this argument resembles the GID as a birth defect section that is currently in the article. Yes, the term gender identity disorder is often stigmatizing, but various experts in the field of this topic do not consider it a mental disorder; like the WP:Lead (introduction) currently states: "Gender identity disorder is classified as a medical disorder by the ICD-10 CM and DSM-5 (called gender dysphoria). Many transgender people and researchers support declassification of GID because they say the diagnosis pathologizes gender variance, reinforces the binary model of gender, and can result in stigmatization of transgender individuals. The official classification of gender dysphoria as a disorder in the DSM-5 may help resolve some of these issues because gender dysphoria only pathologizes the discontent experienced as a result of gender identity issues."

Because the controversial nature of GID is addressed in the WP:Lead, the Diagnosis section, and in the Society and culture section, I don't understand your assertion "that there is very little on the topic of controversy in this article." Flyer22 (talk) 22:48, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This whole article is transphobic. Trans people's identity isn't a disease. Just because I have a penis doesn't make me any less of a woman. 143.231.249.138 (talk) 12:40, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It should be said that the user (143.231.249.138) is a member of congress (or their staff) who has made a number of religiously extreme comments elsewhere^[1], likely saying things to make LGBT advocates seem extreme, simplistic, or out of touch with reality. There's a lot of merit behind the argument that what comprises 'woman,' 'man,' or anything in-between is not tied to primary or secondary sex characteristics, but please don't feed the congress trolls by doing it here or responding to a planted troll comment.

--71.120.19.23 (talk) 22:08, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is this really necessary? Perhaps I just don't have enough experience with commenting on wikipedia, but I'd hoped that people reading niche talk pages would be mostly people interested enough in self-education as to not find that kind of comment extreme, let alone out of touch with reality. Or at least to know that those beliefs are typical for an LGBT ally. I didn't interpret it as a troll at all, it's a perfectly valid comment. More than that, it's the kind of comment I'd expect to see another transgender person to make on this. --Flower f5a9b8 (talk) 02:38, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're not addressing my points or any of the examples I've cited. I don't have much time or energy to spare at the moment and I'm not familiar enough with the behind the scenes of wikipedia to navigate the bureaucracy, so I'm sorry if I come across as short.

>A similar usage of gender dysphoria is addressed there. Though the term gender dysphoria can be used without reference to any diagnosis, and sometimes to simply indicate gender variance, it is usually used in reference to a diagnosis.

This is completely wrong. Using dysphoria to refer to just non-conformity to gender roles would be deeply insulting. I've never seen it happen and the fact you'd suggest that definition makes me feel you don't really understand this topic much. To reiterate, gender dysphoria refers to the pain and suffering that trans individuals experience. Here's the examples I've linked before plus a few more.

"In a nod to progress, the next DSM will replace "gender identity disorder" with "gender dysphoria" as a diagnosis. The shift underscores that being transgender is not a disorder in itself: Treatment only is considered for transgender people who experience gender dysphoria — a feeling of intense distress that one's body is not consistent with the gender he or she feels they are, explains Walter Bockting, PhD, a clinical psychologist and co-director of the LGBT Health Initiative at Columbia University Medical Center."

"This mismatch between sex and gender identity can lead to distressing and uncomfortable feelings that are called gender dysphoria. Gender dysphoria is a recognised medical condition, for which treatment is sometimes appropriate. It is not a mental illness."

"Transgender identity is not a mental illness that can be cured with treatment. Rather, transgender people often experience a persistent and authentic disconnect between the sex assigned to them at birth and their internal sense of who they are. This disconnect is referred to by medical professionals as “gender dysphoria” because it can cause undue pain and distress in the lives of transgender people."

"Dysphoria, in this context, describes a variety of negative feelings that are related or connected to someone's gender or sex. Trans people who experience dysphoria may be profoundly uncomfortable with certain aspects of their bodies, particularly sex characteristics. They may also have a strong aversive reaction — perhaps sadness, or anger, or disgust — upon being called by the (inappropriate) pronouns of their birth-assigned genders, or the inappropriate-gender names that were used for them before they came out."

"Until now, the term “gender identity disorder” has been used to diagnose people who are transgender. For conservatives, this has provided rhetorical carte blanche to describe the entire trans committee as disordered, delusional, and mentally ill. In some cases, this diagnosis has even been used to discriminate against trans people, with claims that they are unfit parents or employees, as examples. The new manual will diagnose transgender people with “Gender Dysphoria,” which communicates the emotional distress that can result from “a marked incongruence between one’s experienced/expressed gender and assigned gender.” This will allow for affirmative treatment and transition care without the stigma of disorder."

Even WPATH, who still use the term GID, refer to "diagnosis and treatment to alleviate the clinically significant distress and impairment known as gender dysphoria that is often associated with transsexualism."

The book preview you linked omits pages 144 and 145, which are the first two that talk about the DSM-5. The half a page that is there mentions "a broad consensus that if the diagnosis remains in the DSM, there needs to be an overhaul of the name, criteria, and language". It seems it's for the wrong reasons (pressure to reduce stigma rather than a general agreement that pathologising transsexuality is wrong, spectacularly missing the point with "While reducing the stigmatization of mental disorders is important, arguing to remove a diagnostic category from the DSM or the mental disorders section of the ICD simply because mental disorders are stigmatized is neither compelling nor persuasive."), but it is at least movement in the right direction and consistent with what I've been saying. While searching for the missing pages I found this pdf by WPATH, which is again consistent with what I've been saying. To quote: "we recommend the term Gender Dysphoria instead, to reflect that the diagnosis should only be applicable to some transgender individuals at those times in their lives when they actually experience clinically significant distress related to incongruence."

>You stated, "Usage of GID implies that all transgender people have a mental disorder." Not everyone, including not every transgender person, agrees with that.

It strongly implies that the individual's gender identity is the thing that's disordered and mismatched, rather than their body. I don't know if you're cis or not, but if you are it would be hard to explain how damaging and insulting that could be. I'm reminded of a great line from the hitch-hiker's guide: when asked why a soldier is limping, an executive responds that "his feet are the wrong size for his shoes." The metaphor was about something else there, but it works well here (and it's amusing).

I'm not going to bother arguing about this article's bias and problems beyond talking about GID in general though, to be honest I don't really care about it. It'll fade into obscurity in time anyway once a separate gender dysphoria page is made (however long that takes) and when the remaining medical professionals who still use the term finally stop. --Flower f5a9b8 (talk) 21:34, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Flower f5a9b8, I'm somewhat at a loss about what else to state to you on this topic (except for proving that I am correct about one of the statements you made -- the one you called me "completely wrong" on -- and I'll get to that in the second paragraph); I have addressed your points, and I know that I am correct on all of what I've stated above. The move discussions, which involved discussion of the gender dysphoria redirect, closed the way that they did essentially because of what I (and others) stated above on the gender identity disorder/gender dysphoria matter. I do understand the topic of transgender and gender identity disorder issues a great deal, or else I personally would not be as involved with this article as heavily as I've been involved with it or comment on matters such as this one at the Transsexualism article, a discussion that shows transgender people can have significantly different views on transgender issues. At the Transgender and Transsexualism talk pages, we get transgender people commenting on and/or actively disagreeing with each other, about what being transgender is and what is insulting to transgender people. Your comments above are an extension of that.

I know that gender variance is commonly distinguished from gender dysphoria, and that gender variance may be categorized as normal among health professionals; if I felt that it was the same thing as gender dysphoria, I would not have indicated that they are different things (including by linking to the Gender variance article). But, as shown by this, this, this, this, this and this source, and various other sources, the term gender dysphoria is sometimes used to simply indicate gender variance, just like I stated before (and keep in mind that while I also stated that the term gender dysphoria can be used without reference to any diagnosis, I was clear to state that gender dysphoria "is usually used in reference to a diagnosis."); that first source, Gender Identity Research and Education Society, (call it reliable or unreliable), while indicating that the experience of gender variance is the same as experiencing gender dysphoria, echoes your sentiment that gender dysphoria indicates unhappiness; the second source criticizes use of the terms gender dysphoria or GID to simply refer to gender variant people. Such a reference (using the term gender dysphoria or gender identity disorder to simply refer to a gender variant person) has happened often, as is also indicated by the third source, which is why I'm surprised that you have never seen it happen that someone is referred to as gender dysphoric simply for being gender variant, and yet you assign such a thing as happening with the term gender identity disorder and a gender variant or transgender person; I suppose that has to do with your view of separating the terms gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria.

This source, Encyclopedia of Gender and Society, Volume 1 (page 355), states, "Gender dysphoria is discomfort or dissatisfaction with one's gender.", and also states that it "is an umbrella term used to refer both transvestites and transgendered persons." It gives a definition that is consistent with defining gender dysphoria in the same way that gender identity disorder is defined, and it extends the definition to transvestites and other transgender people, while also stating that a woman dressing in men's clothing is not socially constructed as gender dysphoric, but rather as gender variant. (Note that I stated "other transgender people" with regard to transvestites because transvestites, as the Transgender article also addresses, are included in the definition of transgender; gender variant people in general are often included in the definition of transgender). And, of course, gender variance usually simply means being atypical regarding gender. This source, The Transgender Studies Reader source (page 272), states that "Gender dysphoria is a technical term for individuals who are dissatisfied with the gender to which they were assigned (usually at birth) on the basis of their anatomical sex." That definition also matches the diagnosis of gender identity disorder. The author goes on to state: "Within the psychological and medical communities, gender dysphoria is considered a disorder, as were lesbianism and male homosexuality before the American Psychiatric Association removed them from its official list of mental diseases in 1973. I am not using gender dysphoria in the clinical sense, with its connotations of neurosis or psychological impairment. I am using it as a purely descriptive term for persons who have gender feelings and identities that are at odds with their assigned gender status or their physical bodies." Going to the third source (page 469), following "Gender Identity Research and Education Society" as the first source, it states: "The term gender dysphoria, replacing the former term GID, was selected with deliberate consideration of the stigma attached to the word disorder. Nevertheless, the diagnosis of gender dysphoria is controversial among clinicians and transgender advocates."

Flower f5a9b8, you continue to reach conclusions that the sources do not state, which is a form of WP:Synthesis. So again, I'm somewhat at a loss about what to state to you on this matter. I stated above that the terms gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria are usually used interchangeably, and I pointed to WP:Reliable sources that show this to be the case; you have not proven that this is not the case. If it were not the case, both of these terms -- gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria -- would not be regulated to this Gender identity disorder article as far as article titles go, after much discussion about that matter. Unless a need is shown to have a Gender dysphoria article as separate from the Gender identity disorder article, the terms will continue to only have one page devoted to them. Furthermore, if we don't have gender dysphoria redirect to the Gender identity disorder article, what would be the better place to redirect it to? I don't see a better place. Flyer22 (talk) 04:22, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

>matters such as this one at the Transsexualism article, a discussion that shows transgender people can have significantly different views on transgender issues

It's generally accepted that non-op transgender people exist and aren't any "less transgender" because of it. The distinction pre/post/non-op is common. Maybe not in the medical community yet, but in the transgender community it is. It's true that there are radicals in the community who claim things like non-binary identities aren't valid, or exclude non-op people and/or people with less severe dysphoria, or deny/misunderstand the existence/significance of gender identity altogether. There's also another end of the spectrum which includes current unfortunate tumblr trends, such as people claiming to be transgender because they "identify" (I don't think they know what that means) as a gender by choice. These views generally fall apart under criticism though and aren't accepted except, from what I've seen, in small sub-communities.

Where previously you said that "the term gender dysphoria can be used without reference to any diagnosis, and sometimes to simply indicate gender variance", you now say "if I felt that [gender variance] was the same thing as gender dysphoria, I would not have indicated that they are different things". Bit confusing.

>that first source, Gender Identity Research and Education Society, (call it reliable or unreliable), while indicating that the experience of gender variance is the same as experiencing gender dysphoria, echoes your sentiment that gender dysphoria indicates unhappiness

I'd certainly call it reliable, I think it's a really good paper. However it's using a different definition of gender variance to the one commonly used outside the medical community (see for example the wikipedia article on gender variance you linked). As you say they use the definition for gender dysphoria I've been talking about which defines it as, basically, a negative experience. It should be obvious they're using a different definition for gender variant because of all the people who are gender variant - in the sense of not conforming to societal gender roles - who do not experience this. Plenty of cis people have interests, aspects of self-expression etc. that don't conform to current cultural gender norms. Probably most do in some way. I mean, even post-transition trans people have things like that too, that don't conform to norms about their gender identity. The article even says in the first line that "gender variance is an atypical development in the relationship between the gender identity and the visible sex of an individual", so it's clearly not referring to the definition either of us was talking about. I hadn't heard of this usage before, which is why I was confused when you stated dysphoria could refer to gender variance. However, I don't understand why you linked the wiki page on gender variance when you did, considering it's about the definition that refers to "behaviour or gender expression that does not match gender norms" (to quote the first line). I also don't understand why you didn't clear up my confusion when I stated that "using dysphoria to refer to just non-conformity to gender roles would be deeply insulting", if you knew it was a different definition. Why not just agree and explain the definition, if you understood it?

I also disagree with your interpretation that it "[indicates] that the experience of gender variance is the same as experiencing gender dysphoria". To quote, "there is a small subgroup of individuals who experience gender variance. The personal experience of this state is sometimes known as gender dysphoria (dysphoria means ‘unhappiness’)". So rather they say that there are people who experience "an atypical development in the relationship between the gender identity and the visible sex of an individual", and that the personal experience of that state is sometimes known gender dysphoria. It's a minor thing but it clarifies that my definition of gender dysphoria does match theirs.

Also as a small side note, I wanted to thank you for linking this article because of this passage: "Gender variance, whilst it may be associated with a great deal of stress, is not caused by psychopathology or mental illness, rather, the stress may be understood to be a normal response to the internal biological conflict. The condition cannot be overcome by psychological or psychiatric treatments alone" and this passage: "Some trans people say that, until the process of transition is complete, they cannot tell what their future sexual preference will be... During the process of transition, the issue of sexual orientation may be of little interest to the individual concerned, since the issue of gender identity is uppermost in his or her mind.". A normal response is what I have personally come to consider it, and I have the same experiences with my sexual orientation. I hadn't seen those things put in exactly those terms so clearly in a medical paper before though, so thanks. I will probably be sharing this webpage :)

The second source states that "In the discussion concerning the pros and the cons of retaining the GID in DSM-5, the workgroup decided to retain the diagnosis, but to replace the name of the diagnosis by Gender Dysphoria, which implies that the identity is no longer considered disordered, but that a diagnosis is needed for those transgender individuals who, at some point in their lives experience clinically significant distress associated with their gender". This again reinforces what I've been saying, gender dysphoria is very different to GID. Gender dysphoria doesn't pathologise "merely being a transgender person", only "the distress and impairment caused by a conflict between gender identity and sex", to quote from my original first paragraph. These quotes mirror very closely the wording in the section above from your source: "the identity is no longer considered disordered" and (referring to needing a diagnosis for people who experience) "clinically significant distress associated with their gender".

I can't view your third source so I'll take your word for it that it's an example of "using the term gender dysphoria or gender identity disorder to simply refer to a gender variant person". If in this context gender variance is "an atypical development in the relationship between the gender identity and the visible sex of an individual", yeah, that makes sense. They'll have some degree of dysphoria and would probably be classified as suffering from GID (if the psychiatrist got it right). The terms having overlap in this case doesn't make them the same though.

For four, I think you meant this link, yours is broken. It does group together gender dysphoria, gender variant and gender identity disorder, but also transsexual and even transvestite, as part of just an overview of "medicalized understanding of gender variance". I really hope you wouldn't equate transvestism to transsexuality. Gender dysphoria is also referred to later as "persistent discomfort with gender role or identity", which is a very crude way of putting it, but still clearly distinct from the other items in the list.

Your fifth source is another that supports my argument? "Gender dysphoria is defined as discomfort with one's anatomical body, particularly one's genitalia and secondary sex characteristics". I don't even see what bit you linked it for to support your argument, unless it's just that gender dysphoria and gender variance are in the same list of potential reasons to seek treatment? That doesn't mean they're the same any more than it means they're the same as the third reason, "family related issues", i.e. not at all.

Sixth one is weird. I think it's too old to be relevant now, it talks about things like "deeper consideration of the relationship between gender variance and homosexuality", when it's understood these days that there is no relationship between sexual orientation and gender identity. The studies it references are older still, the specific reference to gender dysphoria is in a quote from a 1992 study. I think in a field that has changed so rapidly and that has historically been so badly misunderstood, this source doesn't really count for much.

>I'm surprised that you have never seen it happen that someone is referred to as gender dysphoric simply for being gender variant, and yet you assign such a thing as happening with the term gender identity disorder and a gender variant or transgender person; I suppose that has to do with your view of separating the terms gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria.

I'm not certain what this means. I say people are referred to by GID simply for being gender variant and transgender? Well yeah... Transgender and gender variant as in the sense of having a mismatched assigned gender and gender identity; AKA transsexuality (although not exactly the same). GID pathologises this, and not just because of the name. Transsexualism has even been the name of the diagnosis; the history behind the word transsexual is part of the reason why some people don't use it. Maybe I've just misunderstood you, or do you really disagree with some of this?

>This source, Encyclopedia of Gender and Society, Volume 1 (page 355), states, "Gender dysphoria is discomfort or dissatisfaction with one's gender.", and also states that it "is an umbrella term used to refer both transvestites and transgendered persons."

Are these two different definitions? I can't see this book, but the quote wouldn't make sense otherwise. Obviously, by definition, transvestites do not experience discomfort and neither do crossdressers (assuming it's using your broad definition of transgender). The two quoted sections are incompatible unless there's something important in the middle you've omitted. Mind you it is an encyclopedia not directly about transsexuality, from the description it looks like it's mostly interested in gender as a social/cultural thing and not gender identity, so I wouldn't be terribly surprised if it just misunderstood a widely misunderstood field.

>Note that I stated "other transgender people" with regard to transvestites because transvestites, as the Transgender article also addresses, are included in the definition of transgender; gender variant people in general are often included in the definition of transgender

This is highly contentious. There is no consensus on wikipedia, for example the gender variance article states "The word transgender is sometimes used interchangeably with gender-variant, but usually has a narrower meaning and somewhat different connotations, including a non-identification with the gender assigned at birth.". Personally I agree with this quoted passage and think it's absurd to include cisgender people in "transgender" (surely they should be antonyms, or I'll have to start referring to myself as "non-cisgender", which really would be amusing. I'm not serious about using it, but it's funny how much sense it would make because uninformed people often complain that cisgender should just be "non-transgender"). This definition of transgender is widely used. However, again, this isn't something I'm really interested in discussing and I'd rather not get sidetracked so I won't state my full reasoning. It's not like a consensus could be reached on wikipedia anyway. Also you should note that transvestite is an outdated term when referring to "a woman dressing in men's clothing" and is generally considered pejorative now, consider "cross-dresser" instead. Unless of course you're referring to someone who is personally ok with that label, as is the case with "tranny" or "faggot" for example. Transvestite should generally refer only to someone who experiences sexual arousal from cross-dressing, which is obviously very different to and important to distinguish from someone cross-dressing for fun or a transgender person wearing clothes that match their gender identity rather than their assigned gender.

Your final source is really very odd... It's a kind of take on the history of feminism as it relates to gender variant people - as in the non-clinical definition: behaviour or gender expression that does not match gender norms - using your broad definition of transgender people? It doesn't seem to be about people who don't identify as their assigned gender or have much understanding of them. There's sections with names like "Are lesbians women" (yes? This borders on TERF thinking, gender identity =/= sociocultural gender norms). But well, whatever, I don't think it's much of a source but even if it is I feel it's a bit irrelevant at this stage.

My conclusion is that gender dysphoria is defined in a certain way (a variety of negative feelings, a disconnect, emotional distress, all resulting from a mismatch), and I count eleven links that support this definition (four of which were yours): 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. I don't understand why any of them wouldn't support this definition and after reading it I don't see how this falls under WP:Synthesis for any of them. In addition, to quote "What SYNTH is not": The policy does not forbid inferences on talk pages that would be SYNTH if made in an article. Drawing non-trivial inferences is the heart of argument, and on talk pages, you're supposed to present arguments. I believe this means I can infer that since the above definition of gender dysphoria would not be applicable to GID, gender dysphoria is something separate. Which is honestly not exactly a huge logical jump anyway.

>if we don't have gender dysphoria redirect to the Gender identity disorder article, what would be the better place to redirect it to? I don't see a better place.

I never suggested redirecting it to somewhere else. I've said from the start that it should have its own page or this page should be changed.

Sorry about the length, apparently I do have the time. --Flower f5a9b8 (talk) 02:19, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your post about the transgender community, clearly pre-op transgender people are transgender. As you likely know, many transgender people don't even go through with any type of medical operation. I'm going to take a lot of what you stated about the transgender community as your personal opinion, since I know how much opinions on transgender topics in the transgender community can vary.

I don't see how my stating "the term gender dysphoria can be used without reference to any diagnosis, and sometimes to simply indicate gender variance" and then stating "if I felt that [gender variance] was the same thing as gender dysphoria, I would not have indicated that they are different things" is a "[b]it confusing"; I believe that I explained myself well on those matters above. Stating that gender dysphoria is "sometimes [used] to simply indicate gender variance" is not the same thing as stating that I believe that gender dysphoria and gender variance are the same thing. You stated, "However [the Gender Identity Research and Education Society source is] using a different definition of gender variance to the one commonly used outside the medical community." You mean that you think that the medical community doesn't usually mix up the terms gender dysphoria and gender variance? If so, perhaps not usually, but I've seen the mixup (interchangeability matter) enough among scholarly sources, which is why I pointed to examples. You stated "It should be obvious [that the Gender Identity Research and Education Society is] using a different definition for gender variant" and "so it's clearly not referring to the definition either of us was talking about." You also stated, "I hadn't heard of this usage before, which is why I was confused when you stated dysphoria could refer to gender variance. However, I don't understand why you linked the wiki page on gender variance when you did, considering it's about the definition that refers to 'behaviour or gender expression that does not match gender norms' (to quote the first line). I also don't understand why you didn't clear up my confusion when I stated that 'using dysphoria to refer to just non-conformity to gender roles would be deeply insulting', if you knew it was a different definition. Why not just agree and explain the definition, if you understood it?" .... But what makes you think that I was talking about gender dysphoria in a purely medical context, especially since I stated, "Though the term gender dysphoria can be used without reference to any diagnosis, and sometimes to simply indicate gender variance, it is usually used in reference to a diagnosis."? I'm also thinking that you didn't assess the Gender variance article much past the lead, since it's about more than just "behaviour or gender expression that does not match gender norms of male and female." It goes into noting the fact that the word transgender is sometimes used interchangeably with gender-variant, and it notes various other topics, including GID. I'm confused by your confusion of my supposed confusion. I did take into account the same interpretation you got from the Gender Identity Research and Education Society's comment on the gender variance/gender dysphoria passage I cited (meaning I considered that interpretation as well), but I went with what seemed (to me) just as likely an interpretation; like you stated, "It's a minor thing."

You stated, "I really hope you wouldn't equate transvestism to transsexuality. By "transsexuality," I take it you mean "transsexualism," which is where transsexuality redirects to, and not "transgender"? I ask because, as shown at the Transgender article, transvestism is considered an aspect of transgender; and that matter has been debated by editors at the Transgender talk page.

You stated, "Sixth one is weird. I think it's too old to be relevant now, it talks about things like 'deeper consideration of the relationship between gender variance and homosexuality', when it's understood these days that there is no relationship between sexual orientation and gender identity." Like the Gender variance and Childhood gender nonconformity articles relay, "In some studies, a majority of those who identify as gay or lesbian self-report being gender non-conforming as children. However, the accuracy of these studies has been questioned from within the academic community." Research on this particular matter is not yet settled. Indeed, and as indicated by psychologist/sexologist James Cantor, it seems that gender nonconformity is far more prevalent among people who later turn out to be gay or lesbian or bisexual-identified than those who turn out to be heterosexual. So I take it that this is what the source means by "relationship between gender variance and homosexuality." Either way, you are correct that the source is pointing to outdated data, and so I am willing disregard it.

Above, I used the sources that I did to support two matters: The first of those matters is that gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria usually mean the same thing and that the DSM-5 listing of gender dysphoria is the same as a diagnosis for gender identity disorder, except for a different name and slightly different criteria. The second of those matters was to show that the term gender dysphoria is sometimes used to simply indicate gender variance. The sources, though clearly not all of them in both cases, support me on those things. I'm not sure why there are two or a few sources you can't see (except for my broken link), but as for the Encyclopedia of Gender and Society, Volume 1 (page 355) source, where it states "Gender dysphoria is discomfort or dissatisfaction with one's gender." and also states that it "is an umbrella term used to refer both transvestites and transgendered persons," yes, it gives two different definitions and then that bit about a woman dressing in men's clothing not being socially constructed as gender dysphoric, but rather as gender variant.

You stated that my line of "because transvestites, as the Transgender article also addresses, are included in the definition of transgender; gender variant people in general are often included in the definition of transgender" is highly contentious. Were you only referring to the sometimes inclusion of gender variant people in the transgender category? Or do you also object to transvestites being included in the definition of transgender? Whatever the case, as noted above by referring to transvestism and the Transgender talk page, I'm clearly aware that it's contentious among the transgender community to include transvestism as transgender. Yes, I'm also aware that "transvestite" can be considered a pejorative, but it's a term used in the some of the sources above, and in sources at the Transgender article, and I wanted to be clear about what I am referring to with regard to that topic/those sources for anyone reading this discussion. Also, we have a Transvestism and a Cross-dressing Wikipedia article. Wikipedia can come to WP:Consensus, just like it did regarding the move matter of the Gender identity disorder article; just not always.

Like I relayed above, "I'm somewhat at a loss about what to state to you on this matter. I stated above that the terms gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria are usually used interchangeably, and I pointed to WP:Reliable sources that show this to be the case; you have not proven that this is not the case. If it were not the case, both of these terms -- gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria -- would not be regulated to this Gender identity disorder article as far as article titles go, after much discussion about that matter. Unless a need is shown to have a Gender dysphoria article as separate from the Gender identity disorder article, the terms will continue to only have one page devoted to them."

That (the latest seventh paragraph of mine) is how I still feel. You are asking for "Gender identity disorder" and "Gender dysphoria" to be two separate Wikipedia articles when the terms are generally (note: generally, not always) defined as the same thing in the literature; I've pointed to sources above showing that definitional matter to be the case. The lead currently states, "Gender identity disorder (GID) or gender dysphoria is the formal diagnosis used by psychologists and physicians to describe people who experience significant dysphoria (discontent) with the sex they were assigned at birth and/or the gender roles associated with that sex." That is true of both terms, as various WP:Reliable sources show. You keep stating that "gender dysphoria is very different to GID. Gender dysphoria doesn't pathologise 'merely being a transgender person', only 'the distress and impairment caused by a conflict between gender identity and sex'." That is what I mean by WP:Synthesis -- you asserting that the terms are very different and presenting matters as though the terms are usually referring to different things in the literature. I am well aware that the WP:Synthesis policy, like it states in its lead, does not apply to Wikipedia talk pages (I've recently pointed that out elsewhere). But it would be WP:Synthesis to state in the Gender identity disorder article or elsewhere on Wikipedia that "gender dysphoria is very different to GID." You state that "gender dysphoria is very different to GID," but WP:Reliable sources don't show that or distinguish the terms in those ways. They either define gender identity disorder or gender dysphoria the same, similarly or simply state that gender dysphoria is the same thing as gender identity disorder in the DSM-5 but with a different name and slightly different criteria. The DSM-5 is not the only medical source that uses the term gender dysphoria. And, for years, and as still shown by various WP:Reliable sources, gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria are used interchangeably. You find a lot of my interpretations on these matters odd; I find a lot of your interpretations on these matters odd; so we are at a stalemate. I don't have the patience to work out all of or the majority of our differences on this topic, especially with huge posts, and considering they likely will not be worked out and this section will remain only a very long section of debates. So since you think that "[Gender dysphoria] should have its own [Wikipedia] page or [that the Gender identity disorder page] should be changed [to the Gender dysphoria title]" or in some way that I find at odds with what many sources state on this mater," then I suggest you take the matter to the WP:MED talk page (like I did a year ago when seeking opinions on such matters) or propose yet another official WP:Requested move discussion. But if you go the move discussion route, I suggest you re-read over why WP:Consensus was against this article being moved to Gender dysphoria. Flyer22 (talk) 05:42, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's very important when we're editing to make sure that we reflect reliable sources accurately, and avoid imparting our own feelings about how something should be into the article. I reviewed some of the reliable sources, such as the APA, Medline and the DSM and it appears the subject of this article is indicated by a term in transition. According to the sourcing, "Gender identity disorder" in scholarly texts is being replaced by "Gender dysphoria" but the sources are clear to indicate they are referring to the same phonomenon, and so per the sourcing I do not see a case for splitting this article into two. Also, I saw some very poor-quality sources provided; they do no factor in this discussion. Zad68 17:04, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Zad68, by "poor sources," you mean some sources that Flower f5a9b8 provided, some sources on both of our sides (such as the gires.org.uk/Gender Identity Research and Education Society source that I provided above as an example) and/or sources you came across on your own? Flyer22 (talk) 18:24, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Flyer I wasn't really paying close attention as to "whose" sources, but transwhat.org appears to be a self-published source, and yes gires.org appears to be the website of an advocacy group, so I would not weight those sources too highly. Certainly the case can be made to avoid splitting this article by using only high-quality, authoritative sources (as mentioned) so there shouldn't be a need to look to websites like those. Zad68 19:55, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Zad68, yes, when citing the gires.org.uk source above (my "04:22, 19 July 2014 (UTC)" post), I stated "(call it reliable or unreliable)"; it certainly looks unreliable as far as WP:Reliable sources go. But I cited it to counter an assertion made by Flower f5a9b8, and made sure to provide better sources to counter the assertion. Anyway, we're in agreement on this splitting and sourcing matter. Flyer22 (talk) 20:13, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes indeed and thanks for pointing that out. Zad68 20:25, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zad, thanks for contributing. As Flyer just mentioned the page we're discussing has as its first sentence: "Gender dysphoria or gender identity disorder (GID) is the former diagnosis used by psychologists and physicians to describe people who experience significant dysphoria (discontent) with the sex they were assigned at birth and/or the gender roles associated with that sex". The dysphoria being refered to is surely gender dysphoria, which means it's including one of the terms it's defining in its definition. To be accurate I argue it would read "gender identity disorder (GID) is the former diagnosis used by psychologists and physicians to describe people who experience significant gender dysphoria".

I don't believe the terms are in transition, they refer to things that are really very different (albeit perhaps subtlely). In contrast to the definition of GID above (which I think typically extends to include anyone who does not identify as their assigned gender), gender dysphoria refers to the distress and impairment those people experience at some point in their lives. This definition has been backed up by reputable sources I've provided such as the APA both here and here (see under treatment issues), the UK NHS and the World Professional Association for Transgender Health both here, where they refer to gender dysphoria seperately to GID in passing (see "clinically significant distress and impairment known as gender dysphoria that is often associated with transsexualism"), and their response of the change of diagnosis in the DSM 5 here (.pdf). I'm sorry if the non-scientific sources I previously included aren't relevant, I wanted to show that the term gender dysphoria is also used in the transgender community with the same meaning.

I looked up medline and while it does define gender dysphoria in the way you have both been describing, in the same way as GID, there is a great deal on the page that is questionable or straight up wrong. The opening states "The person is very uncomfortable with the gender they were born as" showing a fundamental lack of understanding about the difference between gender and sex (something of vital importance when discussing transgender issues). The page also states that the "condition" may affect the individual's choice of partners, which is incorrect. In fact the whole idea that the dysphoria/GID affects any of the things they mention is misunderstood. Being transgender in itself doesn't change a person's self-identity. Gender identity is a fundamental part of everyone's self-identity from a young age, why would it affect transgender people any more than it affects cisgender people? In fact logically you'd expect it to affect trans people's behaviour and development less if they're in denial about it, can't come out or aren't aware of it yet. The icing on the cake is "The feeling of being in the body of the "wrong" gender must last for at least 2 years for this diagnosis to be made", which is frankly just complete bullshit. It shows very clearly how little whoever wrote that understands about transgender people.

Flyer, for the record you misunderstood my comment about the transgender community; I wasn't excluding non-op trans people, quite the opposite. To reiterate I think they're generally accepted and not considered any "less trans" within the community (from what I've seen). I was only using distinction in the sense of catergorising, separating. Also, like I've said before I really don't like the idea of including cis people in the term transgender. That's especially the case with transvestites since transgender people are widely misunderstood as just people dressing up for sexual reasons. It makes me feel like there aren't any good terms for people like me. So if you could just humour me for this conversation and let me use the term transgender to refer to people whose gender identity doesn't match their assigned gender, I'd really appreciate that. I used "transsexuality" in the case you quoted very reluctantly and for want of a better term, but you still didn't understand me. --Flower f5a9b8 (talk) 07:51, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Flower f5a9b8, I just now saw this post by you. We're at an impasse, a generally "agree to disagree" stage. The next step is WP:Redirects for discussion, as stated below. Flyer22 (talk) 04:13, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that does seem like a good idea. I don't think we're at an impasse though, reading the new thread clears things up on my end. On reflection I agree as suggested by April that it would be better to focus on gender dysphoria as the community understands it, because it seems there is division in the medical community over the definition of gender dysphoria. While some such as the APA, the UK NHS and WPATH apparently (from my examples) use it as it's understood in the community to refer to an experience of distress and impairment, others are sticking to the definition of GID and using gender dysphoria as a replacement in name only. Doc James linked a source in the new thread that is consistent with the Medline source provided earlier here; it uses a similar definition to GID. So, I do see where you were coming from and agree with you on the general point now: as medical diagnoses, gender dysphoria and GID cannot be distinguished reliably. Maybe, as Zad suggested, the term is in transition. --Flower f5a9b8 (talk) 22:53, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Flower f5a9b8, and especially for being reasonable and generally pleasant throughout this discussion and for not, like an editor in the aforementioned WP:Redirect for discussion, throwing unfounded insinuations my way about my supposed transphobia. If I have a bias on this matter, it's a Wikipedia policy or guideline bias or a medical bias. I know that I can sometimes give especial weight to a medical topic, meaning more weight to that than to the social, non-medical aspect of that topic. I agree that how the transgender community defines gender dysphoria is very important; I just couldn't reconcile that with having both a Gender identity disorder and Gender dysphoria article. But I noted in the WP:Redirect for discussion that if a Gender dysphoria article is well done, and seems distinct enough from the Gender identity disorder article, I could support its creation. Flyer22 (talk) 23:11, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Drawing on the conversation we had surrounding last year's move request, I have created a disambiguation page at Gender dysphoria articulating the difference between the medical diagnosis and the subjective experience. I strongly encourage any editor who wants to write a full article on the subjective experience of gender dysphoria (as distinct from this medically oriented article) to do so. --April Arcus (talk) 03:33, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And I reverted, per the discussion above. Except for WP:Primary topic, this is not WP:Disambiguation material. The WP:Primary topic for this term is the Gender identity disorder article. WP:Consensus has been clear on this matter. And WP:Consensus is policy. Going around that WP:Consensus by creating a WP:Disambiguation page in a case it does not apply to is not productive. The way to settle the matter is taking it to WP:Redirects for discussion. Flyer22 (talk) 03:50, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done --April Arcus (talk) 04:09, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll alert WP:Med to the discussion. Flyer22 (talk) 04:13, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Terrific. I'll mention it to WP:LGBT. --April Arcus (talk) 04:27, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's pertinent to revisit this issue, given some of the discussion at the transsexualism talk page, relating to changing transsexualism to transsexual, for wp:commonname and [wp:povtitle]] reasons. Similarly the APA has changed the GID diagnosis to gender dysphoria, and there is no ICD diagnosis of GID. They're still running with transsexualism, but are likely to go straight to dysphoria or other non-stigmatising language with the upcoming ICD-11.

After all, if we organised homosexuality to redirect to sexual inversion, we'd be strung up.Chocolate vittles (talk) 10:27, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Chocolate vittles, I added a "Section break" heading above your post because this discussion is very long and has been stale since (or rather ended in) August 2014. As for your commentary, if WP:Common name applies in this case, then gender identity disorder is the WP:Common name, as has been discussed to death at this talk page; it is also still the most common medical name for the diagnosis, so Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles#Article titles also applies. And stating that this is a WP:POVTITLE case can be argued either way, since arguing that we should move the article to Gender dysphoria because the term gender dysphoria is less stigmatizing than gender identity disorder is POV. And like WP:POVTITLE states, "When the subject of an article is referred to mainly by a single common name, as evidenced through usage in a significant majority of English-language reliable sources, Wikipedia generally follows the sources and uses that name as its article title (subject to the other naming criteria)." The Homosexuality article is not titled Sexual inversion for various valid reasons that you are surely aware of. But we do have a Sexual inversion (sexology) article.

Going by Wikipedia's logic, having this article titled Gender identity disorder is not an invalid matter. See what is stated on Flower f5a9b8's talk page about this. Flower f5a9b8 acknowledged that the terms gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria are not well distinguished in medical sources, and is planning on making a Gender dysphoria article that goes beyond the diagnosis. Flower f5a9b8's plan sounds like it would end up involving two articles significantly addressing the same topic, however, and that the gender identity disorder content would, as a result, be merged into the Gender dysphoria article. The merge seems like something that would bypass the WP:Consensus to have this article titled Gender identity disorder. If such a merge were to happen, then it would be best to simply move the Gender identity disorder article to the Gender dysphoria title, to preserve this article's edit history. Either that, or a WP:Histmerge should be requested after the merge to preserve this article's edit history. If the ICD-11 uses the terminology gender dysphoria instead of gender identity disorder, then there will be a stronger case for moving the title of this article to Gender dysphoria. Right now, there is not, as is made clear at Talk:Gender identity disorder/Archive 2#Requested move 02 September 2013, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 August 31#Gender dysphoria, and above. Flyer22 (talk) 18:28, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the section break - it helps a lot. Regardless of what you, I, or Flower f5a9b8 think on the matter, Gender Identity Disorder is deprecated, and has been replaced as a diagnosis as of 2013 by Gender Dysphoria. The article's content relates specifically to a formal psychiatric diagnosis, which is no longer valid. If you don't like that, it's best to take that up with the APA.

It's not Wikipedia's role to be activists, either for or against. It's wikipedia's role to reflect accurately current reality. And current reality, after many long meetings of the DSM-V GD taskforce is that there is no longer a GID diagnosis, and we now have the diagnosis of Gender Dysphoria.^[1] That was back in 2013. We're now in 2015. Time for wikipedia to change with the times. By all means create a separate GID page referring to the historical DSM-IV diagnosis, but bear in mind that it's historical.

While we're at it, I see the article doesn't even link to DSM-IV. Instead it performs linguistic somersaults in order to infer that the DSM-V diagnosis is actually GID, but that they're referring to GID as GD. This is particularly disingenuous. The diagnosis changed for a whole lot of very good reasons, mostly around not pathologising healthy people, and you'd do well to read some of the taskforce thoughts.

So I ask, again, why do we insist on sticking with the outdated terminology?Chocolate vittles (talk) 04:10, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Again, this has been thoroughly discussed at this talk page; you are arguing things that I and others have already been over extensively. Do read those discussions if you have not read them. As was stated in the 2013 WP:MED DSM-5 discussion, Wikipedia does not bend over backwards for the DSM terminology (no matter what version) when it comes to medical topics. The DSM-5, which is a United States diagnostic tool, as opposed to an automatic international diagnostic tool like the ICD-10 (though both are used internationally, with the DSM to a lesser extent), does not get to decide what is outdated for the general medical community. Neither does the ICD-10 nor the ICD-11, for that matter. Do read that WP:MED discussion which specifically addresses the DSM-5 terminology. The gender identity disorder terminology is still widely used; this was made explicitly clear in the 2013 and 2014 discussions I linked to above, and with my discussion with Flower f5a9b8 above. Like Flower f5a9b8, who made arguments similar to yours, stated above, the "22:53, 31 August 2014 (UTC)" post, "...I don't think we're at an impasse though, reading the new thread clears things up on my end. On reflection I agree as suggested by April that it would be better to focus on gender dysphoria as the community understands it, because it seems there is division in the medical community over the definition of gender dysphoria. While some such as the APA, the UK NHS and WPATH apparently (from my examples) use it as it's understood in the community to refer to an experience of distress and impairment, others are sticking to the definition of GID and using gender dysphoria as a replacement in name only. Doc James linked a source in the new thread that is consistent with the Medline source provided earlier here; it uses a similar definition to GID. So, I do see where you were coming from and agree with you on the general point now: as medical diagnoses, gender dysphoria and GID cannot be distinguished reliably. Maybe, as Zad suggested, the term is in transition."

Flower f5a9b8 also stated on the Flower f5a9b8 talk page, "b) 'Gender dysphoria/GID/transsexuality, as a pathology/mental illness [...] The current focus of the gender dysphoria/GID article. [...] In this context it is currently not productive to try to distinguish between gender dysphoria (as a diagnosis) and gender identity dysphoria, as I conceded to Flyer in the post they quoted."

Do not make this about what I don't like by stating, "If you don't like that, it's best to take that up with the APA." And do not presume what I know and do not know with statements like "and you'd do well to read some of the taskforce thoughts." This is not about what I don't like. And I am well-versed in LGBT topics; yes, that includes the T. I have been explicitly clear with you (as seen here and here) that I do not tolerate WP:Advocacy. My user page is explicitly clear that I do not tolerate it. I do not edit Wikipedia with a WP:IDON'TLIKEIT rationale or with a WP:ILIKEIT rationale. My involvement with the naming of this article, and the aforementioned redirect matter, has been consistently about following Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. As is clearly seen at Talk:Gender identity disorder/Archive 2#Requested move 02 September 2013, I did not even vote in the move discussion, and, near the end of that discussion, I noted, "'In the survey section, editors cite WP:MEDMOS for support of the move; because of that, I feel the need to remind editors that the reason that this article was moved back to Gender identity disorder the first time is because of WP:MOSMED. This is what the Wikipedia:MEDMOS#Naming conventions guideline states, 'The article title should be the scientific or recognised medical name that is most commonly used in recent, high-quality, English-language medical sources.' The keywords there are 'most commonly.' I see no evidence that 'gender dysphoria' is the name that is most commonly used in recent, high-quality, English-language medical sources. But again, I don't care much which title is used on Wikipedia. However, the Gender dysphoria title is less offensive/less stigmatizing to/for transgender people." So, Chocolate vittles, if you want to go ahead and start another WP:Requested move discussion on this topic, which you clearly do, then go for it. I will also refrain from voting in that discussion, but I will point to past discussions about this, alert WP:MED to the discussion, and specifically counter the notion that the DSM-5 terminology rules. Flyer22 (talk) 05:40, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Let's go ahead and change the title to Gender dysphoria via a WP:Requested move; yes, I've clearly changed my mind. The Bruce Jenner matter and the option to validly reduce stigma via changing the article's title have made me suddenly not have such a rigid view of keeping the article's current title based on the WP:Common name policy or any other Wikipedia policy or guideline. The term gender dysphoria has gained significant traction for the diagnosis, and it won't hurt anything to move the article to that title. That stated, the article should still mention gender identity disorder in the lead, per WP:Alternative title, and not in the past tense...since a number of medical texts simply use the terms gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria interchangeably. Flyer22 (talk) 07:58, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: And it's not just the Jenner matter, which has brought greater visibility to transgender people, that has me thinking this way, but it's also the Aydian Dowling matter (seen here and here) and this recent soap opera casting matter. Transgender people are getting a lot more attention these days, and that has urged me toward letting go of the current title as the article's title. Flyer22 (talk) 08:33, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In other words, with so many more people reading about this topic, we should take more care with it. Flyer22 (talk) 08:39, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Flyer22 (talk · contribs), sorry to kind of abandon you here. I sadly didn't have the time recently I would've liked to spend on this. Hearing that you think we'll likely keep the one article simplifies things a bit and saves me having to work out how to structure a whole article when I'm pretty clueless about standard wikipedia styles, formats, layouts, etc. I've got plenty of sources and changes to suggest, but to start with I made some changes to the "signs and symptoms" section to add some extra sources, improve the existing ones and remove some statements which weren't sourced (as far as I could see). If you could give it a look over and suggest any pointers or explain any mistakes I made I'd really appreciate that. I seem to have broken a doi value (whatever that is), but I think I've fixed it now. I'll read up on that and how references work in general when I'm not rushing. — Flower f5a9b8 00:58, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I am an undergraduate student and have been assigned a Wikipedia Project. I have to add or edit something involved in the world of Abnormal Psychology. I was looking into GID and I found some pretty interesting facts. I personally feel like this would be a great addition to the page considering the fact that these are some pretty unfortunate but more importantly, real situations that if brought to the attention of others as a "fact" of GID, can be addressed by changing the all too common reaction towards someone who may be "different" because they have this disorder. Please let me know if there is anything unacceptable or needing of change. Thanks so much!

Signs and symptoms Symptoms of GID in children include disgust at their own genitalia, social isolation from their peers, anxiety, loneliness and depression.[12] According to the American Psychological Association, transgender children are more likely to experience harassment and violence in school, foster care, residential treatment centers, homeless centers and juvenile justice programs than other children.[13]

ADDITION: In children and adolescents, this social isolation can often contribute to low self-esteem, leading to issues in academia (dropping out of school, failing classes, etc.). Peer ostracism and teasing are especially common consequences for boys with the disorder. This disturbance can often be so extensive that the mental lives of some individuals revolve only around activities that lessen gender distress. Relationships with parents also may be seriously impaired. Some males with gender identity disorder resort to self-treatment with hormones and may (very rarely) perform their own castration or penectomy. Certain male individuals with Genetic Identity Disorder may involve themselves in prostitution, which will sometimes place them at a high risk for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. Suicide attempts and substance-related disorders are also extremely prevalent.

Adults with GID are at increased risk for stress, isolation, anxiety, depression, poor self-esteem and suicide.[12] Transgender women are likelier than other persons to smoke cigarettes and abuse alcohol and other drugs. In the United States, transgender women have a higher suicide rate than others, both before and after gender reassignment surgery,[12] and are at heightened risk for certain mental disorders.[14]

In 2014, a researcher found that the brains of adolescents with gender dysphoria react to the sex hormone androstadienone in a measurable way similar to the brain of the gender with which the person identifies.[15]

^[2] Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page).

AMMagill (talk) 22:34, 4 December 2014 (UTC)Alexis Magill - AMMagill[reply]

Conflicting studies exist on research done on differences in the corpus callosum. The Yakota study appears to indicate a difference. The publishers of the Yakota article argued that the shape of the corpus callosum correlates better with the 'mental sex' of individuals rather than their 'physical sex'.[Yokota, Y.; Kawamura, Y.; Kameya, Y. (2005). "2005 IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology 27th Annual Conference". pp. 3055–8. doi:10.1109/IEMBS.2005.1617119. ISBN 0-7803-8741-4. |chapter= ignored (help)]

However, other studies suggest that there is no difference in the corpus callosum regardless of sex or gender, other than that of biological males is slightly larger. [Emory LE1, Williams DH, Cole CM, Amparo EG, Meyer WJ. (1991) "Anatomic variation of the corpus callosum in persons with gender dysphoria". | Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston 77550.| http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1953331]

"Previous postmortem anatomical studies have demonstrated differences between male and female in the size and shape of the splenium of the corpus callosum. The current study using the magnetic resonance imager compares the corpus callosum in 20 transsexuals and 40 controls to determine if the anatomic variance is related to anatomic sex or gender identity. No statistical differences were found in the cross-sectional areas of the entire corpus callosum, regardless of genetic sex or gender. However, the genetic males did have a larger whole-brain cross-sectional area. Also, even though there was a wide range of differences in shape and size in the splenium, the study found no significant differences between the sexes or between transsexual patients of either sex and the controls."

While neither study regarding corpus callosum difference shows on the article, I thought it might be worth a look to those working on the article. Awolnetdiva (talk) 17:05, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There has been a breakthrough in locating and affecting the genetic markers that influence gender in utero. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/03/150331121249.htm Published in the most recent edition of Nature Neuroscience journal, but I have not yet located the original publication details to cite it.

I'd like to introduce the following paragraph into the wiki regarding this new research and wanted to reach consensus on wording and citation.

The brains of most animals develop male or female characteristics during a narrow window of development while in utero. This process involves a group of enzymes known as DNA methyltransferases, or Dnmts, which modify DNA to repress gene expression, and leads to portions of male and female brains being a different size, as well as having a different number of neurons and synapses in most species. Recent research has shown that these Dnmts can be affected in utero during this developmental stage, but also can be affected post-partum after the development window was thought to be closed. Professors McCarthy and Nugent demonstrated that post-partum male and female rats could be given brain characteristics and behaviors of the opposite sex by isolating and targeting the Dnmts that repress or initiate gene expression. They succeeded in transforming the brains of female rats after the window had closed, giving them the physical characteristics of a male rat brain, as well as the behaviors of a male rat. Since the Dnmts that determine male or female brain characteristics and behaviors can be affected chemically, this research has the potential to unlock future pharmacological treatment options for persons with GID. McCarthy has also located sex and gender differences in levels of a protein associated with language acquisition and development.

Awolnetdiva (talk) 16:56, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

THere's quite a bit in the article about this, but no evidence it's happened. Doug Weller (talk) 17:10, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Google Ngrams for Gender identity disorder,Gender identity dysphoria,Gender dysphoria show "Gender dysphoria" as having gained far greater general usage in recent times.

I really think that the perception that someone has a disorder - when "he" or "she" has a self perception of having a different gender from the one biologically assigned (by a ~2% chromosome input) - may be behind us. Situations like the Caitlyn Jenner (previously Bruce Jenner) case has also served to bring transgender issues more into the mainstream.

Is there a way for articles to be named of arranged so as to fit in with the medical diagnosis and also reflect the interpretation that it may be the society in which the judgemental views presented that is disordered.

GregKaye 22:51, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gender dysphoria should be focused only on the medical questions as related to gender, not sex. Being a crossdresser and getting a sex change operation are two completely different things, I would argue more different than being heterosexual or homosexual, because the latter requires surgical, hormonal and other physiological changes to the body to be satisfied, while the former requires none of that. Indeed, since being transgender is perfectly possible, and found even in non-human creatures, like the Bellbird and many others, but the situation being transsexual - which I would define as making a conscious choice to change one's biology in terms of sex, is effectively only possible with modern medical technology, and hence one cannot truly be said to be "born that way", unlike with heterosexuals, homosexuals, bisexuals and transgender folk. Just a thought. Jamutaq (talk) 17:18, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jamutaq, like I stated at the Sex assignment talk page, sex assignment is correct since that is the prevalent term for this topic in scholarly sources and media sources. It is correct because the baby is stated to be a sex when they are born based on their genitalia; unknown to the person (or people) assigning the sex, the baby might be intersex. Gender assignment is also correct because along with that sex...that baby is assigned a gender. But sex assignment is the WP:Common name. So that is why gender assignment is in the lead as the WP:Alternative title." I also stated, "As noted in the Sex and gender distinction article, it's not always the case that sex and gender are distinguished; they are commonly treated as synonyms."

As for transgender and transsexual being distinguished, see the Transgender article; they commonly are not distinguished. And in any case, a transsexual person is transgender person. Furthermore gender dysphoria, at least in the Gender dysphoria article, is not referring to cross dressers.

As for non-human animals being transgender, like I noted at the Homosexual behavior in animals article talk page, "From what I know of the topic of transgender, the term transgender is usually used differently for humans than for non-human animals."

As for being "born that way," the study of sexual orientation, just like the study of the causes of transsexualism, has not definitively revealed the causes. But regarding sexual orientation and human nature in general, scientists these days generally believe that it's a combination of biology and environment (nature and nurture). Flyer22 (talk) 21:06, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have two requests. My first is that the article be treated as part of a series on Psychological or biological disorders, rather than gender studies, as a view least obscured by bias would be best for this article. I'm aware it already says it's specialty is Psychiatry, however I think it should be kept in mind.

In addition, I think we should consider introducing the fact that this disorder is one that must be diagnosed by the assessment of a doctor. This is in contrast to (and i apologize for the awkward wording and possible offense) belonging to a Transgender identity, of which it is debatable who makes the final decision of what they are. I mean this as social and cultural factors play in as well before someone comes out, and usually the process is not along the lines waking up one morning as a kid, brushing your teeth, realizing you are trans, coming downstairs and telling your parents. Not to mention there is still a debate over Intersex matters in terms of this^[1]. --Dabrams13 (talk) 19:59, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

___

Sorry but no, the current approach is meant to alleviate social anxiety and depression. They do not believe there is a medical need for reverse hormones, cosmetic surgery or certain clothes. Males can not be be turned into females — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.207.135.183 (talk • contribs)

Gender dysphoria

On return to this article I started with this edit to add the "Gender identity disorder" text in the infobox as shown to the right. This change was made on the basis that the IDC references present "Gender identity disorder", the MedlinePlus reference presents "Gender dysphoria" while the Me Sh reference just mentions "Gender identity" with a potentially significant absence of use of ".. disorder"

While I think that the Google trends data remains important as it, arguably, presents evidence of actual usage, the Ngrams data (to 2008) presents a marginally different view.

From the beginning of 2009 results in books are that:

• "gender dysphoria" gets About 1,330 results[1] while

"gender identity disorder" gets About 932 results[2]

This also comes in the context of the news coverage such as this article in the very liberal Huffington Post which presents: "In the new edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), released on May 22, the now-defunct diagnosis of gender identity disorder (GID) receives a new name, gender dysphoria, which reflects a new emphasis."

In line with the change in the infobox I have also edited the lead here which previously presented:

• "Gender dysphoria or gender identity disorder (GID) is the formal diagnosis used by psychologists and physicians to describe people who experience significant dysphoria (discontent) with the sex and gender they were assigned at birth."

So that it reads:

• "Gender dysphoria is the dysphoria (discontent) that some people experience with the sex and gender with which they have been assigned at birth. It is also commonly described as gender identity disorder (GID) especially in formal diagnosis of psychologists and physicians."

I personally consider and think that I have argued that there is also need for us to carefully consider this issue.

There are people around the world that are getting thrown off buildings and this is often due to issues that stem from situations such as the human condition known as "gender identity disorder". I personally think might have originally been more neutrally been named as something such as "gender development disorder". The context of the issue is that a person is born is born with a particular set of genetics and then develop with the genitalia associated with one gender and with a world view and mentality associated with the other gender. On this basis my argument, which I maintain to have validity, is that it has been an assertion of POV that the interpretation presented is that the "disorder" is one of "identity".

I have added the second heading to the info box on the basis that it gives representation of content that follows but also wonder whether this is strictly necessary. I would also like to open up any potential discussion regarding the best presentation of the opening paragraph.

GregKaye 07:28, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted you on this. Gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria, although sometimes used interchangeably, are not always defined the same way. Gender dysphoria has at times been used more broadly, and the term gender identity disorder is only defunct in the DSM-5 (and in sources following the DSM-5's lead), which is not the sole authority on medical issues. The DSM-5 is also rejected by a large portion of the medical community. These aspects were already discussed above, in the Gender dysphoria redirect discussion; I am not going to repeat all or most of what I stated there in this section. I suggest you read that section, as I've already suggested you do, if you have not. As I've also noted on this talk page, in the #Gender dysphoria as commonly recognisable and less judgemental name section you started above, the vast majority of the sources in this article currently used the term gender identity disorder instead of gender dysphoria. If you want the lead changed, then see if you can update the article with WP:MEDRS-compliant sources using the term gender dysphoria in the same way for every instance in the article that the term gender identity disorder is used. I'll tell you right now that you cannot, since MEDRS-compliant sources are largely lagging behind in calling "gender identity disorder" by the name "gender dysphoria" for all of those instances.

As you've already been told by more than one person, it is not for us to define what is or is not a disorder; it is up to the medical community and to Wikipedia to follow what that medical community states, not try to lead it by WP:Righting the great wrongs. I've stated before on this talk page that taking away the term disorder from this diagnosis doesn't take away from the fact that it is still a diagnosis found in a manual called Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and similar manuals/books. It is still pathologized. Taking away or reducing the term disorder with regard to this diagnosis is not going to help "people around the world [stop] getting thrown off buildings [...] due to issues that stem from situations [related to this topic]." And to suggest so is silly. Flyer22 (talk) 11:09, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On a related note: I don't think it is appropriate for you to apply the term gender dysphoria in cases such as this one, when the diagnosis was actually gender identity disorder and the criteria was different back then. Doing this is similar to what I stated about doing that type of thing at this article when the sources use the term gender identity disorder instead of gender dysphoria. You are acting like gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria are always interchangeable, when they are not. That is also seen with this, this and this edit. I doubt that LGBT rights in Iceland used the term gender dysphoria instead of gender identity disorder in that case; and today, we don't know if they prefer to use gender dysphoria instead of gender identity disorder. Furthermore, you left the "GID" text in without letting editors know what "GID" means. Bailey uses the term gender identity disorder in the book The Man Who Would Be Queen. And regarding this edit, the removal is inappropriate if that school does allow people to list gender identity disorder as a disability; there are various medical aspects to gender dysphoria, after all, including distress and wanting medical assistance to align one's body with the identified sex/gender. That stated, the list in that article is a WP:Link farm, so your removal toned that down a tad. Flyer22 (talk) 17:49, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kaldari, regarding this edit, see what I stated above in this section. Flyer22 (talk) 02:40, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Flyer! Sorry I missed this discussion. Feel free to revise my edits as needed. I mainly just wanted to update the article since the content about the DSM was outdated. I don't have a strong opinion on the correct term for the diagnosis (or the article), but FWIW, it seems like gender dysphoria has largely displaced gender identity disorder in the last few years.[3] Kaldari (talk) 02:58, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Kaldari. My main concern in this discussion is that we take care not to use the terms interchangeably in ways that are at odds with the sources; this is why I stated above, "Gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria, although sometimes used interchangeably, are not always defined the same way. Gender dysphoria has at times been used more broadly, and the term gender identity disorder is only defunct in the DSM-5 (and in sources following the DSM-5's lead), which is not the sole authority on medical issues." Flyer22 (talk) 03:02, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense. It's a bit tricky in the "Classification as a disorder" section though, since that section is largely devoted to the DSM. For example, it isn't really correct for us to say that "GID is classified as a disorder" by the DSM. I'm fine with changing most of the mentions back to GID, so long as it isn't in reference to the DSM though. Kaldari (talk) 03:06, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the text; what do you think of it? The article needs updating in a number of ways because of the GID terminology, but, like I stated above, first the medical sources need to catch up; most of them use "GID" because this topic was known by that name, with slightly different criteria, for so long. As for "it isn't really correct for us to say that 'GID is classified as a disorder' by the DSM.", that was the classification, though. And as for what the DSM states today, via the DSM-5, I reiterate "that taking away the term disorder from this diagnosis doesn't take away from the fact that it is still a diagnosis found in a manual called Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and similar manuals/books. It is still pathologized." Flyer22 (talk) 03:25, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The "Biological causes" section (which has been tagged along with its parent section as "undue weight") is almost entirely about biological causes of having a certain gender identity / brain-anatomical sex, which in turn, when it does not match one's gonadal sex, may result in transsexualism; one has to carry that train of thought through several train stations in order to label it as "biological causes of gender dysphoria". The section largely duplicates Gender identity#Biological_causes_of_transgender_and_transsexuality, and what it summarizes, Transsexual#Causes.2C_studies_and_theories; that, in turn, summarizes Causes_of_transsexualism. (This article also contains a few snippets that aren't present in the bigger article, which is problematic and yet to be expected whenever content has been duplicated across so many articles.) I propose to address the "undue weight" issue as well as the content duplication and out-of-sync-ness by trimming the "Causes" section down to roughly this (critiques welcome):

Main article: Causes of transsexualism

Gender dysphoria exists when a person experiences significant distress with the sex and gender they were assigned at birth,^[1] having a nonconforming gender identity. Researchers disagree about the nature of distress and impairment; some authors have suggested that people with gender dysphoria suffer because they are stigmatized and victimized,^[2] and that, if the society had less-strict gender divisions, transsexual people would suffer less.^[3]

Some studies have investigated whether or not there is a link between biological variables and transgender or transsexual identity.^[4][5] Several studies have shown that sexually dimorphic brain structures in transsexuals are shifted away from what is associated with their birth sex and towards what is associated with their preferred sex.^[6][7][8] Twin studies indicate that GID is 62% heritable, evidencing the genetic influence or prenatal development as its origin.^[9] In male-to-female transsexuals, GID is associated with variations in an individual's genes that make the individual less sensitive to androgens.^[10]

This snippet could be moved to Transsexual#Causes (everything else I've trimmed seem to already be present there):

Some aspects of trans women's hypothalamus functioning resemble that typical of cisgender women.^[11]

-sche (talk) 20:44, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Per WP:Overlinking, I wouldn't link "sex" and "gender" again. And just so you know, this piece that you removed is also something I objected to; see Talk:Gender dysphoria/Archive 2#Copied from Flyer22's User Talk Page. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 20:54, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your proposed edits, -sche, but I would go further. The current wording implies, by omission, that brain differences are unique to trans populations, but there is now widespread evidence of brain plasticity, as well as brain sex differences between heterosexual and homosexual individuals in studies. Trankuility (talk) 00:36, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine with cutting it down even further, leaving discussion of brain differences and plasticity and homosexual/heterosexual differences to the main article(s). What about this?:

Main article: Causes of transsexualism

Gender dysphoria exists when a person experiences significant distress with the sex and gender they were assigned at birth.^[1] Recent studies have suggested that this has a biological basis and is caused by the development of gender identity before birth.^[12][13][14] Twin studies indicate that GID is 62% heritable, suggesting a genetic or prenatal origin.^[15] In male-to-female transsexuals, GID is associated with variations in an individual's genes that make the individual less sensitive to androgens.^[10] Researchers disagree about the nature of the distress; some authors have suggested that people with gender dysphoria suffer because they are stigmatized and victimized,^[16] and that if the society had less-strict gender divisions, transsexual people would suffer less.^[3]

or alternatively:

[...] they were assigned at birth,^[1] having a nonconforming gender identity; this may be biological.^[17][18][19] Twin studies [...]

-sche (talk) 01:33, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your first proposal is better. I don't like the "a biological basis only" type of vibe that the second proposal gives off. Per this discussion (that's a WP:Permalink) at Talk:Causes of transsexualism, we shouldn't appear to be pushing a "biological basis only" type of text. Scientists these days generally do not believe that any one thing, including biology alone, form our preferences and behavior. They generally have a nature and nurture viewpoint. This is why, when people make sexual orientation about "being born that way" vs. "being raised that way," I can't help but scoff or sigh. The formation of sexual orientation is not an "or" thing; sexual orientation is a combination of things, at least as far as the scientific community is concerned. While scientists generally don't believe that a person can be "raised heterosexual or gay", or some other sexual orientation, they do generally believe that the person's environment (not simply womb environment) in the early years contribute to the formation of sexual orientation. Enough of them feel similarly about gender identity and gender dysphoria, especially gender dysphoria -- that it isn't just one thing that has caused it (that the vast majority of children with gender dysphoria "grow out of it" before puberty and identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual later in life has further contributed to the argument that biology alone does not cause gender dysphoria). Anyway, as for the Causes section of the Gender dysphoria article, it should be a true WP:Summary style reflection of the Causes of transsexualism article, meaning that even a little mention of the non-biological theories should be noted. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 15:02, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, when you say the first proposal is better, do you mean the first of the two short proposals I made at 01:33 30 November 2015, or my initial (long) proposal of 20:44 29 November 2015? The 20:44 proposal has much more of a "biology!" vibe, in my opinion, since it goes into detail on dimorphic brain structures and the like (possibly necessitating, per Trankuility, discussion of straight/gay people's biology). What about:

Main articles: Causes of transsexualism and Gender identity § Factors influencing formation

Gender dysphoria exists when a person experiences significant distress with the sex and gender they were assigned at birth,^[1] having a nonconforming gender identity. Both prenatal biological factors^[20][21][22] and early-childhood social factors^[23] have been suggested to influence gender identity. Twin studies indicate that gender dysphoria is 62% heritable.^[24] In male-to-female transsexuals, it is associated with variations in an individual's genes that make the individual less sensitive to androgens.^[10] Some authors have suggested that people with gender dysphoria suffer because they are stigmatized and victimized,^[25] and that if the society had less-strict gender divisions, transsexual people would suffer less.^[3]

-sche (talk) 20:21, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your "20:44, 29 November 2015 (UTC)" proposal is your first proposal; that's the one I meant. The first suggestion in your "01:33, 30 November 2015 (UTC)" post is more biological to me because it goes right into biological factors and talk of "gender identity before birth," when I don't think there are many scholars who think that gender identity is entirely genetic. I also doubt that a good number of them think it's mostly genetic, especially given gender binary cultures vs. third gender cultures and the topic of genderqueer people, with many of them stating that they were initially binary but now choose their gender identity. There is no disputing, however, that genetic ties have been indicated with regard to gender identity, and that, for transgender/transsexual topics (independent of genderqueer aspects), the genetic explanation is more popular. I prefer your latest proposal (the "20:21, 30 November 2015 (UTC)" one), and would rather we go with that. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:27, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with much of this material is that it looks at trans people in isolation, bereft of developments in broader field related to neuroscience. There's increasing evidence that brains are plastic and gender differences are minimal, let alone differences associated with being transgender. New Scientist has just published an article by a neuroscientist presenting some new Israeli research, and other recent findings: "Based on detailed and careful analysis of core features seen in scans of more than 1400 female and male human brains, Israeli researcher Daphna Joel and colleagues demonstrated that most are unique mixes or “mosaics” of features previously thought to be either “male” or “female”."^[26] Based upon this current research, most of the material on neurological causes of being transgender or transsexual could be said to be WP:UNDUE. Trankuility (talk) 16:15, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Trankuility, since gender dysphoria is about transgender people, we shouldn't be taking information about brain plasticity and attributing it to gender dysphoria unless the research is specifically, or even somewhat, about transgender people and/or gender dysphoria. Furthermore, per WP:MEDRS, we should be using the best available research on these matters; we generally should not be using WP:Primary source studies. And like the WP:MEDDATE section of WP:MEDRS makes clear, new research is not always better research. Considering what the vast majority of research on the causes of transsexualism focuses on, it is not WP:Undue weight for us to summarize that, especially since we are adhering to the WP:Summary style guideline by summarizing the Causes of transsexualism article. As for gender differences, there are various ones, ranging from sexuality, crime, empathy and so on, whether it's more so due to biology or social environment. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 17:26, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that's a very helpful observation, Flyer22 Reborn, given that the current text is dependent on WP:Primary sources. The islanding of those few small case studies by large and diverse scientific studies that identify deeper, broader research data on brain development and plasticity throughout life cannot simply be elided. Those scientific studies have been reported globally in a diverse range of reputable notable secondary sources. Trankuility (talk) 10:54, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Trankuility, it is helpful to remind you and/or others that WP:Synthesis is to be avoided and that we should generally be using the best possible sources on this topic. When I stated that "we shouldn't be taking information about brain plasticity and attributing it to gender dysphoria unless the research is specifically about transgender people and/or gender dysphoria.", that was an acknowledgement of the WP:Original research policy, which WP:Synthesis is a part of. Furthermore, because the topic of causes of transsexualism is not as active a research field as many others (it's not super active, and a lot of progress is not being made), primary sources are expected for this topic. WP:MEDDATE states, "These instructions are appropriate for actively researched areas with many primary sources and several reviews and may need to be relaxed in areas where little progress is being made or where few reviews are published." This, however, does not mean that we should rely on any and every primary source; we should do what we can to avoid primary sources, unless using them is necessary or otherwise very helpful. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 14:12, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you are stating that you want to add brain plasticity material without engaging in WP:Synthesis, it still stands that the material would be added to a section that is about the causes of gender dysphoria and/or transsexualism, which is a different topic unless the sources are noting gender dysphoria and/or transsexualism, and this subsequently makes the material seem like it is implying a connection to the material that is actually about the causes. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 14:31, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think you misunderstand the purpose of my comments, Flyer 22 Reborn. If I was to add content here I would have done so. I think it should be reduced. I don't believe that is a matter of synthesis. Trankuility (talk) 14:36, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I did not misunderstand your comments; I think my replies are clear on that. There is no WP:Undue weight violation in the way you suggested that there is one. We do not have to take brain plasticity studies into account unless the research is specifically, or even somewhat, about transgender people and/or gender dysphoria. That is my point. You clearly disagree. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 14:52, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

____

User:Flyer22 Reborn, can you explain why the term "male-to-female" does NOT imply that transgender women actually were men, not women trapped in men's bodies, before their bodies are corrected with surgery?? Georgia guy (talk) 21:37, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Georgia guy, can you explain why you cannot accept that "male-to-female" and "female-to-male" are standard terms in the literature, and are embraced by many people in the transgender community? Do you not understand the sex and gender distinction? You've gone about excluding the term "male-to-female" from the lead of the Trans woman article, despite the WP:Alternative name policy and despite being reverted on the "male-to-female" wording by others (including transgender people) at that article and elsewhere at Wikipedia. Either way, those terms are covered in the Trans woman and Trans man articles, respectively, for a valid reason: They are part of the literature. I've told you more than once that I do not tolerate WP:Activism, including yours. Your opinion of what it means to be transgender or transsexual does not top others' opinions on those matters. That transgender and transsexual people have different opinions on what it means to be transgender or transsexual, and on what is or is not offensive to them, is quite clear by the current state of Talk:Transsexual. Take note that the fact that many transgender people object to the term transsexual while other transgender people do not is also addressed at that talk page. Also take note of Talk:Transgender/Archive 5#Basic definition is not correct (the second discussion). My reverting the IP had nothing to do with "imply[ing] that transgender women actually were men, not women trapped in men's bodies, before their bodies are corrected with surgery." Furthermore, not all transgender or transsexual people believe that they were "trapped" in a man's or woman's body. I will not let myself get dragged into this semantics debate that you try to have with anyone who uses the terms "male-to-female" and "female-to-male."

Why I reverted the IP is made clear at that IP's talk page, where I relayed the following: Hello, IP. I reverted you on this matter at the Gender dysphoria article, per what I stated in that WP:Edit summary. But I compromised by changing the text with this edit. Like I stated, "Political correctness is not how we work. And, as discussed at Talk:Transsexual, 'transsexual' and 'transgender' are not always the same thing. People usually also don't know what AMAB means. [...] Important to retain 'transsexual,' per what the Transsexual article states, and what has been debated at that talk page. We should go by the sources, not what we perceive as political correctness." Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:09, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I do not deny the fact that those terms are widely used. They are used primarily because most people consider transgender women women who actually were men before their body was changed with surgery. As for the sex and gender distinction, I don't deny it. What I deny is that using the words "male" and "female" as opposed to "man" or "woman" is a defining criterion for talking about sex and not gender. Georgia guy (talk) 22:20, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm weighing in as a trans person who does use the word transsexual (male in my case) for myself. I see this issue not as one of advocacy or "political correctness," but on what the consensus is in the trans community around the word "transsexual." There will never be complete agreement on this term, but I don't believe that trans people have reached any kind of majority agreement to reject it outright.

As far as what the word signifies, when I say that I'm a female to male transsexual (although I usually just say trans male) I do not mean that I was female and then changed my sex to male with surgery. I mean that I was assigned female at birth, came to realize that I was actually male, and then pursued social, legal, and medical (hormones in my case) avenues to have that fact recognized. I would still be a transsexual male regardless of whether I legally or medically transitioned, however.

I recognize that trans women are more affected by misconceptions about gender transition, however. For perspective on this subject from a trans woman who uses the word transsexual, I recommend reading essays and books by Julia Serano. Funcrunch (talk) 19:18, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate you weighing in, Funcrunch; I figured that you might. Editing transgender topics on Wikipedia is one of the more difficult areas to edit because of the sensitive nature of it, including disagreements among the transgender community about definitions and what is or is not offensive to them. People are also quick to think that that someone is transphobic if they do something they don't agree with (whether it's a definition, or something else); for example, see this case if you haven't already. That stated, it's understandable given the difficulties that transgender people go through, arguably more so than the rest of the LGBT community. As for "political correctness," you may have seen that the IP used that term, which is why I used it. And as for advocacy, Georgia guy commonly engages in editing that I would categorize as advocacy. For example, the Homosexual transsexual article currently has the word term in the title despite the topic being about more than just the term, and it's that way because Georgia guy thinks it's less offensive, etc., our naming conventions be damned; see this discussion for full detail. Every time Georgia guy does something like this, I note WP:Advocacy.

Georgia guy takes issue with the "male-to-female" and "female-to-male" wording, and thinks that it's "used primarily because most people consider transgender women women who actually were men before their body was changed with surgery." This is not the case, though. For example, many transgender women have used the wording "male-to-female" to indicate that they were in a male body, a body that they did not like because it was not female and did not align with their gender identity. And it's the other way around for many transgender men. While I know that some transgender people don't think of the matter in terms of "that was a male body" or "that was female body," many transgender people do; and going by any anatomy book, they would be correct. Many transgender people use the sex and gender distinction to explain the topic of transgender -- that their sex was not the same as their gender/gender identity. This is what others have tried to get across to Georgia guy. The terms "male-to-female" and "female-to-male" are also used by scholars who are not transphobic, including some transgender scholars. I understand that Georgia guy hates the terms "male-to-female" and "female-to-male" (especially "male-to-female") and that these terms can be used by transphobic people who are trying to make a misguided point, but Georgia guy needs to stop going on the warpath any time these terms are used. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 20:39, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, I don't believe it's a cis person's place to decide what language is or isn't transphobic (or cissexist), and I don't decide what someone should call their own body parts based on anatomy books, but that's getting into WP:NOTFORUM territory. Funcrunch (talk) 03:09, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your "03:09, 8 January 2016 (UTC)" response is exactly what I mean about this area being a sensitive area, and people taking offense where none was meant. For the record, I was not stating that "it's a cis person's place to decide what language is or isn't transphobic (or cissexist)." I've also seen it argued, including above on this talk page, that it's not a transgender person's place to define non-transgender people with the term cisgender. So both sides are commonly defensive. I was stating that no one should call something transphobic or cissexist when it isn't (similar to how a woman should not call anything she wants to "misogynistic" or "sexist"), and I'm basing that on my interactions with transgender people, not just on a scholar's commentary (transgender or not); I've interacted with the transgender community a great deal, and have made a number of friends and acquaintances along the way. And this was even before I began studying transgender topics in relation to gender studies years ago. I started studying the area for a variety of reasons, including personal ones that I will not go into here at Wikipedia. It is my place to state, like I did above, that one transgender person's opinion of what it means to be transgender or transsexual does not top other transgender people's opinions on those matters. I reiterate that transgender and transsexual people have different opinions on what it means to be transgender or transsexual and on what they find offensive. It is also my place to note that we do not have to alter the language of our encyclopedia because any group of people will find the language offensive (not unless including the language is a WP:Offensive material violation); that was the very reason I had for pointing to Talk:Transgender/Archive 5#Basic definition is not correct (the second discussion).

I also "don't decide what someone should call their own body parts based on anatomy books." My anatomy book commentary was based on the fact that no matter how any of us defines anatomical matters, the categorization of male anatomy and female anatomy exists, and is standard; there is no transgender or genderqueer anatomical categorization. And to that point, I was noting that many transgender women have considered the body they were in to be a male body, not their true body. Many transgender men have considered the body they were in to be a female body, not their true body. In the case of these individuals, it was largely necessary for them to change their bodies to align them with their male or female gender identity. For other transgender people, there is no "male body" or "female body," and it is more so about presentation/gender expression and others accepting their gender identity and gender expression, and so they have not transitioned in terms of hormones or surgery to their bodies. But, yes, this is not a forum. And even if it was, I wouldn't go into all my personal details. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 20:50, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing: Even with it being important for transgender people to speak for themselves with regard to what is or isn't offensive to transgender people, I do not think that any one group has a monopoly on language. If one looks at the current state of the Transphobia article, specifically its sources, there is literature on transphobia that is not written by transgender people. So, in my opinion, stating that only transgender people get to decide what is or isn't transphobic is like stating that only women get to decide what is or isn't misogynistic or sexist (and let's face it: the vast majority of sexism in the world is directed at girls and women). Such a monopoly on language is not how the world works. If I see transphobic material on Wikipedia, I will remove it (well, when it comes to transphobic material on talk pages, I usually leave others to do the dirty work of removing and/or reporting the offense since I have enough tempestuous editors to deal with). But terms like "transsexual," "male-to-female" and similar, which are ingrained in the literature and is why we have articles currently titled Hormone replacement therapy (male-to-female) and Sex reassignment surgery (male-to-female), are terms that I see as being a case-by-case basis matter, as witnessed by discussions at Talk:Transgender and Talk:Transsexual. Same goes for anatomical terms. These are not inherently transphobic terms. I usually do not object to the removal of "transsexual"; this is because I know that many transgender people object to the term. But in the case of reverting the aforementioned IP, I felt that retaining "transsexual" was important (for reasons explained when reverting the IP). Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 17:06, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re "stating that only transgender people get to decide what is or isn't transphobic is like stating that only women get to decide what is or isn't misogynistic or sexist", that's exactly what I would say, and the same for people of color and racism, but this discussion has gone way beyond the bounds of editing this particular article. Funcrunch (talk) 20:22, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You mean that you would say that these groups should have a monopoly on those terms? If so, I disagree with you per what I stated above. Not to mention that sexism and racism can be directed at anyone, no matter that they affect certain groups more than others. Extending transphobia to the term bisexual, as some transgender people would have society do, is a prime example of why no group should have a monopoly on language. That is not how Wikipedia or the real world works. And since language disputes in the transgender community and transgender literature is what led to this current discussion, I don't find much of this section too off-topic, but it has certainly run its course. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:00, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note that I once proposed a move of each of those articles to the phrase Hormone replacement therapy for trans women and Sex reassignment surgery for trans women but there wasn't enough consensus. Georgia guy (talk) 17:48, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The issue I would have with those specific titles is that some non-binary people (who were assigned male at birth but do not identify as trans women) also pursue HRT and surgery, and the content of those articles is relevant to them as well. Same applies to the corresponding articles for FTM HRT and surgery. Funcrunch (talk) 20:26, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't mind those titles being changed, as long as good titles are picked in their place. WP:Requested move discussions are the way to go in those cases, though. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:00, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A gender dysphoric patient has been treated with this antipsychotic drug called "pimozide" and his symptoms of gender dysphoria ceased. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8839957 Why hasn't this been touched? I believe this is pretty important. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:6E:2E08:419B:9CF1:8FBD:F909:CE3E (talk) 20:30, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]