Talk:Gender dysphoria/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 9

Addition to Gender Identity Disorder

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]

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

Biological Differences

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)

Mechanism that plays key role in sexual differentiation of brain described

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)

9 year olds?

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)

Gender dysphoria as commonly recognisable and less judgemental name

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)

Requested move

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Jenks24 (talk) 14:24, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

---

Gender identity disorder → Gender dysphoria – Rationale for the proposed move is above. Flyer22 (talk) 23:27, 13 June 2015 (UTC) Comment was changed, per this edit by Wbm1058. Flyer22 (talk) 03:04, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

• Support move -> Gender dysphoria per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:BLP, we should not describe living people's conditions as "disorders" when a less judgmental term is now the DSM-5 standard. Skyerise (talk) 23:00, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

GregKaye, this has been discussed: #Gender dysphoria redirect; the #Section break section of that discussion has the latest comments on that, of course. In that subsection, I agreed to moving the article to Gender dysphoria, though I still doubt that the term gender dysphoria is more common than the term gender identity disorder for this topic. I also would not state that "the perception that someone has a disorder" in this regard is behind us, given diagnosis aspects that still exist today for the topic (and, obviously, given public perception), but I understand what you are stating. If this is a move discussion, you should go ahead and turn it into an official WP:Requested move discussion, and alert WP:LGBT and WP:Med to it. Flyer22 (talk) 23:06, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

• support agree with Skyerise --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 23:18, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

• Note: GregKaye alerted the aforementioned WikiProjects, and I tweaked the matter here and here. I also turned this discussion into an official WP:Requested move. Flyer22 (talk) 23:27, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

• Support as the condition has been known as Gender dysphoria in the DSM-5 for over two years now. Funcrunch (talk) 05:49, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
• Comment This discussion also comes in the context of a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine#Disorders of magnitude - POV question which may, arguably, also present some unresolved issues. (This discussion may, in the future, in that TP's archive 66). Here I raised the more potentially more complex situations of Sexual masochism disorder and Sexual sadism disorder and, although I hadn't really looked into this specific article at that stage, I also made reference to the article Gender identity disorder in children. It may also be of benefit if some attention can be given to Category:Sexual and gender identity disorders which potential may be split or renames so that a here interpreted WP:ASSERTion regarding 'disorders' may be ensured to apply to any relevant content.

Request Can anyone with knowledge of the subject clarify the extent to which Gender identity disorder and Gender dysphoria are the same subject, are different subjects, are subjects with overlapping topic areas? GregKaye 07:28, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

You already got your answers regarding that "Disorders of magnitude - POV question" discussion. Changing the title of this article to "Gender dysphoria" will not result in Wikipedia removing "disorder" from the title of sexual disorder articles or other articles about disorders (except for maybe the Gender identity disorder in children article, which is about a topic that is distinct from gender identity disorder in post-pubescent minors and adults). And the only reason that I am agreeing to retitle the Gender identity disorder article to Gender dysphoria is because of what I stated in the #Section break section above: It is a common, less stigmatizing title that is used to refer to what is essentially the same thing (well, except for differences that the DSM-5 presented). If you want to know if gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria are the same thing and/or in what ways they differ, I suggest you read that subsection and the broader #Gender dysphoria redirect section that it is a part of. Flyer22 (talk) 08:11, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

• Support as an, in some ways, less overtly pov title and that covers article content as a superset terminology for the topic area. To my understanding this is in accord to the considerable amount of text above.

I find titlings, especially in regard to the one currently in use, to display a huge and (obviously) one sided pov. It is arguably regretable that the medical world, which is meant to support the wellbeing of people, didn't start with a title such as Disparity between gender identity and anatomical sex. My understanding of genetics is that contributions may have effects on disposition (an inner self) and outer form (a biological anatomy). I am quite cynical as, if a questionable assertion of disorder was to be made, to why identity was singled out?

I personally view Gender dysphoria as being the better of two WP:ASSERT type options on the basis that the term Dysphoria from the Greek δυσ-, difficult, and φέρειν, to bear and am dubious as to whether this interpretation should even be regarded to be a condition rather than, perhaps, a symptom. I think that it is also evident that some Humans (who are arguably defined by being), who possess amongst other biological features, a penis, and have a gender identity as a woman - have nothing in their lives that, for them, is in any way difficult to bear with the exception of the prejudices of others.

However "Gender dysphoria" is in accord with UCRN and should be used. I think that it is likely that the article would warrant a ==Gender identity disorder== section and perhaps this could be followed by a subsection perhaps entitled with something such as ===Criticisms=== GregKaye 09:42, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Since the terms gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria are used interchangeably, and the article's sources currently mostly use the term gender identity disorder instead of gender dysphoria, I don't see how creating a "Gender identity disorder" section is a good idea. A Terminology section would suffice, but the article does note, in the Diagnosis section, criticism of the term gender identity disorder. Flyer22 (talk) 10:01, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Also, as for a criticism section, the Classification as a disorder section serves that purpose. Flyer22 (talk) 10:04, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

You might be pleased to hear that the WPATH recommendation for the ICD11 was to call the main diagnosis "Gender/Body Divergence", which is comparable in neutrality to your suggestion of "Disparity between gender identity and anatomical sex". Another favoured suggestion was "Gender Incongruence". — Flower f5a9b8 06:05, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

• Support / pause for verification This sounds like a good idea. However, I am not seeing good sourcing for the idea that "Gender identity disorder" and "gender dysphoria" are equivalent terms for the same concept. If this move is to go forward I would like to see someone reference reliable sources equating the terms or stating that there is a trend in some publications to rename "Gender identity disorder" to "gender dysphoria". Which major health organizations use which term? If no one provides citations then I oppose the move. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:13, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Bluerasberry, see the #Gender dysphoria redirect and #Section break sections above, where I argued (with WP:Reliable sources) that gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria are essentially the same thing. At the end of that section, you can see where Flower f5a9b8 agreed with me while citing Doc James. Flower f5a9b8, stated, "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." These terms are not always used the same way; the DSM-5 revision is an example of that. But they are generally synonyms. That's why gender dysphoria redirects to the Gender identity disorder article, is listed as a WP:Alternative title in the WP:Lead, and is discussed elsewhere in the article. Flyer22 (talk) 00:25, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Also keep in mind that in that aforementioned redirect discussion, you argued, "This should remain as a redirect. No acceptable argument has been made for doing otherwise. To have two distinct articles, sources would need to be presented which differentiate these two concepts. These sources are not being presented, so I cannot further consider this request. This seems like an attempt to coin a WP:NEOLOGISM. It is irrelevant whether these are two distinct concepts - sources have to be presented which demonstrate that this is so." Flyer22 (talk) 00:34, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

• Support - the change in definition and name happened two years ago, and the new name has gained currency at a time of increasing discussion on trans issues. Trankuility (talk) 05:42, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
• Support Gender dysphoria seems to be name that is generally used now, as reflected by the change in the DSM. I agree that there is also a POV aspect to the current name. Neljack (talk) 04:05, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

To be accurate, Neljack, the DSM-5 made the name change before medical and media sources were using the term gender dysphoria to refer to this topic as much as they are using the term now. If the terminology gender dysphoria had been as popular two years ago as it is now, this article would have already been moved to Gender dysphoria. The DSM-5 made a lot of name and definitional changes, many of which the medical community in general have disagreed with, as discussed in the DSM-5 article and as was noted in the 2013 WP:MED DSM-5 discussion. That stated, I understand what you meant/your rationale. Flyer22 (talk) 04:26, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

• Hesitant Support, lets discuss the manner this is done in before doing it (as that seems to be the consensus this time round).

If this page does move then I’m unsure it can happen in a way that continues to use Gender Dysphoria in the same way as GID. While it’s true that as a medical diagnosis they are often used to refer to the same thing, the context they are used in is not interchangeable in many reputable and significant sources. For example the current opening line 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 and gender they were assigned at birth.

Several sources (such as the UK NHS website) use gender dysphoria to refer to just the dysphoria mentioned above, as does the transgender community. If gender dysphoria becomes the main focus, the above introduction would become very confusing to many people with little knowledge of the topic especially if they were previously aware of the non-medical (and sometimes also medical) definition. However I’m unsure if switching to what is arguably the most specialist and reputable medical definition of gender dysphoria also accurately describes GID/gender-dysphoria-as-GID:

Gender dysphoria [or gender identity disorder (GID)] refers to discomfort or distress that is caused by a discrepancy between a person’s gender identity and that person’s sex assigned at birth (and the associated gender role and/or primary and secondary sex characteristics) (Fisk, 1974; Knudson, De Cuypere, & Bockting,2010b)

Does that work? Similarly there are other parts of the article which apply GID/gender dysphoria as a lifelong condition of all transgender people. While "people suffering from GID" can reliably be interpreted as "trans people", "people suffering from Gender Dysphoria" will often be understood to mean only "some trans people". Multiple sources make it clear that (at least in the case of gender dysphoria) the condition applies only to those who experience discomfort or distress as described above. For example before they published the DSM-5 the APA stated: “It is important to note that gender nonconformity [referring to “individuals who see and feel themselves to be a different gender than their assigned gender”] is not in itself a mental disorder. The critical element of gender dysphoria is the presence of clinically significant distress associated with the condition.” WPATH also states that one of the “core principles” laid down by the SOC is “Exhibit respect for patients with nonconforming gender identities (do not pathologize differences in gender identity or expression)”. I would strongly recommend reading pages four and five of the SOC for their explanation of this and other relevant topics.

Provided the context the title is used in throughout the article can be adapted I have no problem with the move, but I feel that should be considered beforehand. We must also bear in mind the that terminology around this topic is shifting rapidly; the ICD has asked WPATH for suggestions on the upcoming ICD-11 and it is possible that following those the ICD-11 will not use either GID or Gender Dysphoria to refer to the new diagnosis. — Flower f5a9b8 06:05, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Flower f5a9b8, I first read your "06:05, 20 June 2015 (UTC)" comment a little after you made it, but I am obviously just now responding to it. Regarding the name and definitional matters, I don't see anything that is difficult for us to overcome. First, we should go by the medical definitions, since they have the most WP:Weight in this case. We can have a section on how the transgender community (well, it's some of the transgender community, not all) defines gender dysphoria and we can include a small summary on that in the lead (per WP:Lead). And as for WP:Alternative names, they can go in a Terminology section; this is the section where the "how the transgender community defines the term gender dysphoria" aspect would go. I understand what you mean about how this case can be complicated, especially since most of the article's sources currently use the term gender identity disorder, but we usually don't need to fret much over different terminology for a topic; it usually should all go in one article. Like WP:POV fork states, "The generally accepted policy is that all facts and major points of view on a certain subject should be treated in one article. As Wikipedia does not view article forking as an acceptable solution to disagreements between contributors, such forks may be merged, or nominated for deletion." Flyer22 (talk) 14:22, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

_____

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

There's a Difference between Gender and Sex

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)

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)

Gender Dysphoria as a matter of Psychology/Biology

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. --Dabrams13 (talk) 19:59, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

___

This approach is based on the concept that their experience is based in a medical problem correctable by various forms of medical intervention

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)

Infobox heading, opening paragraph and related issues

Gender dysphoria/Archive 3

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)

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)

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)

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

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)

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)

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)

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)

"Biological causes" section

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, 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, and that, if the society had less-strict gender divisions, transsexual people would suffer less.

Some studies have investigated whether or not there is a link between biological variables and transgender or transsexual identity. 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. Twin studies indicate that GID is 62% heritable, evidencing the genetic influence or prenatal development as its origin. In male-to-female transsexuals, GID is associated with variations in an individual's genes that make the individual less sensitive to androgens.

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.

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

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)

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)

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. Recent studies have suggested that this has a biological basis and is caused by the development of gender identity before birth. Twin studies indicate that GID is 62% heritable, suggesting a genetic or prenatal origin. In male-to-female transsexuals, GID is associated with variations in an individual's genes that make the individual less sensitive to androgens. Researchers disagree about the nature of the distress; some authors have suggested that people with gender dysphoria suffer because they are stigmatized and victimized, and that if the society had less-strict gender divisions, transsexual people would suffer less.

or alternatively:

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

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

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)

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, having a nonconforming gender identity. Both prenatal biological factors and early-childhood social factors have been suggested to influence gender identity. Twin studies indicate that gender dysphoria is 62% heritable. In male-to-female transsexuals, it is associated with variations in an individual's genes that make the individual less sensitive to androgens. Some authors have suggested that people with gender dysphoria suffer because they are stigmatized and victimized, and that if the society had less-strict gender divisions, transsexual people would suffer less.

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

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)

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”." 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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

____

Extended content

Male-to-female

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

Something like Hormonal feminization therapy for transgender people and Surgical feminization for transgender people would be more neutral. There seems to be general agreement to describe the specific changes induced by the types of HRT and SRS many gender-dysphoric people assigned male at birth pursue as "feminization".

The most neutral and generally accepted term to describe the gender trans people are mistakenly perceived as prior to possible transition is "assigned gender (at birth)". Many trans people indeed strongly object to the description of their bodies or anatomies in terms of "biological sex" incongruent with their gender identity, and question the gender/sex distinction principally, arguing that both (social/identity) gender and sex (especially the binary sex paradigm) are social constructs. (These usually prefer to speak simply of gender and assert that the incongruence in a trans person is not between their gender identity and their "biological sex", but only with their assigned gender, and that their body is simply to be described with their identity gender: Trans women have female bodies, trans men have male bodies, and genderqueer/nonbinary/etc. people have genderqueer/nonbinary/androgynous/gender-neutral (etc.) bodies.)

This is not even a particularly new or radical idea (in the sense of "made up by transgender activists on Tumblr just two years ago"), as is often surmised by outsiders, but driven by the increased awareness of and knowledge about intersex conditions. Check Sex and gender distinction#Feminism. Also compare (this is not an article, so I don't care that these are not RS, and it doesn't matter for my purpose here anyway, to show that this opinion exists and is being argued) this blog post suggesting that the "gender/sex" distinction is just a trick to re-introduce transphobia through the backdoor, Natalie Reed's blog post and this Natalie Reed tweet listing numerous possible dimensions and variables of sex and gender or this Skepchick piece. (Even from the point of view of a forensic, who does distinguish biological sex from gender, and tries to determine it in human remains, sex is a continuum, not binary; they do not stick a "100% female/male" label on a skeleton, but admit that they only determine a probability. They'd probably not be able to sex a non-intersex person who started transition in early puberty as their assigned gender.)

The popular transphobic talking point "you're deluded! you can mutilate your body all you want, but biologically you will always be a DUDE!/CHICK! You can't argue with SCIENTIFIC FACTS!" is all based on the belief in scientific definitions as unquestionable truths and hard facts, but as Zinnia Jones points out, the natural sciences are not a bastion of objective absolute truths, but affected by all the same wibbly-wobbly cultural stuff as "soft" and social sciences, as seen in the Pluto debate. The more obvious parallel, however, is race: Historically used to arbitrarily split and classify people without their own input (and with no regard for their own identities), and to justify power differences and mistreatment of some groups of people, considered an obvious reality for centuries, race is now increasingly recognised as a pure social construct without a meaningful biological basis – so it makes sense to question "forcibly assigned gender" or "biological sex" in the same way.

And once you recognise gender assignment, with its unpredictable vagaries, as equally arbitrary and unscientific as race classification, or at best as equally subject to revision as the classification of a celestial body or a biological taxon, terms such as "male-to-female" become unnecessary – a trans women is simply and has always been female and was erroneously assigned male at birth, which she discovered at some point, and vice versa for trans men. Personally, I find the simplicity and elegance of this view compelling. After all, we could simply stop assigning gender, race or other (really quite inessential) properties and labels to babies and older humans and, if we must, go back to simply asking them to identify themselves.

(After all, you can't scientifically measure someone's religious beliefs either by inspecting their bodies, and attempts to determine a person's sexual or romantic orientations using phallometry and the like are fraught with difficulties, so asking people for their identities is still the easiest way.)

My anecdotal impression is that this alternative to the old "trapped in the wrong body" narrative is, not least thanks to well-known transgender activists and opinion leaders supporting it, actually becoming increasingly popular.

If there are ways to express such things employing language that a large majority of affected people can live with, why not use it? And if you do not know what that could be, how about asking around? --Florian Blaschke (talk) 02:55, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Treatment with Pimozide

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)

At a guess, I'd say because the one study (that I could find) was conducted in 1996 and I don't think Prof._Puri is a gender specialist. I guess if the treatment has been repeatedly shown to help then it would be worth noting Scott A Herbert (talk) 00:03, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Look at the Wikipedia article for pimozide. The side effects are very common (>10%) and mainly include completely dulling the person. Basically I'm saying this study seems more like an example of a cruel treatment being used on a desperate patient. It's unlikely that the study will ever be reproduced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8807:C0C2:E500:4981:D013:C0F4:6F0F (talk) 05:53, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Include Non-binary genders

There isn't much mention of non-binary gender identities. Why is that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.161.252.201 (talk) 21:16, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Because the medical meaning of gender dysphoria, at least going by the vast majority of sources, and the term gender identity disorder, is usually not focusing on genderqueer people or gender variance (the topics of being non-binary in general). Furthermore, it's common that transgender people are binary, meaning that they identify as male/man or female/woman; in fact, that is the usual case. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:17, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

"Is a term for" wording in place of "is the formal diagnosis"

As seen with this link, Rui Gabriel Correia changed "is the formal diagnosis" to "is the term" to go along with the "used by psychologists and physicians to describe people who experience significant dysphoria (distress) with the sex and gender they were assigned at birth" text. Rui Gabriel Correia stated, "a diagnosis is an evaluation/ examination to determine something; not to describe it." That same links shows that I reverted, arguing, "It is the formal diagnosis, going by the sources. It is not simply a term matter, and this is not a term article." My followup note stated, "WP:Dummy edit: Also see WP:Refers." I then changed "describe" to "evaluate." Rui Gabriel Correia came along to revert me, replying, "Sources povide the facts; we provide the wording. That's how it works. You using a term like 'evaluate' for 'describe' simply shows you understand nothing of the subject." Needless to state, I disagree with that assertion.

There is nothing wrong with stating "is the formal diagnosis" or "evaluate." Gender dysphoria is a diagnosis, as made explicitly clear by the sources in the article, and by many transgender activists. I mention transgender activists because it is apparent to me that Rui Gabriel Correia's edit was a WP:Activism edit; it was made as though there was an intention to lessen the stigma attached to gender dysphoria. And the "you don't understand" comment was clearly a jab at me based on what Rui Gabriel Correia assumes about my understanding of this topic or experience with gender identity issues. Let me clear, Rui Gabriel Correia: You know nothing about me in that regard. Your assumptions are wrong. Even though terminology is discussed in this article, this article is not about a term. Therefore, we should not be substituting "is a term" in place of "is the formal diagnosis." That's why I pointed to WP:Refers. Doc James and Jytdog, any help you can provide here would be much appreciated. I am much too busy to keep on top of this as much as I would have in the past. I will also alert WP:Med to this discussion.

Side note: sche, nah, I don't like this "some people experience" wording. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:29, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

How about simply "diagnosis" rather than "formal diagnosis"? And what about healthcare providers rather than "psychologists and physicians"? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:36, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

I could be okay with that, Doc James. Thanks for commenting. Also, if Rui Gabriel Correia felt that I was being redundant by stating "evaluate" since "diagnosis" is already used, I wasn't. These are not synonyms. A number of sources state that a diagnosis, or diagnostic criterion, is used to evaluate. This 2009 The Breast: Comprehensive Management of Benign and Malignant Diseases, Volume 2 source, page 613, for example, states, "Diagnostic mammography is used to evaluate the breasts of patients with symptoms, such as a lump or nipple discharge." Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:44, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

It is the actual condition of experiencing distress. yes we have a diagnostic category, but the diagnosis just puts a name to the condition; we don't need to have the middle term "diagnostic" in there, which is causing the content dispute. Jytdog (talk) 08:02, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

yes, agree--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 09:38, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Jytdog. Although I'm not sure about calling gender dysphoria "a condition," since some people could be offended by that, I am fine with this edit you made. I think most transgender people won't be offended by "a condition" since gender dysphoria is a matter of distress, if going by the medical definitions and since it is a diagnosis. People take offense to a lot of different things regarding this topic; we cannot please everyone. I tweaked your edit since the link was a WP:EGG and since "distress" two times was redundant. I do wonder if we should keep "significant," though. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 08:18, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Seems like you only meant to keep one "distress," not two. But I think it's important to have dysphoria clearly show up. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 08:24, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm ok with your tweak, thanks! Jytdog (talk) 08:49, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

I like the current version ("is the condition of experiencing dysphoria") much better than any of the original proposals. I'm going to see if I can make it even more concise. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:14, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

I can be okay with this change, WhatamIdoing. But as for this, maintaining "experience" seems important to me. I also think "related to" should remain as "with." Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 18:16, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Actually, I'm thinking of a better word to use in place of "with." Considering the new wording, it doesn't seem that "with" is the best word. But I'm not sure "caused by" would be an improvement. Flyer22 Reborn (talk)`

Changed to this and then to this. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 02:56, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Improve the signs and symptoms section?

The signs and symptoms mainly focus on the rate of depression and suicide in trans people, which isn't really informative on gender dysphoria itself. I think this section should mention things like the prevalence of (supernumerary) phantom limbs, the DSM-V criteria, and a description of how this can manifest on a day-to-day basis: discomfort in the body's sex characteristics, roleplaying the correct gender (such as in videogames), etc. (can borrow info from this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFYl3ReqX5k and part 2) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8807:C0C2:E500:4981:D013:C0F4:6F0F (talk) 06:08, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Changing "GID" to "gender dysphoria" throughout the article

I reverted Megathon7 on this for reasons made clear in the #Infobox heading, opening paragraph and related issues discussion. There, I stated that 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. The vast majority of the sources in this article currently used the term gender identity disorder instead of gender dysphoria. If, for any instance, we want to change the term GID to gender dysphoria, we should make sure that the sources in question support the change, and that the sources are WP:MEDRS-compliant. Otherwise, we should take care not to use the terms interchangeably in ways that are at odds with the sources. For a number of instances in the article, including studies, MEDRS-compliant sources are largely lagging behind when it comes to calling "gender identity disorder" by the name "gender dysphoria." Most of the sources use "GID" because this topic was known by that name, with slightly different criteria. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 11:54, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Here is an example of me changing the wording to better reflect the sources. I also re-removed a tag. Velostodon was right to remove it but not because of being peer-reviewed. Peer review is not the same thing as literature review. WP:MEDRS prefers the latter. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 12:12, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

I am reverting the changes made by Flyer22 Reborn back to using gender dysphoria as the predominant term used. The title of this article is gender dysphoria, not gender identity disorder. If we are going to use GID throughout the article, then the title of this article should be changed to match accordingly. However, GID is a defunct term (as clearly stated by the DSM-5, the leading medical authority in the U.S., and many other authorities in their wake). Keeping GID in the introductory paragraphs allows wiki users to know what gender dysphoria was formerly known as, but to continue using GID throughout the article as if this is the term in-use today (and which is based on sources from over a decade ago with outdated terminology) is incorrect. Megathon7 (talk) 20:32, 22 December 2016‎ (UTC)

Current citation is also needed to support the unsubstantiated claim "The DSM-5 is also rejected by a large portion of the medical community." As reported by the New York Times, it is likely the IDC, and therefore the World Health Organization, will drop the term "gender identity disorder" from its 11th revision due in 2018. (The previous revision will be over 25 years old, which again, contains terminology that has become deprecated in that time frame.) If anything, the rational "The vast majority of the sources in this article currently used the term gender identity disorder" is an argument to remove sources with outdated nomenclature, not an argument to continue using defunct language in this article. However these sources can be left intact because aside from an outdated term (GID), they still have relevance, and the article already makes clear "gender identity disorder" is an older term for gender dysphoria. If the argument is then made that gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria are not interchangeable, then the two terms should not be combined on this article in the first place. I have read over the talk history for this page and I have not seen any compelling evidence that those two terms are so rigidly defined as to be separate and distinct. Megathon7 (talk) 03:09, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

i hear the argument you are making. However you are predicting some future that does not exist at this point in time. In WP we follow the sources that actually exist, and Flyer accurately summarized them above. Perhaps in a year or two the best sources actually available will have changed to the GD term; this article will change at that time. It cannot change until the underlying sources do. Jytdog (talk) 05:56, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

This future already exists. The large majority of medical literature within the last few years uses the term gender dysphoria. It is not a "best source" to refer to a guide that was written back in the 80's and completed in 1992 (IDC-10). That is too far back to be considered authoritative on this topic, there is a lack of evidence showing the WHO defending the use of gender identity disorder in this present time, and it alone does not set the standard for the preferred medical term used. Unless evidence can be presented showing gender identity disorder to be the overall preferred term at this point in time (thus far I have not seen this evidence; most items using it are dated pre-2010) it should not be used as the dominant term in this article. Megathon7 (talk) 06:37, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

I should clarify that by "this topic" I mean the area of transgender health, which has undergone considerable advancements in understanding and treatment within the last couple of decades. The terminology has changed along with this. Megathon7 (talk) 06:41, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Please cite those sources. You cannot hand-wave on this. Flyer's arguments deal with this actual article and the actual sources cited here. You may be correct but you need to actually bring those sources. Please do so. I am persuadeable as if everyone else here, but not with hand waving. Sources are what drive change; edit warring based on vapor just gets you blocked. Jytdog (talk) 06:43, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

I've alerted WikiProject LGBT Studies to this discussion. Funcrunch (talk) 15:33, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

• Use Gender dysphoria

1. The term used in the article should match the title of the article. The title is "gender dysphoria". There is a process for changing the names of articles, and that process should not be circumvented.
2. There is enough confirmation at Talk:Gender_dysphoria#Requested_move to say that GID is an equivalent term to "gender dysphoria".

Is it not the conservative default to use the term as named in the article's title, especially after confirmation from a move? For what reasons might this article need to deviate from the common practice? Blue Rasberry (talk) 20:40, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Here are some recent resources I found that might be helpful in this discussion. I did a Google search on "wpath gender identity disorder gender dysphoria" and limited results to scholarly articles from 2015 and later. From my lay perspective, using the term "gender identity disorder" does not seem to be in favor currently.

• Lin Fraser; Gail A. Knudson (2015). "Gender Dysphoria and Transgender Health". In Wylie, Kevan R. (ed.). ABC of Sexual Health. John Wiley & Sons. pp. 108–111. ISBN 9781118665565.
• Els Elaut; Gunter Heylens; Birgit Van Hoorde; Kariann Baetens; Greta De Cuypere (2016). "DSM-IV versus DSM-5: do the new criteria for gender dysphoria lead to different diagnostic outcomes?". Ghent University Academic Bibliography. (Presentation at 24th Biennial scientific symposium of the World Professional Association of Transgender Health (WPATH 2016))
• Randi Ettner; Stan Monstrey; Eli Coleman (May 27, 2016). "An Overview of the Standards of Care for the Health of Transsexual, Transgender, and Gender Nonconforming People". Principles of Transgender Medicine and Surgery. Routledge. pp. 36–41. ISBN 9781317514602.

Funcrunch (talk) 21:41, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

• Change GID to gender dysphoria

Examples of gender dysphoria as the preferred, dominant term:

• The leading authority in the U.S. on trans health, The American Psychiatric Association,
• The leading authority in the UK on trans health, The National Health Service
• The American College of Pediatricians
• The World Health Assocation
• The DSM-5
• Draft of the ICD-11, which scraps transsexualism and gender identity disorder in favor of gender incongruence as seen here, here, and here. Further explanation on the change is here. As I previously stated, the WHO is no longer using nor defending the defunct term gender identity disorder. Waiting until this manual is formally published to change GID to gender dysphoria in this wiki article is not defensible given the vast amount of sources that have already finished converting.
• The Mayo Clinic, consistently ranked one of the top 3 hospitals in the United States
• The largest insurance provider in the United States, United Healthcare

The trend of scholarly articles on google showing gender dysphoria has eclipsed gender identity disorder:

2014 - 1,070 results for gender identity disorder; 962 results for gender dysphoria

2015 - 981 results for gender identity disorder; 1,240 results for gender dysphoria

2016 - 985 results for gender identity disorder; 1,210 results for gender dysphoria

The title and terms in the article should match. Some of the aforementioned sources (see here and here), also use gender identity disorder as a secondary synonym, or former term, for gender dysphoria. This again demonstrates the terms are not separate and distinct, and agreement was already reached on this talk page when the article was renamed from gender identity disorder to gender dysphoria.

I have yet to see evidence presented that gender dysphoria and gender identity disorder are separate, distinct terms that cannot be used interchangeably. Such a claim also contradicts arguments made earlier on this talk page where gender identity disorder was listed as a synonym. If the two terms are not synonyms (I submit they are), then they should not be listed as such at the top of the article. Unless it is demonstrated that these terms are not interchangeable, there is no reason GID should not be updated to gender dysphoria throughout this article. Megathon7 (talk) 03:14, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Jytdog. Bluerasberry and Megathon7, nowhere did I argue that "gender dysphoria and gender identity disorder are separate, distinct terms that cannot be used interchangeably." In fact, in past discussions on this talk page, I've argued that the terms are commonly used to refer to the same thing. What I've argued above, though, is that these terms are not always defined the same way and that we should be following what the sources state. Medically-speaking, and when taking the DSM-5 into account, it is a fact that the gender identity disorder diagnosis is not the same exact thing as the gender dysphoria diagnosis. Some of the criteria was changed along with the name, as made clear in the Diagnosis section of the article and in the Section II: diagnostic criteria and codes section of the DSM-5 article. Megathon7, you've also claimed that DSM-5 does not consider gender dysphoria a disorder. And yet...it is in a book called Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5). There are medical scholars and transgender activists who argue that it is still classified as a disorder, despite the rename being a step in the right direction to lessen the stigma associated with the diagnosis. To specifically source what I mean about gender dysphoria and gender identity disorder not exactly being considered the same thing and that gender dysphoria may still be considered a disorder, let's look at the following sources:

Sources

Gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria diagnoses being different This 2015 Diagnosing and Treating Children and Adolescents: A Guide for Mental Health Professionals source, from John Wiley & Sons, page 368, states, "In the DSM-5, Gender Identity Disorder is now titled Gender Dysphoria. A major focus in this shift is a recognition that some TGNC people living with gender dysphoria experience related mood effects because of gender incongruence with body phenotype. For instance, the term gender dysphoria denotes gender incongruence as opposed to referring to cross-gender identification (APA, 2013b, p. 14). The revision also shifted language ("repeatedly stated desire" to "strong desire to be of the other gender") to include TGNC children who may not be allowed to express their gender identity or gender expression in their environments or who may not verbally express their gender identity or gender expression." This 2016 The Medical Basis of Psychiatry source, from Springer, page 302, states, "The DSM-5 has two sets of criteria for gender identity disorder diagnoses, gender dysphoria in children and gender dysphoria in adolescents and adults. In response to criticisms that the term Gender Identity Disorder was stigmatizing, it has been replaced in DSM-5 by Gender Dysphoria. In addition, the previous subtype pertaining to sexual attraction was eliminated, and a new subtype categorization that does not exclude individuals with a somatic disorder of sex development was introduced." The view that the gender dysphoria is treated as a disorder For one, the source above states "gender identity disorder diagnoses." This 2016 Women's Health Care in Advanced Practice Nursing, Second Edition source, from Springer, page 377, states, "Although gender dysphoria disorders are still listed in the DSM-5-TR (2014), the removal of homosexuality as a mental health diagnosis is considered a milestone moment in the history of the LGBT equality movement." This 2016 Sociology of Mental Disorder source, from Routledge, page 282, states, "In the late 1970s, homosexuality was considered a mental disorder, but was dropped as a diagnostic category from the third edition of the American Psychiatric Association's (APA's) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III) after various gay and lesbian groups successfully lobbied the APA for its exclusion. [...] People strongly discomforted by what they considered to be the inappropriateness of their anatomic sex could still be diagnosed with a gender identity disorder, which in the DSM-5 is now a gender dysphoria disorder." The source goes on to note "psychological distress," which is often key for anything being medically classified as a disorder. Like the American Psychiatric Association states, "gender nonconformity is not in itself a mental disorder. The critical element of gender dysphoria is the presence of clinically significant distress associated with the condition."

Looking at the "gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria diagnoses being different" sources, and a number of others, it's clear that while "gender dysphoria" has replaced "gender identity disorder," and that gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria are commonly used as synonyms, they are not exactly the same diagnosis (when taking into account the DSM-5 factor). And using the term gender dysphoria to refer to matters in the article that are categorized as "gender identity disorder (GID)" by sources in the article can be problematic. My argument is not that we should not be uniform for most of the article. It's that we should not be trading one term for another in cases where the sources are specifically referring to the GID diagnosis. My suggestion has been that the sources should be updated to match the terminology/diagnosis. If there are no updated sources for any particular aspect, then we should continue to state "GID" for that particular aspect.

As for the term, gender identity disorder (GID) being defunct, it's not. It seems to be less preferred these days, but it's not defunct. The DSM-5 is one medical authority, it is not an international medical authority like the ICD-10, and I don't see where it's called the term gender identity disorder "defunct." As for the DSM-5 being highly criticized, it has been highly criticized. This is made clear in its Wikipedia article...with sources. As this 2014 Interviewing in Action in a Multicultural World source, from Cengage Learning, page 240, states, "The DSM 5, the edition released in 2013, has come under serious and widespread criticism."

On a side note, be careful with reverting. There was no need to revert everything I changed. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 11:07, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

I am unable to understand all of this, but generally speaking, it would be extraordinary to enforce the use of two different names for a concept in various places in a single article. If "gender dysphoria" and "gender identity disorder" are technical terms with a specific meeting, then it would be more conservative to concoct a new, more ambiguous general term or phrase for the broad concept which includes both these terms and other similar concepts.

I do not see merit in following the use of the term preferred by sources. If a source is judged to fit in the scope of an article, then the concept in that source should be described in Wikipedia using that article's title. Wikipedia makes judgements about these things all the time, and sometimes the medical, physiological, psychological, and social names for a thing are different and have different nuance yet in Wikipedia all fall under the same article and use the same name. If there is nuance which needs to be preserved then that might be forked into a new article.

If this article is not correctly named then it might be proposed for a rename.

If anyone makes multiple changes in one edit, and even one of those edits is controversial, then I think they should tolerate having their entire multi-part edit reverted. That is part of the systemic design of Wikipedia.

I am sympathetic to getting all of this right but I have a preference to avoid exceptional, surprising, ad hoc actions. Enforcing the use of a second term not matching the title seems like all of those things to me. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:28, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Flyer22 Reborn, it is not accurate when you say the DSM-5 considers gender dysphoria to be a disorder. This is a great explanation by Margarita Sáenz-Herrero on the differentiation between the terms "disorder" and "dysphoria":

According to the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), disorders are thought of as a clinically significant behavior, psychologically syndrome, or a pattern that occurs in an individual typically associated with distress, painful symptomology, disability or impairment.

Dysphoria, on the other hand, is a psychological state that causes one to experience feelings of anxiety, restlessness, and depression. It is not necessarily diagnosable, or something that would be identified in the DSM, but it is more a state of being, a feeling of unpleasantness or discomfort.

The previous diagnosis of GID implied that the problem might lie within the client, futher suggesting that the client might need to be cured or somehow mentally and emotionally fixed. The pending reclassification [my note: this reclassification is now complete] speaks to the mental state that accompanies being transgendered within this society.

Rather than indicating that a person needs to be fixed, the diagnosis indicates that the issues that need to be addressed lie outside the individual.

During development of the DSM-5, it was strongly considered to drop gender dysphoria altogether, mostly because of people who would still falsely claim it is considered a disorder. The only reason it was kept was to help preserve access to medical care, and to prevent treatment such as HRT from being considered cosmetic. Insurance companies are significantly less likely to cover treatment if there is no diagnostic code for it. Yet the DSM-5 reclassified GID (former term, inaccurate because it's not a disorder) as dysphoria for the reason quoted above.

The only authority, so far presented, that uses the term gender identity disorder is the ICD-10 (which is actively replacing it.) Yet, the ICD-10 is not the sole authority on this issue: Every other authority presented has already changed to gender dysphoria. Exactly how is the argument being made that gender identity disorder is not defunct? Perhaps the term obsolete should be substituted for defunct. Presenting one source (ICD-10, which no longer defends the term) and ignoring all the other medical authorities does not make sense.

The argument by Flyer22 Reborn that "[s]ome of the criteria was changed along with the name", and therefore we cannot replace GID with gender dysphoria, does not hold up because GID itself had different criteria depending on who was making the diagnosis. For example, was it GID as diagnosed by the DSM-IV, or as diagnosed by the ICD-10, or as diagnosed by another medical authority? What your argument is really saying, if followed with logical consistency, is that every time GID is used throughout this article, we should indicate whether it uses the diagnostic criteria of the DSM-IV, the IDC-10, etc. We do not do this because it is not necessary to preserve this nuance for every source and inhibits consistency in the wiki article. Likewise, it not necessary to enforce the use of two different names (gender dysphoria and gender identity disorder) when they fall into the same concept and same term. Megathon7 (talk) 17:10, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

@Megathon7: Since you have requested dispute resolution, it's probably not a good idea not to continue making edits to the page on this topic before the volunteer at that board has a chance to weigh in. As an openly transgender person who has been formally diagnosed with gender dysphoria, I have an interest in this article being as accurate as possible, but I also want to be mindful of Wikipedia standards and procedures. Funcrunch (talk) 18:21, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Understood. I had been making edits that would fit the criteria Flyer22 Reborn wants to use (meaning, I didn't think they would be controversial in the same way as changing all references of GID to gender dysphoria seems to be), but I will abstain from further editing. Megathon7 (talk) 18:29, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Bluerasberry, a new article is not needed in this case. That would be an inappropriate content fork. Remember the case we agreed on at the Domestic violence talk page? Use of alternative terms are usually fine, and those terms should usually be covered in the same article (it's disputed whether Intimate partner violence should even be its own article), but we explain the different terminology in the Domestic violence article. In this case, it's not simply a name change. The GID criteria was changed as well, and I think it can be problematic to use the term gender dysphoria for cases, including studies, that are referring to GID. And I explained why above.

Megathon7, no need to ping me since this page is on my watchlist. I didn't state that the DSM-5 considers gender dysphoria to be a disorder. Read what I state carefully. It is annoying to see my words twisted. I argued against your assertion that the DSM-5 does not consider gender dysphoria to be a disorder. You have no proof that it does not; so claiming that it does not is your opinion. I provided evidence that gender dysphoria is still seen as a disorder by sources regardless of the name change. Furthermore, with this source, I think it's very clear that the American Psychiatric Association is indicating that it considers gender dysphoria to fall under the traditional definition of a disorder, which is why it states "gender nonconformity is not in itself a mental disorder. The critical element of gender dysphoria is the presence of clinically significant distress associated with the condition." There are many transgender people who argue that it is a good thing that gender dysphoria is treated as a disorder because it causes significant distress and many transgender people need to be diagnosed with the condition so that they can gain access to the benefits they need, including hormone replacement therapy and other related medical benefits.

The Classification as a disorder section (which you recently partly changed) states, "Individuals with gender dysphoria may or may not regard their own cross-gender feelings and behaviors as a disorder. Advantages and disadvantages exist to classifying gender dysphoria as a disorder. Because gender dysphoria had been classified as a disorder in medical texts (such as the previous DSM manual, the DSM-IV-TR, under the name 'gender identity disorder'), many insurance companies are willing to cover some of the expenses of sex reassignment therapy. Without the classification of gender dysphoria as a medical disorder, sex reassignment therapy may be viewed as cosmetic treatment, rather than medically necessary treatment, and may not be covered. In the United States, transgender people are less likely than others to have health insurance, and often face hostility and insensitivity from healthcare providers."

In what way has the "advantages and disadvantages exist to classifying gender dysphoria as a disorder" aspect changed? You changed "is" to "has been," but where is the proof of "has been" when it comes to diagnosing this condition across the board? It is still classified as a disorder in a number of medical texts, including the previous DSM manual, the DSM-IV-TR. So the edit you made to the text in this case is somewhat inaccurate.

As for "defunct," you can argue that it's defunct on the talk page, but, unless you can provide authoritative sources stating that the term is defunct or obsolete, we should not be stating so in the article. No one is "ignoring all the other medical authorities."

As for using "gender dysphoria" throughout the article, you state that my argument does not hold up, but going by what the sources state is exactly what we are supposed to do at this site. I've already noted that this is not simply the case of synonyms. It's the case of the criteria having been changed as well. I would rather the article be uniform, and I'm okay with most of your latest edits, but I think it's best to update the references (as in sources, not the mentions) with the text. If a 1992 study is referring to GID, I am not sure that it's appropriate to state, "In a 1992 study on gender dysphoria." Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 17:04, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Professional Consult As a doctorate-level Psychologist, I'd like to clarify an issue here. GID is a diagnosis, whereas the term gender dysphoria has two meanings - one colloquial, and one diagnostic. The terminology was evolved out of respect, and reflects NPOV, while continued use of GID to refer colloquially to people with gender dysphoria is considered biased and disrespectful in the scientific community. Because of this, one accurate solution for the article would be twofold. First, leave all instances of GID that refer to the DSM-IV or ICD criteria of GID (8 criteria, very specific) for example, research done with GID diagnoses. Second, update all other uses - especially the descriptive ones - of GID to "gender dysphoria."

For example, I would propose for the lede: "Gender dysphoria is the distress a person experiences as a result of a subjective conflict between their gender and the sex they were assigned at birth. In these cases, when the assigned sex does not match the person's gender identity, the person is transgender."

Then, in the 3rd paragraph of the lede: "Gender Dysphoria is also a diagnosis in the DSM-5 [8], which requires that the dysphoria be severe enough to impair a person's life. The diagnosis of Gender Dysphoria in the DSM-5 replaced the more stringent diagnosis Gender Identity Disorder (GID) from the DSM-IV. GID is also classified as a disorder by the ICD-10 CM[7], again with multiple strict criteria for diagnosis requiring more than distress."

The only other accurate solution for the article would be to keep the name of the article "Gender Identity Disorder," or "Gender Dysphoria Diagnosis" and separate it as a historical account of the diagnostic labels, separate from gender dysphoria.

To illustrate with a parallel, this is like an article about depression the mood which also mentions Major Depressive Disorder. See what Wiki did with that Depression.

In sum, gender dysphoria is both a descriptive term and a specific diagnostic label with strict criteria, and the article would do well to differentiate between these uses. While GID may be a loose synonym for Gender Dysphoria (the diagnostic label), they have very different clinical criteria, and both of these concepts are more strict and specific than gender dysphoria. Cyintherye (talk) 04:17, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Your first suggestion does not seem bad; I'll have to think more on it. I say this because when researching the term gender dysphoria, it is mostly associated with GID. It's not usually defined as something that is simply a colloquial matter. We should also stick to what sources state. For example, I'd rather see a reliable source that states "subjective conflict."

Your second suggestion is not a good idea; it would be an unnecessary WP:Content fork. And the term GID is still currently being used; so it's not simply historical. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 18:15, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

_____

References