Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 10:38, 22 September 2009

Harry Benjamin's Syndrome

• Articles for deletion/Harry Benjamin's Syndrome

Harry Benjamin's Syndrome (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-existent disease. Not recognized in any book of official diagnoses. Article recreated by same editors to circumvent delete/redirect decision of Harry Benjamin Syndrome. See previous delete/redirect consensus. This term is non-notable; the only reliable source that uses the term currently included at the article says "Harry Benjamin Syndrome" is synonymous with transsexualism: “the transsexual disorder known as Harry Benjamin Syndrome.” Previously deleted article averaged 2 visits a day. This obscure term should be a redirect that reflects how Harry Benjamin Syndrome is handled. Jokestress (talk) 23:27, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

• Comment. That one article that calls HBS a type of transsexualism is non-credible and lying. We coined the term and didn't authorize them to speak on behalf of the word we coined. It was published by a person with an agenda. Delete BOTH articles without ANY redirection as per Misplaced Pages policy. Since we coined the term and Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox, either delete both without redirects or let us keep just one and come up with credible sources. There ARE credible sources in Spanish and Italian which more than prove that HBS is not a type of TSism, and the OTRS team has verified this on the Spanish page.--74.124.187.76 (talk) 23:40, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

• Redirect and comment per nominator. Also, I'm not sure what 74.124.187.76 is trying to say with regards to coining this term. Care to clarify a bit more than vaguely stating "we coined it"? Xenocide 23:58, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

• Comment. User Jokestress, Andrea James, an open Harry Benjamin's Syndrome (HBS) phobic person who is strongly against this patient advocacy movement, she has not a voice to speak for the HBS community as has been pointed out by another user on the discussion page of the HBS article, and her comments, arguments, etc, they should not be considered neutral nor objective here because her clear and open hate to this patient advocacy movement, a movement widely documented in the HBS article, and a terminology in fact officially used by prominent doctors specialized in this field and even the Health Department of Spain's government as it is been proven on the article which contains more than enough reliable sources. An article about HBS Phobia will be created soon with all the accumulated proof of hatred against this patient advocacy movement from people like Andrea James. --CharlotteGoiar (talk) 00:08, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

• Comment. More sources showing that the terms are synonymous, supporting a redirect: "Other people with less spectacular transgender conditions such as Harry Benjamin's Syndrome (transsexuality)..." "Transsexualism is sometimes known as Harry Benjamin's syndrome (HBS)." "Harry Benjamin discovered the syndrome we call Transsexualism." The article on Transsexualism already discusses the term, so a redirect should be done per consensus on Harry Benjamin Syndrome. Jokestress (talk) 00:15, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

• Keep. The article should remain because it reflects the reality of a precise term used by doctors today and it reflects the reality of a patient advocacy movement emerging from a few years ago. --CharlotteGoiar (talk) 00:24, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

• Comment while i am very curious about this articles subject, and cannot quite grasp its connection to the phenomenon of transexualism, i can say this: its very telling that the main site for advocacy for this syndrome has an entire page devoted to an exegesis of intersex as related to the bible . NO medically oriented site trying to document a medical condition would dream of including such material. regardless of the sites support for intersex people being included in "gods plan" (at least i think they are supportive of this, not that its directly relevant), this means that this site is absolutely not useful as an objective, medically sound source of information on transsexualism of any sort. If this site/subject has a lot of attention, then it is possible to rewrite this article as being about the social movement represented by HBS sites like this. any critiques they have of other modalities, particularly medical/psychiatric, for exploring transexualism must be seen as social, not medical critiques. any legitimate medical research quoted by HBS must be separated out from HBS and considered in the light of medical peer review, etc. If there are not enough references to be found for HBS being a social movement, then the article must be deleted for nonnotability. and ok, these ARE just my thoughts, so i could be wrong, but i dont think so. as i said at first, this is hard for a relative newcomer to these issues to grasp, so i dont have a firm view of whether we SHOULD delete or rewrite. This article would benefit from expert opinion. I dont know how to advocate for that ethically, so maybe someone else knows how to draw in other editors fairly. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 01:12, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

• Speedy delete - this is an attempt to undo the consensus formed at the AfD of "Harry Benjamin Syndrome", which was closed a few months ago as redirect to Transsexualism. All redirects formed in this squabble should be deleted and salted; the remaining redirect should be protected as it seems absolutely clear that things have certainly gotten out of hand. Both sides have been ignoring constructive suggestions to them at the Harry Benjamin Syndrome RfD, and this AfD is not helping matters as the heat is already quite intense. Everything should be returned to a point two weeks ago... and then, a civil discussion be made at the appropriate venue. There has been too much forum shopping going on here as it is. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 02:33, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • The article can't be speedily deleted, as it's not an exact recreation of the version that was deleted. It's different (in fact, I dare say it's worse than the original version, judging just by the quality of sources and the writing style), so it doesn't fall under the criteria for speedy deletion. Regular deletion after AfD discussion, though, is fine. rʨanaɢ /_contribs 08:14, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

• Delete and keep the redirect, protecting it if necessary. The sources given are totally inconsistent: the principle site, at various places claims it as very rare, but also says it is the most common cause of what they term "true Transsexualism" -- contra the assertion above by 74.124.187.76. The question of whether the two terms are synonymous is unanswerable, because the sources are inconsistent. In this context, I would regard none as truly reliable; they have all been contaminated by propaganda. All we can do is report the variation in terminology, but not canonize it in one way or another. The extent to which human feelings correspond to human biology is not to be solved by squabbling over definitions. The question of determining the biological basis of this is confused, not clarified , by this aberrant terminology. DGG ( talk ) 04:17, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

• Delete because I have found no convincing support for the academic or scientific validity of this term. Unable to figure out what the difference was between HBS and TG, I went to the self-published HBS site that is linked repeatedly in the article and I perused this page of it; I also read part of the Nature review that is repeatedly cited on the HBS page. Based on my reading of it, the Nature article does not support many of the claims it's being used for on the HBS page—in the typical spirit of science journalism, that page appears to be taking mundane observations (for example, a bird with half a female brain transplanted into it can't breed, big surprise there) and leaping to unsupported but flashy conclusions with them (i.e., the claim that "gender identity" is determined wholly by the neurobiological architecture of the brain). Anyway, by now I think I understand the difference that editors are claiming between HBS and TG (that HBS is a physical disorder and TG is a psychological state), but I don't see scientific evidence to back it up and I don't see evidence that HBS is recognized by the academic or scientific communities. No opinion on whether the article should be redirected or deleted, but at the very least it should not remain an article. rʨanaɢ /_contribs 08:33, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

• Keep. First off, I can see lots of TG Men discussing here and in another related pages about Harry Benjamin's Syndrome, these people's arguments should not be considered neutral nor objective for the discussion of the current topic. They have a clear agenda and and they often show an open hate towards this particular patient advocacy movement (all this will be reported soon online on several websites including on a new specific HBS Phobia wikipedia article on several languages). The main purpose of this article is not to claim for a new disease but to refine a precise diagnostic for the type VI of primary transsexualism which is stated to be a form of intersexualism by dozens of medical experts on this condition today . We should rely on FACTS and medicine, the term transsexualism is not longer suitable for this very precise type VI of patients, because the etiology of their condition is intersexual as Harry Benjamin himself pointed out. To rely in the opinions and arguments of transgender men with a clear agenda behind is not serious at all, as I said, is not objective judgement. Misplaced Pages's articles about Harry Benjamin's Syndrome in Spanish and in Italian keeps online and the references provided on these articles had been proved realiable and verified by the OTRS team of Misplaced Pages in these countries. In this English version however, it clearly appears a conflict of interest in the publication of this article, and this violates Misplaced Pages policy. But the REAL MAIN PURPOSE of this article, beyond all of what I mentioned, is just only to reflect the reality of an real patient advocacy movement who is the reality of a minority group who identifies with this definition following the advance in Science and this is very widely showed by dozens of blogs, sites, etc, on the internet, just Google for Harry Benjamin's Syndrome at this moment of the search 51.900 entries resulted from the search. So it is a social reality that we cannot deny.

This article should Keep, of course, we must rely on these facts and in the conclusions of doctors, not to rely in the conclusions of TG men with supports and opposite agenda to the purposes of this minority of people that suffer this precise condition. If Misplaced Pages keeps online an article about Queer Theory which is just that, a theory, not more than a theory, then the Harry Benjamin's Syndrome article should be keep too, as the social movement who identifies with it exists as much as the one who identifies with that "queer theory".

And I will not comment more about this. The situation of this problem of HBS Phobia that some TG people suffer from, it will be soon exposed widely on the internet, and eventually other articles will appear on Misplaced Pages and in other informational resources on the internet about the progressing fact of this patient advocacy movement, so what you decide to do or not here will be see in a short future as just something anecdotal for the history of this patient advocacy movemement. --CharlotteGoiar (talk) 10:38, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

• AfD debates (Science and technology)
• AfD debates