Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gender dysphoria article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
Gender euphoria was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 12 May 2021 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Gender dysphoria. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology
This article is part of WikiProject Gender studies. This WikiProject aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Gender studiesWikipedia:WikiProject Gender studiesTemplate:WikiProject Gender studiesGender studies
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Misplaced Pages. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies
This article was created or improved during Wiki Loves Pride, 2015.Wiki Loves PrideWikipedia:Wiki Loves PrideTemplate:Wiki Loves Pride talkWiki Loves Pride
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
Becker, Judith V.; Perkins, Andrew (2014). "Gender Dysphoria". In Hales, Robert E.; Yudofsky, Stuart C.; Roberts, Laura Weiss (eds.). The American Psychiatric Publishing Textbook of Psychiatry (6th ed.). Washington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Publishing. pp. 679–702. ISBN978-1-5856-2444-7.
Article published March 2023
It's been one month since print publication, should it not be included in this article:
It's a journalistic article written by a journalist - I don't think being published in BMJ changes that. I don't see why we would use it for any actual medical content rather than citing the relevant medical bodies directly. Maybe for some society stuff/commentary on the state of evidence so far. Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:34, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Actually not even "commentary on the state of evidence so far" I'd say since we'd want a systematic review for that (and can cite the systematic reviews she mentions directly if needed). Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:57, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
The thing that immediately strikes me is that the article evokes this. Perhaps I'm being overly cynical, but it helps to remember that there is a whole demographic of transphobic idealogues who will happily point to "professional disagreement" in order to further their agenda - when said disagreement is irrelevant to the material facts (as with Evolution). AbominableIntelligence (talk) 18:43, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
100% agree with this. Block is manipulating the statistics of detransitioning and other contentious trans-related issues to make it seem much more common place than it actually is. There is clearly an agenda in mind here. I would be concerned if this was going to be used as a source for what's supposed to be a neutral article. BreakfastSonata (talk) 12:35, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
Suggest that it not be included on the grounds that, though published in a very high quality source and directly addressing current professional opinion on appropriate treatment for gender dysphoria in the young, it's inconvenient. 2407:7000:9BF1:4000:4D73:4B53:3B58:9B53 (talk) 08:48, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
BMJ is certainly highly reliable, and it seems okay to me; my only concern, is how do we treat it? It's not a study, so not a primary source, so that's a good start. But it doesn't look quite like a literature survey to me, at least not the ones I'm used to seeing, although it does have similarities. Author "Block" is listed as "investigations reporter". So, how do we characterize this? Sandy, if you're not too busy, any thoughts about how to characterize it? Should we just copy their lead, and say, "in an investigation by BMJ, blah blah..", or just cite it, without further qualification? (edit conflict) Mathglot (talk) 06:14, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
I haven't been overly impressed by some-such coming out of the BMJ lately, but I can't recall the specific examples. That said, if the BMJ is now engaging in "investigative journalism", my inclination is to treat it exactly as we would another high-quality source (think New York Times) doing an investigative piece in medicine. It's a good source for making statements, for example, about society and culture, but not necessarily or the best for statements about biomedical fact. Attribution seems safe ... According to the BMJ Investigations Unit ... or some such. By the way, some of what is in Society and culture now looks like it might be better placed in a History section. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:01, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
What are we even debating? I don't see any article content proposed, just a reference. What is the reference supposed to support? Nosferattus (talk) 21:07, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
Issue With DSM-5 Prevalence Estimate
Hi, so at the start of the "Epidemiology" section it states:
The DSM-5 estimates that about 0.005% to 0.014% of people assigned male at birth (5-14 per 100k) and 0.002% to 0.003% of people assigned female at birth (2-3 per 100k) are diagnosable with gender dysphoria.
I can't verify since I'm not sure the specific sources used, but my reading of the "Prevalence" section in the DSM is that they are getting these estimates based on face-value number of referrals compared to the general pop. Specifically it says:
Since not all adults seeking hormone treatment and surgical reassignment attend specialty clinics, these rates are likely modest underestimates. Sex differences in rate of referrals to specialty clinics vary by age group.
If these rates are just based on the amount of a population going to specialty clinics, I don't know if it's appropriate at all to use it as an estimate of the % of the population *diagnosable* with gender dysphoria (it'd be an estimate of the % of the population *diagnosed* with GD at one point in time). At the very least it should be qualified, since that's a much stronger statement that could be, e.g., cross referenced with the current amount of people identifying as trans women to say "X% of those identifying as trans women do not have diagnosable gender dysphoria", which wouldn't be a valid conclusion based on my reading of what the DSM is saying. VoeVoeVoe (talk) 23:28, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
Yes, they are very unrealistic numbers and extremely low. Far too low to be representative of the general population based on available surveys. This study says: The prevalence of gender dysphoria is difficult to determine in the general population. Previously, the prevalence in adults was thought to range from 0.005% to 0.014% for people assigned male gender at birth and 0.002% to 0.003% for people assigned female gender at birth.18 These estimates are based on referrals to surgical gender reassignment clinics, however, and are therefore likely an underestimate.Hist9600 (talk) 03:09, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, this does seem ripe for rewording. At the very least, @VoeVoeVoe you're correct that it's not accurate to paraphrase the DSM5 prevalence number as an estimate of people ... diagnosable with gender dysphoria, and as @Hist9600 points to, there are newer, more confident and likely more accurate prevalence estimations in the literature. Srey Sros03:20, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
I'm looking at the page in the DSM-5, and even the DSM-5 says that, "not all adults seeking hormone treatment and surgical reassignment attend specialty clinics", and further says that the numbers are likely to be underestimates (p. 454). Yet the numbers were used rather uncritically in the article here. Not a good use of this source. Hist9600 (talk) 15:36, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
.svg){kind=small}
