Talk:Gender dysphoria

Is this correct?

About this paragraph in the introduction, does this correctly describe the stances of the referenced sources?

Some researchers and transgender people argue for the declassification of the condition because they say the diagnosis pathologizes gender variance and reinforces the binary model of gender. However, this declassification could carry implications for healthcare accessibility, as HRT and gender-affirming surgery could be deemed cosmetic by insurance providers, as opposed to medically necessary treatment, thereby affecting coverage.

Are they really calling for the declassification of gender dysphoria or the declassification of free self identification? As gender dysphoria has lots of severe symptoms right? So it is unclear to me how anyone can argue that symptoms should be declassified? Is enough context given here? Are they maybe arguing this out of questioning whether the symptoms are caused by the dysphoria or by environmental factors (discrimination)? I can only really think of possible arguments to declassify gender dysphoria that would indeed lead to "implications" stated in the second sentence, that it would deemed cosmetic.

So to wrap up a bit, it is not clear to me what exactly the first sentence here means with "declassification", is it an emotional argument out of activism, or is there some solid logic here? If there is solid logic, I don't see it. Wallby (talk) 15:55, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

This looks like a fair summary of the existing sources, although one is old and the other is tertiary so I imagine more nuanced coverage of both stances probably exists.

• From Britannica:

  Critics have argued that GD diagnoses continue a long-standing history of pathologizing oppressed peoples. Some argue that the diagnosis stigmatizes groups that are simply expressing variation, not pathology. Critics suggest that the diagnosis individualizes a broad cultural and social phenomenon and reinforces a binary mode of gender.

• From ThinkProgress:

  On the other hand, insurance companies have been more willing to cover the expenses associated with transition under this language, because treatment for a disorder is considered medically necessary, rather than cosmetic.

Hope this helps. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (talk • stalk) 17:24, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

I can't speak for others, but if it helps you conceptualize the "anti-" argument, I offer the following clumsy analogy: I was born with a rare birth mark that spells out "Kick Me". I'm depressed because everyone keeps kicking me. I go to the doctor to get it removed. He says I have kick-me sad-brain disorder. He gives me antidepressants and says not to let it bother me as much when people kick me. I turn to leave. He kicks me. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (talk • stalk) 17:34, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

I apologize for my rant months ago. I don't think I was making any sense. I want to try again. Are you saying that some people who identify as another gender don't have any desire to change their phenotype and therefore their gender dysphoria is purely about expression in language (he/her, they/them, clothes)?

I would say that some people who have gender dysphoria choosing transition seems to be able to be not out of "fear of judgement by society", but simply them seeing themselves when looking down or in the mirror, or when sexually active, triggers their gender dysphoria. For those people, as without treatment they have symptoms, gender dysphoria IS a pathology caused by gender incongruence between the brain, and phenotype and reproductive organs. Thus declasification would deny these people's symptoms. Wallby (talk) 18:18, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Or more accurately it would deny the mechanism of their gender dysphoria. Wallby (talk) 18:18, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

It's a significant minority viewpoint, it's not our job to check if it's sensible, just to report that some people think that. For context, this seems to be an anti-psychiatry-adjacent belief. Flounder fillet (talk) 19:54, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Actually I was mistaken to assume that without gender dysphoria gender transition cannot be medically indicated. Gender transition can be indicated by any distress that is the result of the absense of a specific "right" gender or the presence of a specific "wrong" gender. Only the presence of a wrong gender would fit the current definition of gender dysphoria, whereas stress caused by absense of a right gender that could aliviate that stress would be more like non gender originating dysphoria resolvable through gender transition or something? Wallby (talk) 15:40, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Wrong gender is present ≡ right gender is absent (since both "occupy the same space" in a way). This is nonsensical. Flounder fillet (talk) 20:57, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

The first quote doesn't seem to establish declassification.

It only the seems to claim that the formulation and/or application of the current diagnosis allegedly leads to reductionisticly or even entirely wrongly labelling people with a variation-question with a pathological label (second sentence from first quote), and seems to claim that before mentioned of the current diagnosis seems to lack neutrality/objectivity, specifically failing to detect (binary) gender stereotypes.

So is it then correct that declassification is argued for? Wallby (talk) 18:09, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

With "before mentioned" I meant "the formulation and/or application" again, not sure if there is a more compact/clear way to write that without repeating that entirely. Wallby (talk) 18:11, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

@RoxySaunders Also, there is another implication of declassification. The sentence "People with gender dysphoria commonly identify as transgender" says "commonly", thus declassifying would also unavoidably impact people who have gender dysphoria but aren't transgender. Wallby (talk) 20:04, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Which is not addressed in that paragraph..

However, this declassification could carry implications for healthcare accessibility, as HRT and gender-affirming surgery could be deemed cosmetic by insurance providers, as opposed to medically necessary treatment, thereby affecting coverage.

It doesn't even mention what the impact of declassification would be on people with gender dysphoria who aren't transgender. I know from very close experience that is seems to exist, as this page also seems to suggest/confirm. Wallby (talk) 20:06, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

References

Gender incongruence infobox

@Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist I am struggling to understand the differentiation between Gender dysphoria (GD) and Gender incongruence. The former is derived from the DSM-5, while the latter is derived from the ICD-11. In their respective infoboxes, GI's symptoms are "A marked and persistent incongruence between an individual's experienced gender and the assigned sex", while GD's symptoms are "Distress related to one's assigned gender, sex or sex characteristics". These relay the same information but through different wording. Both have gender-affirming care as the listed treatment. Additionally, "Gender variant behavior and preferences alone are not a basis for assigning the diagnosis" is not a differential diagnosis as it is written but closely resembles the differential on GD's infobox. I did miss the Sexual health classification on sources and body so thanks for pointing this out. I do not understand though how these two conditions are not synonyms. The extra infobox clutters the article and, if they are distinct, would normally require a separate article if notable enough. Slothwizard (talk) 22:08, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

GI is a sexual health diagnosis in the ICD-11 for somebodies experienced gender mismatching their assigned sex regardless of the distress. GD is a psychiatric diagnosis in the DSM-5 for distress caused by marked persistent GI. Historically, they've pointed to each other or changed their names in spite of eachother. Transgender health guidelines / clinics, depending on country, use the diagnosis GI, GD, or both.

Most simply, they are two different health authorities' interlinked diagnoses that refers to the same population and treatment - one says the issue is physical, one says the issue is the psychological distress caused by the physical issue.

In regards to splitting them, they'd end up mostly duplicating each other. Especially in regards to their interweaving histories. I do think renaming to gender dysphoria and gender incongruence might be called for but that's a larger discussion. Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 23:05, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

I see the distinction now. It seems to be a difference in framing from the ICD and DSM. I don’t think the WHO is suggesting that there is no distress; they explain that it is a mismatch between your sense of gender and your assigned sex along with a desire to transition. There would need to be an aversion against having a conflicting gender and gender identity and not seeking treatment. The DSM's framing is not much different except they do not specify that the incongruence is inherent (with a physical origin). It would probably be better for the main infobox to contain only information that both framings have in common rather than have two separate infoboxes. The lead and body would be more suited in explaining the distinctions. Slothwizard (talk) 23:47, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Senior Capstone in Psychology

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 May 2025 and 26 July 2025. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Shay Gerdes (article contribs). Peer reviewers: CommonPigeon, Bschwear02.

— Assignment last updated by Chericomfort (talk) 21:28, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

@Shay Gerdes First lesson in wikipedia editing is BRD. Bold, revert, discuss. You were bold, you got largely reverted, now come to talk and discuss instead of simply reverting Snokalok (talk) 17:13, 15 July 2025 (UTC)