Talk:Etiology of transsexualism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale. |
Contents |
[edit] References needed
It appears that this page is largely unreferenced. Could any of the contributors of interested parties please look for references, particularly to early theories, behavioural theories and their discreditation?
Cheers Lwollert 02:41, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
There is a "Citation Needed" indicator following the statement in the sixth paragraph of the Possible Physical Causes section:
"There is also evidence from transsexual people born between the 1930s and 1970s that exposure to a synthetic estrogen known as diethylstilbestrol(DES), routinely used at the time to prevent miscarriage and treat morning sickness, may have contributed to disrupting the hormonal balance within the womb. Evidence suggests that an unusually high percentage of physical males whose mothers were known to have taken this medication present as transgender or transsexual, either in childhood or in later life.[citation needed]"
This statement has no basis in fact and may have been placed here on the basis of anecdote, urban legend, or wishful thinking. That would explain why there is no reference given. In fact, reference 9, the Centers For Disease Control DES Update, clearly states that as of 2003 the only well-documented effect of prenatal DES exposure in DES Sons is benign epididymal cysts. In no follow-up studies of male children exposed prenatally to DES have psychosexual efffects of any kind been observed. I will watch this page for a while to see if anyone comes forward with a reference to support this statement. If that does not happen, I will edit the page using reference 9 to present what is currently known about the effects of DES exposure on human males.
"Always look to the data!" JRamlow 07:27, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Joan vs John
It might be worth putting in a link to the John vs Joan Case, that is, the case of David Reimer and all the effort John Money put into the transsexual debate. (I know he's unpopular, and what was done to David Reimer was unconscionable, but he was fundamental in the early treatment of transsexuals, and worked with Harry Benjamin
Cheers Lwollert 02:41, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Cerebral Sexual Dimorphism
There is at least one study showing that the brain does in fact have sexually dimorphic characteristics. Putting such a finding wiht the almost axiomatic proposition that anything that forms in a human body may end up developing divergently from normative leads to a simple conclusion that divergent sexual dimorphic development may occur between the brain and all other parts of a human body. Note, this is not a cause, it's rather a realization that inevitably that if the brain is in fact sexually dimorphic, then at least one form of transsexualism would be a form of intersexuality.
I personally feel that there is a distinction between finding the etiology of transsexualism, and enforcing a binary gender order. Recall that I hold as an axiom that if something can diverge in the human body, that eventually at sometime it will. Now, "divergent development" is completely different from calling it a disease or disorder. Women and men are naturally diverent in development. While it may work in mind experiments to assume that a perfectly developed human would never have transsexuality, and that only two genders would result from such perfect development, that biology is horribly bad at going "perfectly". Thus every person is in some way divergently developed from the perfection of their genetic heritage. This standing also follows that divergencies need not be complete, and in fact, by imperfect biology, will never be complete. Thus, the notion of a binary gender system requires as an assumption the existence of perfect biology, which we all know is in fact quite imperfect.
This position that transsexuality and transgenderism should be considered "naturally occuring divergent developments" of the human body, has a number of benefits. The condition is no longer a DSM criteria, as the condition is not psychological, but rather physiological, thus granting continued medical access, and care. Whereas any event that would simply dismiss GID the same as homosexuality from the DSM would say that the condition requires no treatment at all. Also, there is the greater potential for legal recognition, and a stronger medical argument from which to demand medical coverage.
Just some thoughts, but restating what's above, if the brain is sexually dimorphic, then at least some transsexuals would be intersexed. --Puellanivis 20:49, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Possible physical causes
The possible physical causes section is in need of serious editing, primarily for purposes of clarity. Very quick switches are made between discussion of BSTc studies and hormonal studies such as those centered around Ar-Ir, without the difference in structures examined being examined or apparently even stated. Such distinctions are very important in order to accurately represent the findings of current studies in this area
--Zach Chidester 19:29, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
