atypical gender development: gender dysphoria Flashcards
what is gender dysphoria?
Gender dysphoria is when there is a mismatch between an individuals biological sex and the sex that they feel, their gender identity.
Individuals may identify more with the opposite sex/gender, rather than the one identified at birth and they may opt for gender reassignment surgery.
why is gender dysphoria identified as a psychological disorder under the DSM?
Gender dysphoria is a source of stress and discomfort and is therefore identified as a psychological disorder on the DSM.
what is the brain sex theory as a biological explanation of gender dysphoria?
This explanation suggests parts of the brain structure are incompatible with their biological sex. Research focuses on dimorphic areas as they have different forms in males and females.
what was Zhou et al (1995) research into the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis as part of the brain sex theory?
Zhou et al (1995) found that the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis was fully developed by the age of 5 and was 40% bigger in males. In 6 post-mortems of female transgender individuals they found that it was the same size as the average females.
what was Kruijver et al (2000) research into the number of neurons on the same tissue as Zhou’s research in the brain sex theory?
Kruijver et al (2000) studied the same tissue but counted the number of neurons and he found that they were similar in number compared to the average female.
what was Heylens et al (2012) twin studies into the role of chromosomes as a biological explanation of atypical gender development?
Heylen’s et al (2012) compared 23 MZ twin pairs with 21 DZ twin pairs. They found that the concordance rate for MZ twins was 39% whereas DZ twins it was 0%, this suggests that there are some genetic influence.
what was Hare et al (2009) research into the DNA of male to female transexuals when looking into the role of chromosomes on atypical gender development?
Hare et al (2009) looked into the DNA of 112 male to female transexuals. They found that they are more likely to have a longer version of the androgen receptor gene and the effect of this is that they have reduced actions of the male hormone testosterone. This means that they may have an effect on gender development in the womb as their brain may be under-masculinising.
AO3: how is ‘supporting evidence’ a strength to the biological explanation of gender dysphoria and atypical gender development?
one strength to the biological explanations of gender dysphoria as an explanation of atypical gender development is that there is supporting evidence. For example, Rametti et al (2011) looked into the brains of female to male transexuals before they started hormone treatments. They found that they had a similar amount of white matter to males in which they identified with and not females which was their biological sex. Therefore, this supports the idea that there are biological influences on an individuals gender development and that there are early differences in the brains of transgender individuals.
AO3: how is ‘problems with twin studies’ a limitation to the biological explanations of gender dysphoria and atypical gender development?
one limitation to the biological explanations of gender dysphoria as an explanation of atypical gender development is that there are problems with twin study evidence. This means that although some aspects of gender dysphoria are inherited, the research findings from twin studies remain inconclusive. This is because there are very low concordance rates with only 39% for twins who share 100% of the same DNA and 0% between twins who share 50% of DNA. They are also unable to separate the relative influence of nature versus nurture as Mz twins are more likely to grow up in the same environment and be exposed to the same triggers and behaviours compared to Dz twins. Therefore, this suggests that we are unable to conclude that genetics are the sole purpose for the atypical gender development and that our environment may also have a larger influence than initially thought.
AO3: how is ‘reductionist’ a limitation to the biological explanations of gender dysphoria and atypical gender development?
one limitation to the biological explanations of gender dysphoria is that it is a reductionist explanation. This is because the biological explanation reduces a very complex condition and associated behaviours to a simpler genetic, neuroanatomical or hormonal level. This means that other factors that contribute to gender dysphoria may be ignored if the biological explanation is emphasised too much, such as the social influences on gender development. Therefore, by reducing gender dysphoria to more simple levels, it means that other factors and influences may be ignored which may have a more important influence on gender development.
AO3: how is ‘socially sensitive research’ a limitation to the biological explanations to gender dysphoria and atypical gender development?
one limitation to the biological explanations of gender dysphoria is that the research is socially sensitive. This is because the research into gender dysphoria has potential social consequences, suggesting that we need to consider whether those with gender dysphoria are better off as a result of the research or worse off. This means that if a biological cause is found, it may lead to acceptance of and support for those experiencing gender dysphoria. Therefore, this may help an individual to understand why they feel the way they do and they may be less likely to assume the way they feel is their fault. However, it may lead to negative assumptions being made, such as the idea that transsexualism is inevitable in those experiencing gender dysphoria.
what is social constructionism in the social psychological explanations of gender dysphoria?
Social constructionism: this argues that ‘man’ and ‘women’ are social constructs, they are concepts invented by societies, but they do not represent underlying biological differences
what does social constructionism suggest gender dysphoria stems from?
Gender dysphoria stems from trying to force people to be one or the other, we have to pick a side and conform to this label, and this is a social phenomenon not a pathological condition.
what is McClintocks research into the influence of cultural expectations on gender development?
She looked at the Sambia in New Guinea and looked at biological males with a genetic condition who were labelled as female at birth because they have a labia and clitoris. At puberty, testes descended and the clitoris enlarged to a penis. They widely accepted that individuals were men, women or kwolu-aatmwol. This contact with the ‘west’ has led to the latter now being judged as having pathological forms of gender dysphoria.
what is Ovesey and Person (1973) psychodynamic explanation of gender dysphoria?
Ovesey and Person (1973) explained gender development in males. They suggested that this was the result of a child experiencing extreme separation anxiety before their gender identity is established. He fantasises of a symbiotic fusion with the mother to relieve the anxiety, and the fear of the separation is then removed. Therefore, he becomes the mother and adopts a female gender identity.
AO3: how is ‘supporting evidence for social constructionism’ a strength to the social psychological explanation of atypical gender development?
one strength to the social psychological explanation of atypical gender development is that there is supporting evidence for social constructivism. This is because support comes from cross-cultural research that recognised that not all cultures have two genders. For example, the Hijras in India are transgender individuals who’s gender identity are recognised on their legal identify documents such as their passport by having their gender marked as ‘E’. The fa’afafine in Samoa are biological males who adopt traditionally female gender roles in the house such as domestic work. They may also have sexual relationships with non-fa’afafine men but are not considered as gay. Therefore, this theory challenges the idea that men and women have to follow the traditional binary classifications and follow stereotypical roles.
AO3: how is ‘supporting evidence for psychodynamic explanations’ a strength to the social psychological explanation of atypical gender development?
one strength to the social psychological explanation of atypical gender development is that there is supporting evidence for the psychodynamic explanation. For example, Stoller (1973) found that males with gender dysphoria, when interviewed, seemed to have a pretty close relationship with their mother. This means that this close relationship leads to the boys over-identifying with their mother which may be the cause of the possible gender confusion. Therefore, this supports the idea that when boys spend an increased amount of time with their mothers during the phallic stage, it may have an impact on their gender development and gender identify later in life. However, how do we know that the gender dysphoria is caused by the close relationship with the mother instead of the possibility that the close relationship with their mother is due to the gender dysphoria. Therefore, there is however a problem with cause and effect within the research of the psychodynamic theory of gender dysphoria.
AO3: how is ‘gender bias’ a limitation to the social psychological explanations of atypical gender development?
one limitation to the social psychological explanations of atypical gender development is that there is gender bias within the research. This is because the psychodynamic theory does not provide an adequate explanation of gender dysphoria in those who are born female, but identify with males. This means that it doesn’t provide us with a full understanding of the psychological factors that influence gender development. Therefore, this theory lacks generalisability and suffers from androcentrism due to the fact that it minimises biologically female individuals who identify with males in the research or doesn’t even include them. This means that they are not fully represented as there may be different processes we are not aware of that are involved when biological women identify with men compared to biological men identifying with women.
AO3: how is ‘alternate funding’ a limitation to the social psychological explanations of gender development?
one limitation to the social psychological explanations of atypical gender development is that it doesn’t account for alternative explanations of gender development. This is because the social and psychological explanations of gender development fail to account for the fact that our gender development and atypical gender development is influenced by our biology and genetics. This means that these explanations fail to account for the impact that our chromosomes and hormones, such as testosterone, have on us and our development. For example, twin studies on 23 Mz and 21 Dz twin pairs found that the concordance rate for atypical gender development was 39% for Mz and 0% for Dz twins, suggesting there is a genetic component. Therefore, this theory may be seen as simplistic and incomplete due to the lack of accountability for other explanations.
