biological and social e-xlantion for gender dyspohira Eval Flashcards
Socially-sensitive research
For some individuals, knowing that there is a biological basis to their gender dysphoria may be a relief. Classifying GD as a medical category requiring treatment removes responsibility from the person. As a consequence, they may be less likely to assume the way they feel is ‘their fault’ and the conflict they are experiencing is some kind of character flaw or indication of personal weakness.
However, others object to the label of mental disorder being applied to gender dysphoria. Such a label risks stigmatising those who are subject to it, characterising them as ‘ill’ or ‘sick’ rather than merely ‘different’. They may be subject to prejudice or discrimination as others are unable to look past the label.
This suggests that research into gender dysphoria may ultimately shape how society views the label, and consequently, how individuals who come to have the label applied may be viewed. This means that researchers and clinicians should avoid reinforcing damaging stereotypes where possible.
Different outcomes
Some people who experience gender dysphoria will decide to have gender reassignment surgery in the future. Such treatment is available on the NHS or through private healthcare. With appropriate support, those individuals are able to reconcile their external appearance with the gender they have always identified as. There now exists many ways and agencies through which people can access support and advice whilst managing their transition.
However, a significant proportion of people who experience dysphoric feelings in childhood do not do so as adults. A study by Kelley Drummond et al. (2008) followed a sample of 25 girls who were all diagnosed with gender dysphoria in childhood. Only 12% (3 out of 25) were still classified as having gender dysphoria when they were followed up at the ages of 24. This tends to reflect the proportion of people in this country who initially report a desire to change gender in childhood and adolescence, then no longer feel this way as they get older.
This suggests that gender reassignment surgery before the age of consent must be very carefully managed with appropriate support and safeguards. Many people are uncomfortable with the idea of children receiving hormone treatment that may permanently change their physicality. That said, early medical intervention may be the only way to prevent depression and possibly suicide in extreme cases.
Psychoanalytic theory
One limitation is there are issues with the psychoanalytic theory of gender dysphoria.
Ovesey and Person’s explanation does not provide an adequate account of gender dysphoria in biological females as the theory only applies to transgender women (people assigned male at birth who identify as women). In any case, research by George Rekers (1986) found that gender dysphoria in those assigned male at birth is more likely to be associated with the absence of the father than the fear of separation from the mother.
Social constructionism
One strength of the social constructionism approach is that not all cultures have two genders.
On the previous spread we saw how some cultures recognise more than two genders, such as the fo’ofafine of Samoa. This is a challenge to traditional binary classifications of male and female. Indeed, the fact that increasing numbers of people now describe themselves as non-binary suggests that cultural understanding is only now beginning to ‘catch up’ with the lived experience of many.
This suggests that gender identity (and dysphoria) is best seen as a social construction rather than a biological fact.
Other brain differences
One strength is that evidence suggests there may be other brain differences associated with gender dysphoria.
Gluseppina Rametti et al. (2011) studied another sexually dimorphic aspect of the brain - that of white matte (the deeper tissues of the brain). There are regional differences in the proportion of white matter in male and female brains. Rametti et al. analysed the brains of both male and female transgender individuals, crucially before they began hormone treatment as part of gender reassignment. In most cases, the amount and distribution of white matter corresponded more closely to the gender the individuals identified themselves as being rather than their biological sex.
This suggests that there are early differences in the brats of transgender individuals.
Contradictory evidence
One limitation of brain sex theory is its central claims have been challenged.
Hillere Hulshoff Pol et al. (2006) studied changes in transgender individuals’ brains using MRI scans taken during hormone treatment. The scans showed that size of the BST changed significantly over that period. In the studies by Kruijver et al. and Zhou et al. (facing page) the BST was examined post-mortem and after transgender individuals had received hormone treatment during gender reassignment treatment.
This suggests that differences in the BST may have been an effect of hormone therapy, rather than the cause of gender dysphoria.
