Talk:Gender transition

WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality , a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. 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

High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject icon LGBTQ+ studies

WikiProject icon

Gender studies Top‐importance

WikiProject icon 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 Wikipedia. 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 Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. To-do list: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Assess : see Unassessed Gender studies articles and Unknown-importance Gender studies articles Cleanup : edit to see Collaborate : see /Collaboration Copyedit : edit to see Deletion sorting : see /Sexuality and gender Expand : edit to see Infobox : see Gender studies articles needing infoboxes Merge : edit to see Notability : edit to see NPOV : edit to see Orphans : Brannon Masculinity Scale · Holy Virility · Media and gender · Michael Kaufman (author) · Women's education in Saudi Arabia Photo : see Wikipedia requested photographs of gender studies Split : History of feminism Stubs : see Gender studies stubs Translate : see /translation Update : edit to see Verify : Riot grrrl Needs attention : see Gender studies articles needing attention

Section sizes Section size for Gender transition (14 sections) Section name Byte count Prose size (words) Header Total Header Total (Top) 5,336 5,336 226 226 Terminology 121 14,173 15 89 Identity-related terms 5,124 5,124 0 0 Medical-related terms 6,423 6,423 74 74 Social-related terms 2,505 2,505 0 0 Various aspects 949 9,438 81 600 Social aspects 3,802 3,802 125 125 Psychological aspects 552 552 78 78 Legal aspects 2,200 2,200 161 161 Physical aspects 461 461 53 53 Grieving gender identity 1,474 1,474 102 102 See also 55 55 0 0 References 66 66 0 0 Further reading 769 769 0 0 Total 29,837 29,837 915 915

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 8 January 2024 and 28 April 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Zisha68 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Zisha68 (talk) 02:34, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

There needs to be more of an idea on this page's identity I think. In addition: some parts of the page repeat almost verbatim (my fault, but it seemed better than the alternative of withholding detail in certain places), needs more neutral detail on detransitions, non-binary identity and transitioning as a non-binary person, and maybe more consensus on how this page is written? (what terms we use, etc.). I think I'm probably a bit too close to the page to help with some of these things, but I'll continue to improve the page however I can, whenever I am able. However, in its current state, I hope improvement is seen across the board!!

bluhhh signing off for the night JDBauby (talk) 22:22, 25 July 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

The current text comes across as one-sided, sounding like it's from trans activists, so it needs a more balanced perspective. The practice has become highly controversial, leading to ongoing lawsuits, legislative bans in multiple U.S. states and countries, and systematic reviews questioning the evidence base. 98.37.197.117 (talk) 07:01, 28 October 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

In the lead:

It is the recommended course of treatment for individuals struggling with gender dysphoria, providing improved mental health outcomes in the majority of people.

This statement is surprisingly affirmative compared to the study that was used as reference (italics added for emphasis):

This systematic review of 20 studies found evidence that gender-affirming hormone therapy may be associated with improvements in QOL scores and decreases in depression and anxiety symptoms among transgender people. Associations were similar across gender identity and age. The strength of evidence for these conclusions is low due to methodological limitations (Table 6). It was impossible to draw conclusions about the effects of hormone therapy on death by suicide.

Maybe someone can add another source to support the claim? Preferably, a high-quality systematic review or meta-analysis with strong evidence.

Or simply reword the sentence according to the source?

Sincerely, DiscipulusVirtutis (talk) 21:19, 2 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

This particular review says it could not draw any conclusions about death by suicide, probably because it only reviewed one study that assessed suicide. The review does conclude that ‘Hormone therapy was associated with increased QOL, decreased depression, and decreased anxiety’. That said, I agree that further sources are needed to justify a firm claim of effectiveness. I’ve added three more literature reviews of 29, 31, and 58 studies that all conclude gender transition improves or significantly improves mental health, as well as statements from the American Psychological Association and World Medical Association to back up the claim that it's a recommended treatment.

More broadly, I think it's important to keep in mind that the goal of this page is not to accurately represent the limitations of one source, but the overall state of the evidence. In this case, there's plentiful evidence of a broad medical consensus on the efficacy of gender transition, and the language should reflect that. The revision 'It is a treatment for individuals experiencing gender dysphoria, with evidence suggesting potential mental health benefits, though further research is needed' frames the issue as far more uncertain than it really is, so I've reverted the change, with additional citations.

Ashpancakes (talk) 12:03, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

There’s ample evidence of a lack of consensus, for instance, the well-known Cass Report and the bans on this practice as harmful in the UK, US, and several other countries. As it stands, the page reads as if the entry on lobotomy had been written by its own advocates before the procedure was recognized as medical malpractice. 98.37.197.117 (talk) 07:46, 28 October 2025 (UTC) [reply ]