Thank you Jesus. I wanted to look up just what "congruence" full deification was. I can upon this article.
http://genderkid.wordpress.com/2010/...-incongruence/
“Gender Incongruence”
February 11, 2010
tags: APA, DSM, DSM-5, gender identity disorder, gender incongruence, GID
by genderkid
I just found that the APA –the US-based psychiatric organization– published its list of proposed revisions for the next edition of the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistic Manual of Mental Disorders). Of course, what interested me the most was this:It is proposed that the name gender identity disorder (GID) be replaced by “Gender Incongruence” (GI) because the latter is a descriptive term that better reflects the core of the problem: an incongruence between, on the one hand, what identity one experiences and/or expresses and, on the other hand, how one is expected to live based on one’s assigned gender (usually at birth).
This is a big improvement: the revision authors are stating that the problem is between a person’s identity and societal pressures, rather than within said person’s identity. I don’t know how they’ll manage to keep this diagnosis within a manual of mental disorders once they’ve recognized that it’s a larger societal issue, as well as a physical one. I guess they don’t know where to put trans people, yet they feel like they have to put us somewhere to maintain a sense of order. We’re just a reminder that human beings are a whole rather than distinct bits –bodies, minds, social beings– to be dealt with separately.
I’ll leave my thoughts on the larger picture –the whole idea of having a diagnosis for trans identities– for a later post. For now, let’s look at more of the actual text. These are the new criteria:Gender Incongruence (in Adolescents or Adults) [1]
A. A marked incongruence between one’s experienced/expressed gender and assigned gender, of at least 6 months duration, as manifested by 2* or more of the following indicators: [2, 3, 4]
1. a marked incongruence between one’s experienced/expressed gender and primary and/or secondary sex characteristics (or, in young adolescents, the anticipated secondary sex characteristics) [13, 16]
2. a strong desire to be rid of one’s primary and/or secondary sex characteristicsbecause of a marked incongruence with one’s experienced/expressed gender (or, in young adolescents, a desire to prevent the development of the anticipated secondary sex characteristics) [17]
3. a strong desire for the primary and/or secondary sex characteristics of the other gender
4. a strong desire to be of the other gender (or some alternative gender different from one’s assigned gender)
5. a strong desire to be treated as the othergender (or some alternative gender different from one’s assigned gender)
6. a strong conviction that one has the typical feelings and reactions of the other gender (or some alternative gender different from one’s assigned gender)
Look, they’re acknowledging the existence of non-binary genders! In Endnote 16 they even point out their “avoidance of male-female dichotomies”. And, no mentions of stereotypical masculinity or femininity.
There are lots of surprises in the endnotes. For instance, Endnote 15 states that trans people are now allowed to be happy, and the revision authors have acknowledged that transphobia is to blame for much unhappiness: they took out the requirement of suffering “significant distress or impairment” in part because “increased psychiatric problems in transsexuals appear to be preceded by increased experiences of stigma”. “Postulating ‘inherent distress’ in case one desires to be rid of body parts that do not fit one’s identity is, in the absence of data, also questionable.”
There’s a whole endnote –number 16– that discusses the problem of limiting diagnosis and treatment to “true transsexuals” (they used quotation marks!) which tends to exclude other gender-nonconforming people. And in Endnote 18, they mention that they removed the question of sexual orientation entirely, not only because it’s irrelevant but also because non-straight people might lie if they’re afraid of being denied treatment. So, the authors are acknowledging the problem with normative trans stories, and the perpetuation of those stories to get by the gate-keepers.
Another interesting point –at the end of Endnote 2– is the treatment of post-transition regret. It states that these people would also be considered to have Gender Incongruence, although happily transitioned people would not (which makes sense). Extra points for recognizing the existence of regret, while not stigmatizing it.
Now for the criticism. Item 1 speaks of an (allegedly objective) incongruence between someone’s sex and gender. As I see it, no body type is necessarily bound to a certain gender identity — my manhood is not at odds with my body, even if doctors choose to label it as female. There is an incongruence between my body and my mind, but that has to do with my subjectivity (item 2) rather than a universal truth about which genders are “congruent” with which bodies. And point 4, seriously, what do you mean, desire to be of another gender? I’m already a guy.
Point 5 and 6 present might be more complicated than they seem: is “desire to be treated as the other gender”only about pronouns? If it isn’t, then it touches on a sensitive point of discussion: by wanting to be treated as men (or women), we have to recognize that men and women are treated differently. I like it when I’m treated as a boy, but that pleasure comes with a twinge of guilt — am I validating a differential treatment of differently-gendered people? But then, the item only describes a desire; whatever my opinion, I can’t deny that some of us have this desire. This is closely tied to item 6: I don’t think that feelings and reactions should be limited to one gender, except for maybe the feeling of belonging to that gender. But again, my opinion has no place in other people’s convictions.
So there’s a lot of food for thought in these items, but it’s a huge leap from Gender Identity Disorder (except they’re still diagnosing people’s identities — oh wait, I promised to leave that for later). I bet many people are going to post their own analyses soon; I look forward to reading other opinions on these proposed revisions. This is an important discussion to be had, because –for better or for worse– the DSM affects the medical and legal treatment of trans people around the world.
Thanks to Micah for the hat-tip!
from → Activism, Politics and Mass Media, Links