Jump to content

Talk:Detransition

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RoxySaunders (talk | contribs) at 17:37, 19 December 2023 (Rename article to "Retransition": Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconLGBTQ+ studies C‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

"Censorship" in opening?

The third paragraph of the introduction reads: Academic research into detransition is underdeveloped. Professional interest in the phenomenon has been met with contention, and some scholars have argued there is censorship around the topic. There are 5 citations for this claim. However, none seem to even mention the word "censorship"? Zenomonoz (talk) 08:07, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it's supposed to be about a "chilling effect" or something like that? Or journals refusing to publish (although I doubt it)? But even if so it should be adjusted for clarity. Crossroads -talk- 18:38, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
At a glance this seems to be referring to Bath Spa University in 2017 rejecting a psychotherapist's proposed thesis on "trans regret" as being potentially "politically incorrect", which was picked up by various outlets and academics crying censorship. In 2021, BSU later told PinkNews that the ethics committee had rejected it over concerns of methodology and confidentiality rather than subject matter. I think some scholars have argued there is censorship around the topic and Some researchers perceive there to be an atmosphere of censorship around studying the phenomenon are a fair summary, although it might warrant further elaboration. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (💬 • 📝) 19:03, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 5 October 2023

For these two lines, the citations are swapped and therefore incorrect for the respective sentences. Please change them.

"A 2022 5-year follow up study of 317 socially transitioned transgender children published by the American Academy of Pediatrics found that 94% retained a binary transgender identity, 3.5% identified as non-binary, and 2.5% identified as cisgender. A 2022 study of 720 trans adolescents who started puberty blockers found 98% of them continued on to hormone replacement therapy. Most childhood desisters go on to identify as cisgender and gay, bisexual, or lesbian."

5 year follow-up study link: https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/150/2/e2021056082/186992/Gender-Identity-5-Years-After-Social-Transition?autologincheck=redirected

Study of hormone therapy: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PIIS2352-4642(22)00254-1/fulltext#%20 Fjgwey12 (talk) 07:05, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 14:57, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Forced detransition" section

It seems to me like the section titled "forced detransition" isn't actually, necessarily about forcing people to detransition so much as preventing or making it more difficult for people to transition in the first place. It seems like this section (and its subsections) need to be either retitled, reframed or moved into a separate (perhaps preexisting) article. If this weren't such a sensitive subject, I might've made the edits on my own but figured it best to pose the issue to the community first. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 19:24, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What do the sources say? Zenomonoz (talk) 20:40, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Preventing someone from transitioning or making it difficult is most definitely forced detransition. There are many advocates who use this exact phrase in referring to this. There is no need to rename the section. -TenorTwelve (talk) 04:38, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But how can someone "detransition" if they weren't allowed to transition in the first place? Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 18:28, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It does both at the same time. Someone else later in transition would be affected by the same legislation. It wouldn’t just impact people who “haven’t” transitioned. Also, not all of transition is medical. Some is social. Some people socially transition before medically transitioning. Someone might be transitioning and is prevented from further transitioning. That is also a forced detransition, if partial. And often, the intent behind the legislation is to detransition trans people. -TenorTwelve (talk) 23:26, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Detransition and regret

This article describes the flaws in the conclusion of previous studies that ‘only 1%’ has regret.

Can somebody adapt the main text? The info is not correct.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0092623X.2022.2150346

84.83.131.154 (talk) 09:05, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When you did surgeory you cannot retransition and best to do then is to stay trans. But you can still have regret. YouTube is full of examples like that.
Many of the studies are confusing detransition during transition with regret. Regret is after complete transition, not during. Of course you can also regret during, but the issue is the post-regretters.
To get a good view, you need long term research. Many studies check after a few years. Those are the years of gender euphoria. The hangover appears after the party though.
Many studies lose contact with ex-patients. They move, or don’t want to participate or died. Therefore the noise in the % is significant and ‘only 1%’ is always a false conclusion. The noise is easily 10-30%. It is naieve to think the leftovers will score equal to the ones that have disappeared.
84.83.131.154 (talk) 09:13, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, we can not include that article.
  1. On medical articles like this, we have strict sourcing requirements (WP:MEDRS). We should be using the highest quality peer-reviewed articles summarizing the current state of research. This article is not a peer-reviewed summary but an Article Commentary, an unreviewed primary source.
  2. This was funded by the Society for Evidence-Based Gender Medicine, a WP:FRINGE advocacy group, and written by members of the same. To quote some researchers from the Yale School of Medicine: The long list of citations omits mainstream scientific articles that do not support the SEGM agenda, and the list includes a large number of letters to the editor, which are not peer-reviewed or fact-checked,114 as well as other sources of little scientific value, including opinion pieces and case studies. and [SEGM]'s 4 core members are a small group of repeat players in anti-trans activities – a fact that the SEGM website does not disclose. These 14 often write letters to the editor of mainstream scientific publications; these letters appear in the list of publications on the website (even though letters to the editor typically are not peer-reviewed or fact-checked). (Our review shows that the group of 14 has a total of 39 relevant publications and that 75% of these are letters to the editor.) [1]
TLDR, this paper is not a reliable medical source and that is a feature not a bug as it is published by a group known for pushing misinformation and avoiding peer-review. Best regards, Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 17:21, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a word for this?

WP:NOTAFORUM. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 01:09, 18 December 2023 (UTC) (non-admin closure)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Wikipedia has an article called Transphobia.

Is there a similar kind of word for people who feel that way about detransitioners?

SquirrelHill1971 (talk) 04:06, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The most obvious candidate would be detransphobia, for which Google returns a handful of attestations. An article in the Bulletin of Applied Transgender Studies defines that term as fear or hatred of detrans people and the existence of detransition, but it is otherwise fairly rare. "To our knowledge, this term appears to be in use over social media but has yet to be discussed within academic scholarship.".
Unless this term enters the academic mainstream, I would describe the concept in wikivoice as "stigma against detransition(ers)" and positions/policies or anti-detransition. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (💬 • 📝) 06:27, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rename article to "Retransition"

"Detransition" has a negative connotation and is falling out of favor within much of the trans community. "Retransition" has a more positive and affirming meaning. 98.114.41.189 (talk) 16:19, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Would need demonstrable RS support. We currently have a separate disambiguation article called Retransition, which explains that the term is variously used to mean either:
1. the same thing as detransition
2. a subsequent transition following detransition (i.e. resuming transgender identity or presentation)
To be frank the first sense is completely new to me, although a glance at Google shows some sources preferring it.[2] The majority seem to treat these as two separate terms.
The current title is less ambiguous for our purpose, so probably not likely to change. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (💬 • 📝) 17:23, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've since adjusted the body text (diff) to clarify this somewhat. The BMJ source gives the following definition which I think is apt:

Retransition—Resuming a gender transition following detransition. Some detrans people may use this term to indicate restarting hormone therapy for medical reasons but without re-identifying as transgender. Others may apply this word to refer to re-identifying since initiating a gender transition such as moving from a binary transgender identity to non-binary. Some people prefer retransition to describe stopping or reversing transition.

RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (💬 • 📝) 17:37, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]