How frequently does transsexualism occur

• Posted by Cristine Jennifer Shye. BL. B/acc September 28, 2019 Filed in Member's Blogs 1,886 views
  click to rate

  When all available hypotheses have been evaluated, the scientific method chooses the one that best meets the above criteria. A simpler explanation will be preferred over one that is complex or requires a leap of faith to accept.

   

  Califia (1997) reports that three different schools of thought can be identified within the debate on Gender Dysphoria. These are not all that have been proposed over
  the years but these form the majority of the currently credible arguments.   First, the psychoanalytic approach based on innate bisexuality in humans has been
  proposed. This suggests that male-to-female transsexualism might result from a failure
  of a boy to separate himself from his mother in early boyhood. Instead of identifying with the father, the boy identifies with the mother. Such traditional analyses consider lack of a cohesive self, opposite gender envy and jealousy combined with positive reinforcement such as a parent encouraging opposite gender behavior as the driving force behind the feeling of discomfort or confusion with the persons’ gender identification. A relatively high incidence of these factors has been observed in studies during supervised therapy for both male-to-female and female-to-male transsexuals (Califia, 1997).

   

  The psychoanalytic theories, with many variants, present a hypothesis for a cause for Gender Dysphoria, but none of these theories has been investigated to see if the existence of these initial conditions correlate with resulting Gender Dysphoria. Studies of intra-family relationships, divorce rates, parental dominance, marital harmony, and many other factors have not revealed a common pattern that could account for Gender Dysphoria. In fact, the evidence is that stable and harmonious intra-family relations do not exclude a transsexual outcome of one or more children. This approach certainly does

  not explain the significant numbers of people who display gender variant behavior and have not come from these kinds of family background.
  The second school of thought is behaviorism, also known as Social Learning Theory.    Gender identity development is viewed as the result of a learning process that is imposed on the developing gender identity of a child. Gender identity develops as the result of “imprinting” and “conditioning” processes (Califia, 1997).

   

  In gender dysphoric people the conditioning is different to that which would normally be expected. A typical example of this process would be a parental figure encouraging “tomboy” behavior for a child born as a female or encouraging a male child to dress up and behave like a girl.   This theory has been elaborated by introducing biological factors (by chemicals, hormones or by brain differences) and by introducing the concept of a “critical period” to
  account for the fact that many people have experienced periods where they were encouraged to behave outside “usual” gender roles and have not experienced Gender Dysphoria    In the critical periods, biological, psychodynamic, and environmental factors (in particular, the parents’ expectations and the way they rear their
  child) have an effect on the development of their gender identity. Prior and subsequent to this critical period, such an effect does not occur.

   

  A prominent researcher, John Money, has drawn an analogy with the critical period of genital differentiation known to operate in the fetal period. Based on the result
  of his extensive research, he has hypothesized that the process of gender identity formation can be compared with the process of acquiring a language.

  This school of thought is quite complex in the way it describes many special cases and variations in cause. It therefore becomes very difficult to test or to make predictions from a set of initial conditions. It does have the advantage of being quite descriptive.   The whole process may, in fact, be quite complex and require complexity to adequately explain it.

   

  The introduction of biological influences, known as the Biological Theory, at or prior to birth seem to be quite explanatory of many things observed in gender dysphoria, but they are difficult to test. For instance, the brain differences can only be discovered after a person dies by dissection. Prospective studies are hard to achieve in those circumstances. Monitoring of hormonal variations prior to birth is too intrusive to hope
  to perform a useful analytical test of this idea

  
  The third school of thought assumes that the development of gender identity is related to the maturation of cognitive development (Cognitive-Developmental Theory).   At about eleven years of age, a child’s gender identity starts to become consolidated or fixed as formal thought and abstract reasoning become possible. An abstract concept of gender identity develops rather than the concrete concept of boy or girl and this concept can be related to the rest of the world as a whole. This idea is in line with the work done by Piaget and others on childhood developmental processes. This school addresses some additional observations but has difficulty addressing all of the observations. All authors on gender identity development agree that a sense of gender identity termed core gender identity can be found in every child before 3 years of age. Core gender identity can be described as the child’s recognition that he is a boy or she is a girl.

   

  Research shows that this concept proves to be highly resistant to change in later life. On the basis of clinical evidence, it seems that there is a solid argument that the foundation of gender dysphoria is laid before the age of three. Further research of this period is needed in order to understand more about the origin of gender dysphoria.

  
  Gender may well be the most basic element that makes up human personality. In fact, gender is so basic to our identity that most people mistakenly assume
  our sense of being male or female is defined with absolute certainty by our anatomical sex. Contrary to popular belief, one’s sense of gender and one’s anatomical sex are two distinct elements each developing at different times in different parts of the body.   More theories surround what causes Gender Identity Disorder and where it originates. These theories are sub-categories in two very popular sociological theory bases, Social Constructionism and Essentialism (Stein, 1999).

  What started out as a criticism of socially constructed roles developed into a theory of gender, which denied Essentialism Gender Identity Disorder 50 in every form, stating instead that society took the biological differences of procreation, and instilled in them an artificial behavioral difference. The theory denies that there is any natural basis for gender identity. Thus, it denies to transgender people any rational cause, while at the same time presenting no reason why not. To some authors this meant that transgender people were free to express themselves in any manner they chose since all gender expression is a valid as any other. Only societal convention stands in the way of such freedom. Such conventions can be modified by the society as is deemed desirable. To some, all such restrictions are to be avoided in a live and let live ethos. Other authors, Janice Ramond and Germain Greer, being notable examples, saw male-to-female transgender people as exploitive of women, supporting the artificial sexist forms that oppress women. It is interesting that in this regard they exhibit a hidden Essentialism, one that focuses on the genitalia as defining classes of human beings. They decried the restrictions on one class, while despising those of the other class when they break those very restrictions

  
  Still the existence of transgender people poses a challenge to the social constructionist theory. One must explain both why gender identity exists, how it is perpetuated, enforced, and why some rare individuals chose to express a gender identity at odds with socially prescribed gender expression norms.

  While the data used originally in writing this is now well outdated, with more use of Brain Scans DNA testing and  an established clinical consensus facts proven which cannot be denied, enforced deterrent treatments and religious denials of the condition are therefor null and void.To understand more fully one must read the complete thread

   https://gendersociety.com/forums/topic/7790/synopsis-of-the-etiology-of-gender