Draft talk:Transgender youth

Article title
I can't believe we don't have this (do we have this?), seeing as "transgender children" is the up-and-coming hot-button issue in politics. In my opinion sufficiently different, both in facts and in the content and nature of the public reaction, to need its own article from transgender and gender dysphoria.

Should the title be "transgender youth", in my opinion more neutral and general, or something like "gender dysphoria in children", which is pathologizing and inaccurately narrow but possibly the keywords people expect to search for?Looi (talk) 15:17, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Psychology and language
Look, I really hate to be that guy, but scientific language is not going to be affirming or flattering. That's not what it's for. It's going to feel somewhat demeaning, since it deliberately depersonalizes the subjects of study, and creates/uses terms which are meant to meaningfully describe phenomena. Now, that being said, if you want to argue the language isn't accurately reflecting the research subjects that's fine. But complaining about the terms being somewhat dehumanizing sort of misses the mark. 17:35, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
 * You're right, language being clinical in the psychological and medical literature isn't the problem. Things like (falsely) labelling subjects or behaviour as criminal, sexually deviant, or undesirable is.  It's a problem with content as well as tone of the literature in question.  I'll hopefully get around to expressing this better, with help from some sources, when I get around to expanding on the point in question with more specific points.  So far the next sentences in the paragraph say there is a lot of 1) misgendering and 2) vocabulary implying criminality, doesn't that clarify what is meant?Looi (talk) 17:57, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. I just want to avoid things like the reaction to "people with uteruses" that made the round awhile back. The term is fine for clinical language. But the language should be clinical, not discriminatory. 21:52, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Structure
User:TranslationForAll, I meant for the nesting of heading levels to be roughly the way it was, with 3 subcategories of "Psychologists' views" (all still about debate within the clinical literature and among healthcare providers) and the rest subheadings under "Talking points" (for listing common ideas in media, politics, and public debate). This made sense to me. On the Talk page, I did set up heading levels wrong, thanks for fixing.Looi (talk) 18:10, 9 April 2022 (UTC)