Reimagining constructions of gender dysphoria: a dual systematic review using analytical psychology's concept of individuation

Abstract

The process of conceptualization has long served to capture and represent our perceptions of the social world. Conceptual categories help to make sense of subjective experiences, and through discursive practices may come to construct conventional frameworks of knowledge. Consequently, frameworks operating as natural and immutable run the risk of ignoring the dynamic and diverse experiences of many individuals. Today, conceptual frameworks for gender identity are found as inadequately representing progressive social views on the existence of gender identities manifesting outside of the prevailing male-female binary. Within this space of conceptual contention, the diagnostic category of gender dysphoria has received considerable inspection and critique. In particular, it has been criticised as fundamentally controversial by classifying issues of identity within a clinical framework and, consequently, as contributing to the pathologization of all gender diverse individuals. Thus, efforts to reconceptualise and reimagine gender dysphoria may be found. In this research the concept of individuation, as understood within a framework of analytical psychology, is discussed as a potential consideration in reimagining the concept of gender dysphoria. An overarching framework of social constructionism was adopted within this research in examining how constructions of conventional knowledge come about through regulatory discursive and performative practices. The theoretical orientation of analytical psychology was used to frame the concept of individuation and its application to gender dysphoria. This perspective consulted queer theory as a further critical orientation toward the construction of gender identity. The chosen methodology took form as a dual systematic review using critical interpretive syn