CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 30LGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicySexual function and dysfunction studiesGender and Feminist Studies

Resisting Trans Medicalization: Body Satisfaction and Social Contextual Factors as Predictors of Sexual Experiences among Trans Feminine and Nonbinary Individuals

Goldbach, Chloe, Lindley, Louis, Anzani, Annalisa, Galupo, M. Paz·2023·The Journal of Sex Research
DOI 10.1080/00224499.2021.2004384
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Past research has constructed a medicalized model of trans women’s sexuality, where trans women are believed to be hyposexual and distressed by their bodies pre-transition, and are cured of their sexual dysfunction as a result of gender affirmative medical procedures. The current study engaged a community sample (N = 169) of trans feminine and nonbinary individuals assigned male at birth (TFNB) to investigate predictors of sexual experiences after addressing methodological biases of prior studies, including body satisfaction (using a modified Body Image Scale) and social contextual factors. Hierarchical regressions were conducted to test the hypothesis that after accounting for demographic variables and social contextual aspects (i.e., body satisfaction, social dysphoria, and fetishization), medical transition (i.e., hormone therapy) would not significantly predict five outcomes of sexual experience (i.e., receptive penetration, insertive penetration, importance of sex, sexual pleasure, and sexual intimacy). Across all models, medical transition was not a significant predictor of sexual experiences; however, sexual orientation, age, body satisfaction, and experiences of fetishization were frequent predictors. Results suggest that the sexual experiences of TFNB individuals do not align with the medicalized model and that demographic and contextual factors play an important role in the sexual outcomes for this population.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00224499.2021.2004384

Cites

67 of 67 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Goldbach, C., Lindley, L., Anzani, A., & Galupo, M. P.
Affiliations
  • Department of Counseling Psychology, Southern Illinois University
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • University of Milan (IT)
  • Towson University (US)
Corresponding author
Galupo, M. Paz
ORCID
Venue
The Journal of Sex Research
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2022-01-25
Volume
60
Issue
6
Pages
868-879
ISSN
  • 0022-4499 (ISSN-L)
  • 1559-8519
DOI
10.1080/00224499.2021.2004384
OpenAlex
W4206963965
Cited by
30
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2
FWCI
6.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Sex Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • BOA (University of Milano-Bicocca) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Sexual function and dysfunction studies
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Feminist Studies
Keywords
non-binary people, body satisfaction, fetishization, hormone therapy, medical transition, sexual experience, sexual orientation, sexual pleasure, sexual intimacy, gender-affirming care
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Female, Gender Identity, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Male, Personal Satisfaction, Sexual Behavior, Transsexualism, Young Adult, Medicalization

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review