In this editorial we outline why a call for more inclusive, conscientious approaches to studying gender/sex/ual diversity and intersectional identities is needed, and how the articles in this special issue answered this call. We summarize key takeaways from a review of the literature, noting significant under‐representation of gender/sex/ual diversity and intersectional social locations. We also explore the history of the gender/sex binaries (e.g., female/male; women/men; femininity/masculinity) to help illuminate the premises upon which the popular trend of studying gender/sex differences between men and women and the invisibilities of gender/sex/ual diverse people exist. We conclude with guidance on how scholars and practitioners might engage in thinking, doing, and connecting to move the conversation forward.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Steinfield et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: