Disorders of sex development: challenges for the future

No abstract available

Standardised data collection for clinical follow-up and assessment of outcomes in differences of sex development (DSD): recommendations from the COST action DSDnet

The treatment and care of individuals who have a difference of sex development (DSD) have been revised over the past two decades and new guidelines have been published. In order to study the impact of treatments and new forms of management in these rare and heterogeneous conditions, standardised assessment procedures across centres are needed. Diagnostic work-up and detailed genital phenotyping are crucial at first assessment. DSDs may affect general health, have associated features or lead to comorbidities which may only be observed through lifelong follow-up. The impact of medical treatments and surgical (non-) interventions warrants special attention in the context of critical review of current and future care. It is equally important to explore gender development early and refer to specialised services if needed. DSDs and the medical, psychological, cultural and familial ways of dealing with it may affect self-perception, self-esteem, and psychosexual function. Therefore, psychosocial support has become one of the cornerstones in the multidisciplinary management of DSD, but its impact remains to be assessed. Careful clinical evaluation and pooled data reporting in a global DSD registry will allow linking genetic, metabolomic, phenotypic and psychological data. For this purpose, our group of clinical experts and patient and parent representatives designed a template for structured longitudinal follow-up. In this paper, we explain the rationale behind the selection of the dataset. This tool provides guidance to professionals caring for individuals with a DSD and their families. At the same time, it collects the data needed for answering unsolved questions of patients, clinicians, and researchers. Ultimately, outcomes for defined subgroups of rare DSD conditions should be studied through large collaborative endeavours using a common protocol

Peer Toy Play as a Gateway to Children’s Gender Flexibility: The Effect of (Counter)Stereotypic Portrayals of Peers in Children’s Magazines

Extensive evidence has documented the gender stereotypic content of children’s media, and media is recognized as an important socializing agent for young children. Yet, the precise impact of children’s media on the endorsement of gender-typed attitudes and behaviors has received less scholarly attention. We investigated the impact of stereotypic and counter-stereotypic peers pictured in children’s magazines on children’s gender flexibility around toy play and preferences, playmate choice, and social exclusion behavior (n = 82, age 4–7 years-old). British children were randomly assigned to view a picture of a peer-age boy and girl in a magazine playing with either a gender stereotypic or counter-stereotypic toy. In the stereotypic condition, the pictured girl was shown with a toy pony and the pictured boy was shown with a toy car; these toys were reversed in the counter-stereotypic condition. Results revealed significantly greater gender flexibility around toy play and playmate choices among children in the counterstereotypic condition compared to the stereotypic condition, and boys in the stereotypic condition were more accepting of gender-based exclusion than were girls. However, there was no difference in children’s own toy preferences between the stereotypic and counter-stereotypic condition, with children preferring more gender-typed toys overall. Implications of the findings for media, education, and parenting practices are discussed, and the potential for counterstereotypic media portrayals of toy play to shape the gender socialization of young children is explored

Sex differences in semantic categorization

Sex differences in certain cognitive abilities, including aspects of semantic processing, are well established. However, there have been no reports investigating a sex difference in semantic categorization. A total of 55 men and 58 women each judged 25 exemplars of natural categories (e.g., fruits) and 25 of artifact categories (e.g., tools) as a nonmember, partial member, or full member of the given category. Participants also rated confidence for each judgment. Women provided a greater number of vague (partial member) judgments whereas men provided more inclusive (full member) judgments of artifacts but more exclusive (nonmember) judgments of natural categories. The sex difference in vagueness was observed across domains (Cohen’s d = .56). Confidence predicted categorization among both men and women, such that more confident participants exhibited fewer vague category judgments. However, men and women were equally confident in their category judgments, and confidence failed to explain the sex difference in categorization. Men and women appear to categorize the same common objects in systematically different ways