Abstract

Histories of transgender life in mainland China often proceed through surgeries, diagnoses, policy documents, public figures, and individual biographies. A second history becomes visible through a different question: who kept support running? That question leads to meeting rooms, hotlines, volunteer training, medical referral lists, parent groups, surveys, temporary projects, public accounts, small teams, and digital archives. This article treats these recurring forms of maintenance as transgender advocacy infrastructure and traces changes in its organizational carriers from 1995 through 2025.

The evidence suggests four broad carrier shifts. Feminist and sexual-minority networks after the mid-1990s accumulated organizational techniques, hotline practice, and digital communication. Fixed LGBT community spaces around 2008 created durable urban nodes where transgender issues could acquire dedicated groups and programs. From 2015 through 2021, transgender-specific hotlines, psychological support, surveys, parent networks, medical collaboration, leadership programs, and cross-regional projects produced clearer specialist interfaces. From 2021 through 2025, account governance, organizational closure, funding changes, and rising operating costs encouraged smaller teams, project partnerships, commercial affiliation, online mutual aid, everyday lifestyle information, and distributed preservation. Tianyi Bai’s 2026 ethnography documents the fatigue and “fragile optimism” that accompany this latest configuration (Bai 2026).

The article proposes a four-layer model: organizational carriers, service interfaces, knowledge loops, and preservation layers. This model separates the lifespan of an institution from the lifespan of a capability. A center may close while volunteer skills, referral relationships, survey methods, community language, and archived records continue through later carriers. Mainland Chinese transgender advocacy history therefore appears as a history of infrastructure migration, recombination, and re-embedding.

Keywords: transgender history; mainland China; advocacy infrastructure; community organizations; Beijing LGBT Center; National Transgender Hotline; digital archives

Research questions and method

This encyclopedia entry asks three questions. Which organizational forms have carried public support for transgender communities since 1995? When did transgender-specific services become more distinct within broader tongzhi, lesbian, HIV, and gender-equality networks? Which capacities continued through volunteers, projects, platforms, hospitals, commercial entities, and archives as stable institutional space became harder to sustain?

The evidence base combines four source groups. Academic work supplies scholarship on Chinese civil society, tongzhi activism, queer media, transgender medicine, family care, and contemporary advocacy ethnography (Saich 2000; Hildebrandt 2011; Bao 2018; Tan 2023; Zhou 2024; Shao 2026). Community and organizational records include Common Language oral histories, Beijing LGBT Center profiles, the Trans Well-being Team, ShanghaiPRIDE project pages, hotline announcements, and public community videos. Research and institutional material includes national surveys, UNDP reports, and hospital pages. Digital preservation projects include the Chinese Transgender Digital Archive, the Sinophone Transgender Chronicle, CNLGBTDATA, and TransChinese-related archives.

Three time coordinates organize the evidence: event time, organizational time, and preservation time. Event time records when a project launched or an organization changed form. Organizational time asks how long a service function operated. Preservation time records when a surviving webpage, PDF, mirror, or archive copy became available to present researchers. This separation helps distinguish historical activity from the survival of evidence about that activity.

The article uses “transgender” as a present-day analytic term while preserving period-specific labels from sources, including terms translated as transsexualism, gender reassignment, kuar, FTM, and FTX. Howard Chiang’s histories of sex, medicine, and transness in the Sinophone world demonstrate why terminology belongs to specific medical, political, linguistic, and geopolitical contexts (Chiang 2018; Chiang 2021).

1. 1995–2007: organizational skills before specialist transgender infrastructure

The 1995 Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing and its NGO Forum became an important landmark in the history of gender-related civil society in China. Stephanie Yingyi Wang places the period within a longer history of LGBT activism and highlights the networks, organizational experience, and transnational contacts accumulated around the conference and its aftermath (Wang 2021). Jude Howell similarly describes the 1995 conference as a catalytic moment for the growth of relatively autonomous women’s organizations and broader NGO practice in China (Howell 2021). Bai’s recent ethnography records younger transgender organizers treating “1995” as a symbolic origin point for later NGO forms (Bai 2026).

Transgender-specific organizations remained limited during this period, while infrastructure accumulated through adjacent networks. Common Language’s oral histories of Beijing lesbian communities describe home gatherings, hotlines, magazines, mailing lists, websites, bars, cross-city meetings, and sustained organizer networks from the late 1990s through the 2000s. These records also trace movement between feminist, lala, and broader tongzhi organizing (Common Language 2017a; 2017b). CNLGBTDATA’s historical compilations preserve additional timelines of hotlines, online forums, and nationwide sexual-minority gatherings.

These earlier networks developed reusable organizational techniques. Hotlines required training, scheduling, confidentiality, supervision, and referral. Meetings required space, facilitation, participant care, and risk assessment. Websites and forums required moderation, documentation, and conflict management. Later transgender-specific projects inherited many of these techniques. Broader scholarship on Chinese social organizations shows how registration, project funding, state relations, and resource mobilization shaped organizational form across sectors (Saich 2000; Hildebrandt 2011). Transgender advocacy would later combine projects, volunteer teams, affiliated entities, service framing, and informal networks within this wider institutional landscape.

The period can therefore be understood as pre-infrastructure for specialist transgender advocacy: organizer networks, hotline practice, public education, project language, cross-city collaboration, and digital communication acquired repeatable form before transgender-specific organizations became prominent.

2. 2008–2014: fixed community space as an organizational hub

Around 2008, a more durable physical infrastructure appeared. The Beijing LGBT Center emerged through collaboration among organizations including Beijing Aizhixing Institute, Common Language, Aibai Culture and Education Center, and les+. A 2011 China Development Brief profile described community fundraising, screenings, discussion events, administrative work, and the Center’s physical activity space. It also mentioned Wujiexian, a group addressing bisexual and transgender concerns (China Development Brief 2011).

Common Language’s oral history treats 2008 as a moment when inter-organizational cooperation took physical form. Wujiexian, founded in March 2009, brought bisexual and transgender concerns into the surrounding lala and tongzhi organizational ecology (Common Language 2017c). Transgender infrastructure during this stage remained embedded within a comprehensive LGBT space while specialist grouping became more visible.

Fixed space created a key capability: predictability. Participants knew where recurring events occurred. Volunteers knew where training and meetings could happen. Partner organizations had a stable contact point. Journalists, researchers, and public institutions encountered an identifiable organizational interface. Physical space acted as a router connecting community events, volunteer labor, counseling relationships, media work, and institutional partnership. Bao’s work on tongzhi activism and queer media similarly shows how offline organizing, film, websites, and community identity developed through linked infrastructures (Bao 2018; Bao 2021).

The carrier still existed within a negotiated civil-society environment. Hildebrandt shows how registration politics and resource access affected Chinese social organizations (Hildebrandt 2011). Stern and Hassid describe governance through ambiguous boundaries and uncertain signals that shape organizational behavior (Stern and Hassid 2012). These conditions help explain the later use of projects, companies, volunteer teams, informal networks, and partner organizations as interchangeable or overlapping carriers.

3. 2015–2018: the hotline becomes a standard transgender service interface

In December 2015, the Beijing LGBT Center launched a transgender hotline. When the National Transgender Hotline expanded in 2018, China Development Brief reported that the earlier hotline had provided more than one thousand instances of support. The national service brought together the Trans Center, Trans Well-being Team, teams in Anhui and Suzhou, transgender youth organizers, and individual volunteers (China Development Brief 2018a; 2018b).

The hotline changed the architecture of access. A community member could enter a support system through a telephone interface; fixed physical centers became one entry route among several. The visible front end was a phone number; the operational back end consisted of trained volunteers, schedules, supervision, referral lists, shared knowledge, and relationships across organizations. A single call could connect psychological support, medical information, family communication, legal resources, and local community networks.

The Trans Well-being Team, founded in Guangzhou in 2018, later described work spanning mental health, community service, capacity building, research, education, and advocacy. Its later National Transgender Hotline 2.0 and parent-support resources show how an interface can survive across program and organizational changes (Trans Well-being Team 2022).

Survey infrastructure also became closely linked with service infrastructure. UNDP, Peking University’s Department of Sociology, and the Beijing LGBT Center jointly produced the 2016 Being LGBTI in China survey with nearly 30,000 valid responses. Transgender-focused population research then quantified health-care demand, hormone and surgery access, and suicide risk (Chen et al. 2019; Chen et al. 2020). The Chinese launch of the regional Trans Health Blueprint in 2016 explicitly brought transgender community input, medical professionals, and policy actors into a shared health framework (UNDP China 2016).

These relationships form a knowledge loop. Hotlines and community programs encounter practical needs. Surveys aggregate recurring experiences. Academic studies convert patterns into comparable findings. Hospitals, community organizations, and training programs then reuse the resulting knowledge. Knowledge circulates through community service, research, professional practice, and public education.

4. 2018–2021: support distributes across psychology, family, medicine, and leadership

The late 2010s produced a more distributed specialist ecology. ShanghaiPRIDE’s 2018 beneficiaries page listed multiple transgender projects, including TransTalks, Nanjing Trans Sanctuary, and Trans Center, illustrating functional and geographic differentiation across public education, shelter, community events, and support (ShanghaiPRIDE 2018). The Trans Well-being Team developed psychological resources, hotline work, training, research, and parent support. These projects suggest a move from one comprehensive center toward a network of specialist interfaces.

Family became an explicit infrastructure node. Parent groups allowed relatives to exchange practical information and communication experience. Zhou’s study of gender-affirming care in China places family involvement, transnational medical norms, and local adaptation in the same analytic frame (Zhou 2024). Shao’s ethnography of trans medicine further examines kinship, recalibrated care, and local medical practice (Shao 2026). Family participation therefore belongs to organizational history as a support mechanism with its own knowledge and labor requirements.

Medical infrastructure also moved toward multidisciplinary and longitudinal care. Peking University Third Hospital’s 2018 page described a comprehensive clinic involving plastic surgery, psychology, gynecology, andrology, endocrinology, and other specialties. Community projects functioned around that clinical system by translating medical information, sharing experience, identifying friendly professionals, and preparing people for care. Public video material in 2024 continued to present the transgender clinic as a visible health-care node.

At this point, a multi-node service graph captures the support structure more closely: psychological support, parent communication, medical care, public education, shelter, peer connection, and research may be carried by separate teams whose lifespans and access rules differ.

5. 2021–2023: platform and organizational contraction alters the carrier layer

In 2021, public accounts associated with sexual-minority student groups at Chinese universities were removed in a coordinated platform action. Contemporary records show that these accounts served several functions at once: announcements, recruitment, public education, continuity of organizational memory, and discovery between groups (China Digital Times 2021). Account removal therefore affected both communication and preservation.

In May 2023, the Beijing LGBT Center announced the end of its operations. Associated Press reporting and later annual rights reviews treated the closure as the disappearance of one of mainland China’s best-known LGBTQ organizational nodes (AP 2023; CNLGBTDATA 2023). From an infrastructure perspective, closure changed physical space, public identity, administrative capacity, institutional memory, contact channels, and partnership coordination at the same time.

Many functions continued elsewhere. Hotline resources remained available through specialist teams. Hospitals continued gender-related care. Local groups and individual volunteers maintained selected forms of mutual aid. Digital archives preserved earlier organizational materials. Survey methods, training knowledge, and referral practices remained reusable. The carrier layer contracted while parts of the service, knowledge, and preservation layers moved across the network.

Tan’s account of feminist and queer digital media in China emphasizes tactical shifts in visibility and media form under platform governance (Tan 2023). Huang’s analysis of precarious queer politics similarly foregrounds forms of imagination and practice that can be reorganized across unstable conditions (Huang 2017). These perspectives connect organizational contraction with media innovation and network recombination.

6. 2023–2025: small teams, commercial affiliation, and everyday projects

Tianyi Bai’s 2026 ethnography provides unusually detailed evidence for the newest stage. Bai follows TGDP, a pseudonymous transgender advocacy group in a coastal Chinese city. TGDP formed in 2020 as a transgender branch of an NGO whose main services had focused on gay men. The parent NGO disbanded and reformed as a commercial enterprise during 2022–2023. TGDP retained a formal and financial relationship with the successor entity while daily service work and office space separated from it (Bai 2026).

The case makes carrier migration concrete. From 2021 to 2023 the group received support through a local branch of the Chinese Center for Disease Control system for sexual-health work with transgender sex workers. By 2024 earlier funding sources had disappeared. A New Year gathering introduced a RMB50 entry fee to cover costs; participant sign-ups stayed below the threshold for holding the event, so organizers cancelled it. Core members faced the combined burdens of fundraising, promotion, accessibility for lower-income participants, and their own livelihoods. Police encounters in 2025 then influenced the group’s approach to public promotion and in-person gatherings. The team continued smaller online and offline activity while considering commercial registration and lighter project formats.

One especially revealing experiment was a trans-friendly restaurant guide. Members reviewed restaurants for features such as all-gender restrooms, seating privacy, gendered service encounters, and practical coping strategies. The guide required less organizational overhead than a formal event and treated trans people as active evaluators of urban space. Bai uses “fragile optimism” to describe the affective orientation through which the group sustains work amid unstable recognition and resources (Bai 2026). In infrastructure terms, the guide marks a shift from the formal event toward reusable everyday information.

This development resonates with Tan’s analysis of digital queer practice in China, where political and community work often travels through media forms whose surface genres may include culture, entertainment, or everyday life (Tan 2023). Service value can be embedded in public-account posts, maps, guides, group chats, and small-scale commercial activity. Everyday media becomes an infrastructural carrier.

7. The preservation layer: when records outlive organizations

A further layer has grown in importance: preservation. The Chinese Transgender Digital Archive preserves organizational documents, reports, news, and community material. The Sinophone Transgender Chronicle arranges medical, legal, community, and media records along a timeline. CNLGBTDATA preserves organization profiles, annual reviews, and earlier movement documents. These projects allow closed organizations and discontinued programs to remain visible to historical research.

Community-archive scholarship emphasizes the role of archives in restoring representation and enabling communities to imagine historical continuity (Caswell et al. 2017). Bao’s study of queer media in China likewise treats community archives and memory work as central to queer cultural history (Bao 2021). For mainland Chinese transgender history, the preservation layer retains evidence from vanished sites, reconnects dispersed projects into timelines, preserves period-specific self-description, and gives later researchers traceable source paths.

Preservation also introduces provenance questions. A copied webpage can be years newer than the event it describes. A repost can change a title, layout, or hyperlink. An organization’s retrospective account can choose a different founding point from a contemporary report. A practical source card should therefore record four fields for each item: event_date, source_date, archive_date, and source_role. These fields distinguish the date of an event, the date of documentation, the date of preservation, and the institutional position of the recorder.

8. Four layers for comparing transgender advocacy infrastructure

The evidence can be condensed into four interacting layers. Organizational carriers include LGBT centers, specialist teams, hospitals, volunteer groups, commercial entities, and loose networks. Carrier form shapes finance, space, employment, public events, and partnership capacity. Service interfaces include hotlines, counseling, shelter, family support, medical referral, activity space, training, and trans-friendly venue guides. Community members usually encounter infrastructure through one of these interfaces. Knowledge loops include surveys, research recruitment, clinical collaboration, policy briefs, training materials, and resource lists. Service encounters generate knowledge, and research results feed back into service design. Preservation layers include websites, PDFs, community media, digital libraries, chronologies, and archives.

Resources travel among these layers. A fixed organization such as the Beijing LGBT Center once carried multiple functions. The National Transgender Hotline distributed a service interface across teams. National surveys strengthened knowledge loops. Recent archive projects strengthen preservation. TGDP-like teams recombine carrier and service functions through commercial affiliation and everyday information projects.

This model separates node survival from capacity survival. The end of an organization reduces space, staff, accounting capacity, and coordination. Skills learned by volunteers, referral relationships, research practices, and public resources can travel to later networks. Historical evaluation gains precision when both dimensions are recorded.

9. Competing explanations: service orientation, decentralization, and contraction

Three interpretations fit parts of the chronology. A service-orientation interpretation emphasizes the translation of broad equality claims into psychological support, medical access, family communication, employment, crisis assistance, and everyday information. A decentralization interpretation emphasizes the movement of functions from large organizations toward specialist teams, individuals, hospitals, public accounts, and distributed networks. A contraction interpretation emphasizes the rising cost of durable public advocacy under account governance, organizational closure, funding loss, and constraints on public gatherings (Wang 2021; Wang 2026; Bai 2026).

The chronology supports all three mechanisms. Hotlines and specialist projects between 2015 and 2018 show expanding service capacity. Account and organizational events between 2021 and 2023 show shrinking durable public nodes. Ethnographic evidence from 2024 and 2025 shows small teams sustaining selected functions through lighter formats. The resulting landscape combines innovation with capacity loss and distributed resilience with dependence on a small number of organizers.

The distinction between node survival and capacity survival keeps two historical differences visible. A small successor team carries a different capability profile from a staffed center with office space and accounting capacity. A closed center also leaves a wider ecology of hotlines, clinics, parent support, archived materials, and personal networks. The four-layer model keeps these differences visible.

Regional evidence also remains uneven. Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou leave abundant public organizational records. Local teams, cross-city networks, and online services can have lower documentary visibility. Future historical work can address this imbalance through local oral histories, old forum archives, personal collections, and project records.

10. A reading map and structured record for future history

Readers can enter this history through four paths. An organizational history path begins with Common Language oral histories, Beijing LGBT Center records, China Development Brief, and scholarship on LGBT activism. A service history path follows the 2015 hotline, the 2018 national expansion, the Trans Well-being Team, parent support, and medical clinics. A knowledge history path links national surveys, transgender health research, medical anthropology, and legal-gender-recognition reports. A preservation history path uses the Chinese Transgender Digital Archive, Sinophone Transgender Chronicle, CNLGBTDATA, and news archives to reconstruct moved or vanished pages.

A reusable historical record can attach five fields to each source or project: carrier identifies the entity carrying responsibility; interface records how community members entered the service; knowledge records surveys, training, or referral knowledge produced; preservation records surviving copies and provenance; handoff records evidence that functions later moved elsewhere. New local teams, earlier hotlines, old forums, and personal archives can then be added to the map while preserving uncertainty.

This method complements the documentary-regime framework used in the previous GenderLibs history report. Hospitals, media, administration, community organizations, litigation and surveys, and archives explain how transgender history was recorded. The four-layer infrastructure model explains how support capacity was organized. A hotline can be both a service interface and a community recording system; a clinic can be both a medical interface and a clinical archive; a digital archive can preserve history and simultaneously function as a new community infrastructure.

Conclusion

From 1995 through 2025, transgender advocacy infrastructure in mainland China moved through preparatory feminist and sexual-minority networks, fixed comprehensive institutions, transgender-specific hotline and service networks, distributed specialist teams, smaller project carriers, and digital preservation systems. Fixed spaces after 2008 concentrated events, services, and partnerships. Hotlines, psychological support, surveys, parent work, and medical collaboration between 2015 and 2021 strengthened specialist capacity. Platform and organizational changes during 2021–2023 accelerated carrier recombination. Ethnographic evidence from 2024–2025 documents commercial affiliation, lightweight activities, online mutual aid, and lifestyle information as emerging forms of continuity.

The central historical object is capacity across carriers. Organizational carriers determine responsibility and resources. Service interfaces determine how people reach support. Knowledge loops turn experience into reusable methods. Preservation layers allow later researchers to reconstruct projects after organizational change. These layers place centers, hotlines, parent groups, clinics, venue guides, and digital archives on one historical map while retaining their differences.

Future research can extend this map through local city histories, oral histories of volunteers, archived organizational records, documented handoffs between projects, and more precise operating dates for hotlines and services. The infrastructure approach also creates space for earlier pre-1995 histories and post-2025 organizational forms as new evidence becomes available.

References

  1. Bai, Tianyi. 2026. “No-One Signed Up: Fatigue, Failure, and Fragile Optimism in Chinese Trans Advocacy.” Made in China Journal. https://madeinchinajournal.com/2026/06/01/no-one-signed-up-chinese-trans-advocacy/
  2. Wang, Stephanie Yingyi. 2021. “Unfinished Revolution: An Overview of Three Decades of LGBT Activism in China.” Made in China Journal. https://madeinchinajournal.com/2021/07/15/unfinished-revolution-an-overview-of-three-decades-of-lgbt-activism-in-china/
  3. Wang, Stephanie Yingyi. 2026. “Decolonizing politics of (In)visibility and LGBT rights—being political in non-liberal China.” Sexualities. https://doi.org/10.1177/13634607261417775
  4. Hildebrandt, Timothy. 2011. “The Political Economy of Social Organization Registration in China.” The China Quarterly. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/china-quarterly/article/abs/political-economy-of-social-organization-registration-in-china/6A04A3753759DA827000C702BA26ABD0
  5. Saich, Tony. 2000. “Negotiating the State: The Development of Social Organizations in China.” The China Quarterly. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/china-quarterly/article/negotiating-the-state-the-development-of-social-organizations-in-china/A207B5AEBBC10327105BC81357B95378
  6. Huang, Ana. 2017. “Precariousness and the Queer Politics of Imagination in China.” Culture, Theory and Critique. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14735784.2017.1287580
  7. Tan, Jia. 2023. Digital Masquerade: Feminist Rights and Queer Media in China. New York University Press. https://nyupress.org/9781479811847/digital-masquerade/
  8. Bao, Hongwei. 2018. Queer Comrades: Gay Identity and Tongzhi Activism in Postsocialist China. NIAS Press. https://nottingham-repository.worktribe.com/output/1480891/queer-comrades-gay-identity-and-tongzhi-activism-in-postsocialist-china
  9. Bao, Hongwei. 2021. Queer Media in China. Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Queer-Media-in-China/Bao/p/book/9781032010113
  10. Chiang, Howard. 2018. After Eunuchs: Science, Medicine, and the Transformation of Sex in Modern China. Columbia University Press. https://cup.columbia.edu/book/after-eunuchs/9780231185783/
  11. Chiang, Howard. 2021. Transtopia in the Sinophone Pacific. Columbia University Press. https://cup.columbia.edu/book/transtopia-in-the-sinophone-pacific/9780231190961/
  12. Liu, Petrus. 2023. The Specter of Materialism: Queer Theory and Marxism in the Age of the Beijing Consensus. Duke University Press. https://www.dukeupress.edu/the-specter-of-materialism
  13. Rofel, Lisa. 2007. Desiring China: Experiments in Neoliberalism, Sexuality, and Public Culture. Duke University Press. https://www.dukeupress.edu/desiring-china
  14. Zhou, Xiaogao. 2024. “Care in Transition: Global Norms, Transnational Adaptation, and Family Involvement in China’s Transgender Health Care.” Social Science & Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.116658
  15. Shao, Jianmin. 2026. “The Geobiopolitics of Trans Medicine: Kinship, Recalibrated Care, and Gender-Affirming Health in China.” American Ethnologist. https://americanethnologist.org/journal/issues/volume-53-issue-1-february-2026/
  16. Zhang, Ye, John Best, Weiming Tang, et al. 2016. “Transgender Sexual Health in China: A Cross-Sectional Online Survey in China.” PLOS ONE. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5053843/
  17. Chen, R., et al. 2020. “The Desire and Status of Gender-Affirming Hormone Therapy and Surgery among Transgender Men and Women in China.” Journal of Sexual Medicine. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32868262/
  18. Chen, R., et al. 2019. “Suicidal Ideation and Attempted Suicide amongst Chinese Transgender Persons: National Population Study.” Journal of Affective Disorders. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165032718317920
  19. Caswell, Michelle, Alda Allina Migoni, Noah Geraci, and Marika Cifor. 2017. “‘To Be Able to Imagine Otherwise’: Community Archives and the Importance of Representation.” Archives and Records. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/1h54v9m9
  20. Howell, Jude. 2021. “From Green Shoots to Crushed Petals: Labour NGOs in China.” Made in China Journal 6(1). https://madeinchinajournal.com/2021/07/15/from-green-shoots-to-crushed-petals-labour-ngos-in-china/
  21. Stern, Rachel E., and Jonathan Hassid. 2012. “Amplifying Silence: Uncertainty and Control Parables in Contemporary China.” Comparative Political Studies. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414011434295
  22. Li, Jun. 2025. “News Media and the Feminist Movement in China: A Brief History.” Made in China Journal. https://madeinchinajournal.com/2025/02/19/news-media-and-the-feminist-movement-in-china-a-brief-history/
  23. Beijing LGBT Center / China Development Brief. 2011. “北京同志中心.” https://www.chinadevelopmentbrief.org.cn/news/detail/10768.html
  24. Common Language (同语). 2017. “北京拉拉社区口述史｜同志社区的萌芽.” https://commonlanguage.github.io/TYarchives2017-1/20170426_1%E5%8C%97%E4%BA%AC%E6%8B%89%E6%8B%89%E7%A4%BE%E5%8C%BA%E5%8F%A3%E8%BF%B0%E5%8F%B2%E5%90%8C%E5%BF%97%E7%A4%BE%E5%8C%BA%E7%9A%84%E8%90%8C%E8%8A%BD.html
  25. Common Language (同语). 2017. “北京拉拉社区口述史｜运动化与组织化.” https://commonlanguage.github.io/TYarchives2017-1/20170524_1%E5%8C%97%E4%BA%AC%E6%8B%89%E6%8B%89%E7%A4%BE%E5%8C%BA%E5%8F%A3%E8%BF%B0%E5%8F%B2%E8%BF%90%E5%8A%A8%E5%8C%96%E4%B8%8E%E7%BB%84%E7%BB%87%E5%8C%96.html
  26. Common Language (同语). 2017. “北京拉拉社区口述史｜2008年之后——挑战与转型.” https://commonlanguage.github.io/TYarchives2017-1/20170719_1%E5%8C%97%E4%BA%AC%E6%8B%89%E6%8B%89%E7%A4%BE%E5%8C%BA%E5%8F%A3%E8%BF%B0%E5%8F%B22008%E5%B9%B4%E4%B9%8B%E5%90%8E--%E6%8C%91%E6%88%98%E4%B8%8E%E8%BD%AC%E5%9E%8B.html
  27. China Development Brief. 2018. “全国跨性别热线正式上线啦！” https://www.chinadevelopmentbrief.org.cn/news/detail/19107.html
  28. China Development Brief. 2018. “National Transgender Hotline Launched in China.” https://chinadevelopmentbrief.org/reports/news/national-transgender-hotline-launched-in-china/
  29. 跨儿心理小组. “了解我们.” https://kuaerxinli.org/%E4%BA%86%E8%A7%A3%E6%88%91%E4%BB%AC
  30. 跨儿心理小组. 2022. “全国跨性别热线2.0上线啦！” https://kuaerxinli.org/%E7%A4%BE%E7%BE%A4%E8%B5%84%E6%BA%90/1335
  31. 跨儿心理小组. “跨性别家长专属微信群.” https://kuaerxinli.org/%E7%A4%BE%E7%BE%A4%E8%B5%84%E6%BA%90/1083
  32. ShanghaiPRIDE. 2018. “骄傲节支持 / Beneficiaries 2018.” https://shpride.com/beneficiaries2018/
  33. Mapping Chinese Feminism. “北京同志中心.” https://mappingchinesefeminism.com/organizations/%E5%8C%97%E4%BA%AC%E5%90%8C%E5%BF%97%E4%B8%AD%E5%BF%83/
  34. 北同文化. 2021. “2021年全国跨性别健康调研.” Bilibili. https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1RB4y1c7db/
  35. 跨性别兄弟盟. 2023. “飞天猫兄弟盟｜国内首支跨性别兄弟记录长片先行片.” Bilibili. https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Y84y1N7Sv/
  36. 一条. 2024. “中国第一个‘跨性别门诊’.” Bilibili. https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1BM4m1m7R9/
  37. CNLGBTDATA. 2023. “2023 LGBT权益年度回顾：性少数权益公益机构/民间组织停运.” https://cnlgbtdata.com/fulltext/books/lgbt-rights-annual-review/2023-LGBT/
  38. Associated Press / PBS NewsHour. 2023. “Beijing LGBTQ Center Shuttered amid Crackdown in China.” https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/beijing-lgbtq-center-shuttered-amid-crackdown-in-china
  39. Congressional-Executive Commission on China. 2023 Annual Report, section on closure of Beijing LGBT Center. https://www.congress.gov/event/118th-congress/joint-event/LC72618/text
  40. China Digital Times. 2021. “未命名公众号，未命名群体，未命名的爱——中国高校性少数社团公众号遭批量永封.” https://chinadigitaltimes.net/chinese/667938.html
  41. 跨与多元性别档案. “跨性别组织或机构.” https://digital.transchinese.org/%E7%A4%BE%E7%BE%A4%E5%8F%8ANGO%E6%96%87%E4%BB%B6/%E5%85%B6%E4%BB%96%E7%BB%84%E7%BB%87%E6%96%87%E4%BB%B6/%E8%B7%A8%E6%80%A7%E5%88%AB%E7%BB%84%E7%BB%87%E6%88%96%E6%9C%BA%E6%9E%84_page/
  42. 跨性别华语编年录. “跨性别华语编年录.” https://project-polymorph.github.io/trans-history/
  43. 多元性别中文数字图书馆. 2025. “中国大陆及港澳台跨性别社群生存现状简报.” https://docs.transchinese.org/%E7%9F%A5%E8%AF%86%E5%BA%93/transgender/report1.zh/
  44. China Development Brief. “机构简介—北京同志中心.” https://www.chinadevelopmentbrief.org.cn/company/detail/532.html
  45. Transgender Resource Center (Hong Kong). “中國大陸機構.” https://www.tgr.org.hk/index.php/en/10-database?start=8
  46. CNLGBTDATA. “中国LGBT运动二十年.” https://cnlgbtdata.com/fulltext/books/south-city-new/china_LGBT_in_two_decades/
  47. 跨性别新闻档案. “异装：我与我周旋久，宁做我.” https://news.transchinese.org/%E6%BE%8E%E6%B9%83%E6%96%B0%E9%97%BB/m_%E5%BC%82%E8%A3%85%EF%BC%9A%E6%88%91%E4%B8%8E%E6%88%91%E5%91%A8%E6%97%8B%E4%B9%85%EF%BC%8C%E5%AE%81%E5%81%9A%E6%88%91/
  48. 北京大学第三医院. 2018. “易性症综合治疗门诊.” https://www.puh3.net.cn/zxwk/info/1005/1041.htm
  49. UNDP China. 2016. “A Blueprint for Trans Health: Filling the Knowledge Gap in China.” https://www.undp.org/china/news/blueprint-trans-health-filling-knowledge-gap-china
  50. UNDP. 2016. “Being LGBTI in China: A National Survey on Social Attitudes towards Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and Gender Expression.” https://www.undp.org/china/publications/being-lgbti-china
  51. UNDP China. 2018. “Legal Gender Recognition in China: A Legal and Policy Review.” https://www.undp.org/china/publications/legal-gender-recognition-china-legal-and-policy-review