From Community Surveys to Service Manuals: An Annotated Archive Guide to Mainland China’s Transgender Grey Literature, 2014–2021

Abstract

Between 2014 and 2021, public knowledge about transgender life in mainland China acquired a dense documentary layer: regional and national surveys, population-specific studies, legal-policy reviews, health-care blueprints, document-change manuals, workplace reports, and a new nationwide health survey. Community organizations, university teams, international institutions, public-interest lawyers, and professional networks often produced these works collaboratively. Their publication sites ranged across institutional webpages, PDFs, social-media circulation, resource databases, and later digital-archive mirrors. Reading them only as containers for statistics leaves a second history unexplored: how a concern became a questionnaire item, how questionnaire responses became tables, how those tables informed service manuals and legal recommendations, and how later scholarship and archival mirrors extended the life of a document after websites and organizations changed.

This guide arranges representative materials from 2014–2021 as a grey-literature document chain: community question formation → survey or case collection → report publication → service/rights tooling → policy and legal synthesis → scholarly reanalysis → digital archiving and rediscovery. It annotates the documents chronologically and proposes two reusable research instruments. A grey-literature provenance matrix records authorship, collection period, publication date, target population, geography, evidence form, intended use, version, and language. A document-life ledger continues the record through original URLs, surviving mirrors, archive dates, later scholarly reuse, and citation context. Together these tools turn a phrase such as “a 2017 statistic” or “a 2019 manual” into a versioned historical object with identifiable authors, audiences, publication events, and later uses.

The central argument is that transgender grey literature from 2014–2021 formed a distinct layer of public knowledge infrastructure in mainland China. It connected community experience, service practice, legal advocacy, and academic research, giving shared documentary form to questions that had previously appeared across health care, schools, workplaces, families, and identity-document procedures. Its historical value therefore lies in both content and document life: who framed a question, who could collect evidence, who published it, which texts entered repeated scholarly use, and which versions became visible again through digital preservation.

Keywords: mainland Chinese transgender history; grey literature; community archive; survey reports; service manuals; knowledge infrastructure; digital preservation; source provenance

1. Why reports, manuals, and guides belong in transgender history

Public transgender history often revolves around people, operations, court cases, media events, or the founding of organizations. Reports, manuals, and guides reveal a different tempo. They show when a community concern became surveyable, when an organization invested labor in collecting experience, how service workers translated experience into procedures, how legal advocates organized administrative practice into clauses and checklists, and how researchers later selected samples and variables from community-generated datasets. Mainland China in the middle and late 2010s produced a particularly dense set of such documents (Engebretsen, Schroeder, and Bao 2015; Guo 2018; Bai 2026).

This guide uses “grey literature” as a description of publication and circulation. The category includes surveys, reports, manuals, blueprints, and policy reviews released by universities, public-interest organizations, international institutions, community teams, legal-service groups, and professional networks outside conventional commercial academic publishing. Some documents contain extensive methods sections and stable citation formats. Others prioritize practical workflows, resources, and accumulated service experience. Together they form a knowledge layer around journal literature. Peer-reviewed work can then perform narrower analyses of samples, variables, and statistical relationships, as happened when the 2017 national survey entered studies of suicidality, gender-affirming care, and school-related mental health (Chen et al. 2019; Liu et al. 2020; Spielmann et al. 2022).

For historical research, the useful question therefore expands from “what does this PDF say?” to “what relationships does this document occupy?” The 2016 national LGBTI survey supplied a cross-domain baseline. The 2017 transgender-specific national survey increased population specificity. A 2018 legal-gender-recognition review assembled dispersed rules into a policy interface. A 2019 health-care report and document-change manual converted institutional experience into actionable knowledge. A 2020 workplace survey produced scene-specific evidence. The 2021 national transgender health survey expanded both sample scale and health-related coverage (UNDP 2016, 2018; Amnesty International 2019; Beijing LGBT Center 2021).

The historical object here is therefore the inheritance relationship among documents. A later report cites an earlier survey; a service manual combines policy text with accumulated community experience; an academic article extracts an analytic subset from a community database; a digital archive later reunites PDFs, Word files, and webpages whose original hosting environments have shifted. Every step adds metadata and changes the context available to a reader. Recording those changes preserves source transparency and places community knowledge work inside the historical narrative.

2. Research materials and method: separating several kinds of time

The guide centers on 2014–2021 and selects materials closely connected to transgender life in mainland China. Five document roles structure the corpus: national or cross-regional baseline surveys, population- or setting-specific studies, legal-policy reviews, service and rights manuals, and health or workplace reports. Regional Asian materials enter when they supplied frameworks directly relevant to Chinese service practice, as with the comprehensive-care blueprint preserved on the Asia Pacific Transgender Network’s 2017 resource page (APTN 2017). Academic publications serve two purposes: they explain the historical conditions of community organizing and digital publics, and they demonstrate how grey-literature datasets entered peer-reviewed reanalysis (Chiang 2018, 2021; Liu 2023; Wang et al. 2023).

Each document receives at least four temporal fields. Collection time records when surveys, interviews, or cases were gathered. Composition time describes analysis and drafting. Publication time marks the document’s first public circulation. Preservation time records later database or archive capture. These fields explain a common archival pattern: a page visible today may carry a 2023, 2024, or 2026 archive date while preserving a survey conducted in 2017 or 2021. Historical claims should use collection and original publication dates; histories of circulation should retain later mirror and archive dates as well (Chinese Transgender Digital Archive 2026; CNLGBTDATA 2023).

The research used two rounds of source verification. The first checked institutional pages, community databases, public digital archives, and contemporary reporting for titles, authors, dates, target groups, and accessible versions. The second followed journal articles, dissertations, and books to trace how those documents entered academic analysis and historical interpretation. Mirrors establish survival and version relations; statistical claims return to the original report or the peer-reviewed paper that performed the analysis. This method keeps three events separate: a document’s existence, its original publication, and its later reuse in scholarship.

A grey-literature provenance matrix

A minimum provenance record can use eight fields:

The matrix creates comparability while preserving differences. A nationwide online questionnaire, a Beijing–Shanghai focused study, and a document-change manual can share one archive catalogue while retaining distinct evidentiary functions.

3. 2014–2015: from broad context to population-specific depth

UNDP’s 2014 China country report supplied a broad frame for the years that followed. It placed law, health, education, employment, family life, and community organizing within a shared account of conditions affecting LGBT people in China (UNDP 2014). As part of a regional project, it represents a “comprehensive baseline” form: broad topical coverage suited to policy and institutional readers, with a map of questions later reports could narrow.

In 2015, Too Dark to See the Light shifted the scale toward transgender female sex workers in Beijing and Shanghai. China Development Brief’s publication record describes a 72-page report built on ten months of research by Asia Catalyst and two Chinese community-based organizations, Beijing Zuoyou Center and a Shanghai organization serving sex workers and men who have sex with men. It documented discrimination, police violence, legal restrictions, public services, legal identity, and health care (Asia Catalyst 2015). This kind of document illustrates one strength of grey literature as historical evidence: a focused project can create dense records of a high-risk population and specific occupational setting before national survey infrastructures mature.

The relationship between the 2014 and 2015 materials can be read as a change of scale. A regional/national contextual report offers a problem map; a population-specific study offers greater process detail. Later national surveys expand the scale again. Treating this sequence only as a progression toward larger samples would erase the evidentiary task of each form. The urban and occupational focus of the 2015 report is part of its value because it makes the interaction among policing, labor, identity documents, and health services especially visible, while later research on stigma, health, and service use adds other designs and populations (Yan et al. 2019; Wang et al. 2023).

This period also makes collaboration networks visible. International institutions contributed publication capacity and cross-national frameworks. Local community organizations contributed access, trust, and experience interpreting concrete institutional friction. Grey literature compressed those capacities into a shared output. Authorship, partner organizations, and publication platforms therefore belong in the archival record: they explain how a document became possible and which relationships supported its knowledge production.

4. 2016: almost 30,000 questionnaires and a new scale of baseline evidence

In 2016, UNDP, the Department of Sociology at Peking University, and Beijing LGBT Center jointly implemented Being LGBTI in China. UNDP records nearly 30,000 valid questionnaires from all provinces in China, covering law, education, employment, family, health services, mental health, media, social services, religion, and related areas (UNDP 2016). The document’s historical force came from two features. Wide geographic reach turned dispersed experience into a nationally legible baseline, while the partnership connected community networks, academic research capacity, and an international institution’s publication infrastructure.

Its target population was broader than the transgender-specific survey that followed in 2017. It included lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, and other people with diverse sexual orientations, gender identities, and gender expressions. A citation to a transgender result from the report therefore benefits from a clear subpopulation and question label. A history of expanding public knowledge about sexual and gender minorities can treat the whole project as an infrastructural event (UNDP 2016; Engebretsen, Schroeder, and Bao 2015).

From an archival perspective, the 2016 report also models the value of preserving both publication page and document file. The institutional page carries the release date, collaboration information, project description, and links to Chinese and English editions. The PDF carries the report text and tables. These are different archival objects. If a download path changes years later, the publication page can still support authorship and dating; a preserved PDF can retain the substantive record.

Academic work later used such baselines as part of a wider research landscape. Reviews of LGBTQ health and wellbeing in China describe rapid expansion of research during the 2010s, while scholarship on Chinese digital gender practice documents the role of online platforms in identity performance and community connection (Lin et al. 2022; Liu 2023). Grey literature and academic research are complementary layers: one creates public evidence at scale, while the other can examine associations, methodological limits, and social mechanisms in more specialized forms.

5. 2017: a dual track of national and issue-specific documents

The year 2017 was especially dense in this document chain. Beijing LGBT Center and the Department of Sociology at Peking University released the Chinese Transgender Population General Survey Report. The project received 5,677 submissions and retained 2,060 valid questionnaires through criteria involving completion, IP uniqueness, response time, and gender-identity or gender-expression scope. Recruitment circulated through Weibo, WeChat, Zhihu, community service centers, educational organizations, and media accounts. The report placed health care, family, school, work, public space, self-harm, and suicide-related experience within one survey architecture (Beijing LGBT Center and Department of Sociology, Peking University 2017).

A separate 2017 Survey Report on Transgender School Experience and Identity-Document Change brought public-interest legal work, gender-and-sexuality education, and a transgender community organization into a more focused evidentiary project (Beijing Impact Law Firm et al. 2017). Reading the two documents together reveals concurrent baseline and issue-specific evidence. The first mapped the distribution of many concerns; the second increased resolution at two institutional interfaces—education and document change.

The national survey later became one of the clearest examples of grey literature moving into peer-reviewed reanalysis. Chen and colleagues selected 1,309 transgender men and women for a 2019 analysis of suicidal ideation and attempts. Liu and colleagues used an analytic sample of 1,304 in a 2020 study of hormone therapy and surgery. Spielmann and colleagues used a school-related sample of 1,106 in research published in 2022 (Chen et al. 2019; Liu et al. 2020; Spielmann et al. 2022). One community-recruited database therefore acquired several valid denominators, each tied to identity filters, variable availability, and a distinct research question.

This point is also where provenance can become confusing. Contemporary newspapers selected high-impact figures from the report. Overseas resource pages preserved the English edition. A Hong Kong transgender resource organization described and mirrored the report. Later digital archives preserved Chinese and English pages (China Daily 2017a, 2017b; TGR Hong Kong 2017; Equal Eyes 2017). These layers increase discoverability. For a descriptive statistic, the original report remains the closest source. For a later model, the peer-reviewed analysis supplies the more precise source. For a history of circulation, mirrors and media pages become primary evidence in their own right.

The coexistence of multiple 2017 documents also argues for a richer chronology. A timeline containing only the largest survey would flatten legal aid, school experience, and identity-document practice. An annotated archive can retain the national report and issue-specific report together, then record their overlapping concerns. That structure shows community knowledge moving from “what experiences occur?” toward “at which institutional interface?” and “what practical process governs the encounter?”

6. 2017–2019: evidence becomes care and rights tooling

The comprehensive-care blueprint preserved on the Asia Pacific Transgender Network’s 2017 resource page represents another document role. It organized transgender health care into a framework that clinical, community, and service systems could use across the Asia-Pacific region, with multilingual circulation (APTN 2017). In a mainland Chinese historical archive, such regional documents supply professional vocabulary and care models that can be compared with needs identified by domestic surveys. Their cross-national scope should remain explicit in the provenance matrix.

In 2018, UNDP and partner institutions published Legal Gender Recognition in China: A Legal and Policy Review. The report brought together laws, policies, implementing regulations, arbitration rulings, judicial decisions, and evidence about cumulative effects on transgender communities, then offered recommendations concerning legal gender recognition and access to public services (UNDP 2018). A contemporary release page also records China Women’s University as an academic partner and places the work inside a multi-country UNDP–APTN legal-gender-recognition initiative (UNDP China 2018). The evidentiary object here shifts from questionnaire responses to institutional text and implementation.

In 2019, Amnesty International published research on barriers encountered by transgender people seeking gender-affirming treatment in China, concentrating on health information, professional care, and institutional requirements (Amnesty International 2019). A transgender identity-document change manual published in the same period converted legal, administrative, and community knowledge into stepwise guidance for people interacting with identification systems (Rainbow Lawyers 2019). These documents illustrate an evidence-to-tool transformation. Surveys and interviews describe a problem; legal-policy synthesis maps the institutional environment; a manual translates that map into procedures.

Service manuals consequently have clear historical value. A manual records which certificates, departments, schools, employers, and other institutions formed practical interfaces during a particular period. It also records what a community understood as an available route at that moment. Administrative systems evolve, so manuals need dates and versions in an archive. A 2019 manual can serve as a cross-section of practice knowledge around 2019, while later public-security or health regulations establish subsequent regulatory context (Rainbow Lawyers 2019; Ministry of Public Security 2021).

The intended readership also differentiates over time. National surveys address policy institutions, researchers, media, and the general public. Legal reviews address government, legal professionals, and advocacy networks. Health reports address rights and care. Practical manuals speak directly to people navigating procedures. The history of grey literature is therefore also a history of audience differentiation: public evidence increasingly became knowledge designed for distinct institutional tasks.

7. 2020–2021: workplace, public attitudes, and national health evidence diverge

A 2020 survey on transgender employment and workplace experience focused attention on recruitment, workplace environments, identity disclosure, and occupational institutions. A surviving digital-archive copy preserves the report after changes in its original circulation environment (Chinese Transgender Digital Archive 2020). This workplace study forms a baseline-to-setting relationship with earlier national surveys: broad data identify employment as a life domain, while a dedicated report increases detail about occupational processes.

Around 2021, two different evidentiary routes became visible. The Williams Institute published research on public opinion concerning transgender rights in China, shifting the target population toward the general public (Williams Institute 2021). Such work asks a different question from community surveys. One line records transgender people’s experiences; the other measures the social environment through public attitudes. Placing both in the provenance matrix keeps “what the public thinks” distinct from “what transgender people experience.”

The other route is the 2021 national transgender health survey. Surviving archive and database records describe it as another large nationwide project after 2017, covering physical health, mental health, family, and public environments; records describe 9,390 participants and 7,625 valid questionnaires (Beijing LGBT Center 2021; CNLGBTDATA 2023). Later peer-reviewed work used the new survey generation to study gender-identity conversion practice, mental health, substance use, suicidality, identity milestones, and hormone use (Wang et al. 2023; Hou et al. 2026).

The archival state of the 2021 survey is especially useful for understanding the four temporal fields. Data collection belongs to 2021. Some currently accessible database pages carry dates in 2023. A digital archive created or refreshed mirrors later still. A “2023 webpage” can therefore preserve a “2021 survey.” Both dates are accurate records of different events. Separating collection time, first release, database entry, and current mirror time keeps the historical chronology stable.

The 2021 public-security specification for household registration and resident identity-card management adds regulatory context to the same period (Ministry of Public Security 2021). Its presence shows why grey-literature archives benefit from links to official rules. Community manuals record practical routes and friction; official documents record formal systems; administrative and judicial cases show implementation. These source types can then be read together as institutional history.

8. Five document roles: building a structured archive from a source set

Reordering the 2014–2021 corpus by function reveals five roles. Baseline surveys, such as the 2016 LGBTI survey and the 2017 transgender-specific national survey, establish broad descriptive frames. Population- or setting-specific studies, including work on transgender female sex workers, schools and identity documents, and workplaces, increase resolution in particular contexts. Legal-policy reviews, such as the 2018 legal-gender-recognition report, organize dispersed institutional texts into a common problem. Service and rights manuals, such as the identity-document guide and regional care blueprint, convert knowledge into procedures, resources, and service models. Scholarly reanalysis then builds analytic samples, models, and peer-reviewed arguments from databases or issues first consolidated through community research.

These roles form a directional chain. Baseline surveys identify dense problem areas. Topic-specific work adds contextual detail. Policy reviews connect experience to legal and institutional responsibility. Service manuals convert institutional maps into actionable routes. Peer-reviewed studies transform databases into models that can participate in international research conversations. Digital archives later aggregate these publishing forms inside one searchable environment. The sequence can be summarized as:

community experience → survey object → report table → topic-specific branch → legal/service tool → scholarly reanalysis → digital archive → later citation

The benefit of this chain is attribution. Community organizations contribute recruitment, service knowledge, and question formation. University teams contribute research design and analysis. International institutions contribute policy frameworks, publication resources, and cross-national networks. Legal and health professionals convert institutional knowledge into tools. Archive projects extend discoverability. Scholars then move source databases toward specialized questions (Guo 2018; Bai 2026; Wang et al. 2023).

A structured archive therefore goes beyond a link list. URLs establish locations. Annotations establish evidentiary roles, target populations, collection periods, institutional authorship, and later uses. Two reports on similar themes may serve different populations. Two documents from one year may use entirely different methods. Two journal articles from one database may have different denominators. A provenance matrix places these distinctions where readers can see them.

9. The document-life ledger: original pages, mirrors, and scholarly reuse

Grey literature often depends on changing publication infrastructure. Organizations rename themselves, websites migrate, social-media entry points shift, PDFs move away from homepages, and Word attachments lose their original links. The current Chinese Transgender Digital Archive groups a large body of “community and NGO documents,” including statistical reports, manuals, tutorials, and organizational materials (Chinese Transgender Digital Archive 2026). This preservation work keeps documents accessible and also creates a new layer of archival metadata.

A document-life ledger can record at least these fields: original title; original authoring organizations; collection period; first release date; original URL; original file format; language edition; known revision; current institutional page; independent mirror or archive page; first confirmed mirror date; later journal citations; later manual or policy citations; and current access status. When a report moves from an institutional PDF to a database record and then into a specialist digital archive, all three states belong in its history.

The ledger can also record citation identity. The 2017 national survey is a community–university nationwide online survey at the report layer. In Chen et al. 2019 it becomes a 1,309-person suicidality analysis sample. In Liu et al. 2020 it becomes a 1,304-person analysis of gender-affirming care demand and status. In a digital archive it becomes a preserved and indexed historical document (Chen et al. 2019; Liu et al. 2020). A single document thus acquires several later functions while remaining tied to one source-data lineage.

Digital preservation works best when institutional context remains attached. An archive mirror preserves access; an original institutional page often provides richer information about publication purpose, partnerships, launch events, and version date. UNDP’s 2018 legal-gender-recognition project illustrates the pair: the report page supplies downloads and project positioning, while the contemporary press release supplies event context, partner institutions, and the range of legal materials considered (UNDP 2018; UNDP China 2018). Preserving both reconnects document content with publication event.

10. Counterevidence: methodological, genre, and version differences are historical evidence

Documents sharing a topic still carry distinct methods, populations, and evidentiary tasks. The 2015 Beijing–Shanghai study of transgender female sex workers emphasizes situated depth. The 2016 survey covers a much broader LGBTI population. The 2017 transgender survey recruited through digital and community networks. The 2019 manual prioritizes procedural navigation. The 2021 national health survey uses a new recruitment and question structure (Asia Catalyst 2015; UNDP 2016; Beijing LGBT Center and Department of Sociology, Peking University 2017; Rainbow Lawyers 2019; Beijing LGBT Center 2021). These differences make comparison more informative.

Sample structure belongs in the annotation. Online community recruitment can reach people across many regions while producing a participant profile associated with platform access, age, urban residence, and community connection. The 2017 survey itself recorded a young, urban, highly educated sample profile; later national research used new recruitment frames. Any comparison of percentages gains accuracy when question wording, denominator, identity classification, and recruitment method travel with the number (Zhang et al. 2020; Kronk et al. 2022).

Genre also determines what a source can establish. A policy review organizes regulations and cases. A service manual organizes practical knowledge. A national survey describes distributions within its sample. A peer-reviewed article estimates associations under explicit analytic rules. A digital archive establishes preservation and retrieval. These genres support each other when their evidentiary jobs remain visible. Strong historical writing assigns lived experience, formal rules, organizational recommendations, and statistical associations to the source type suited to each claim.

Version difference offers another historical signal. Chinese and English editions can reach different circulation networks. Institutional reposts may condense method sections. Later databases add keywords and metadata. Digital archives can convert file formats or generate page previews. A document-life ledger retains these layers so a researcher can state which edition supports a claim and why the same statistic may appear inside different contexts on different webpages.

11. Original synthesis: 2014–2021 as a period of documentary interface densification

Read together, these eight years show a clear change: the density of documentary interfaces around transgender public knowledge increased. Broad contextual reports around 2014 offered wide frames. A 2015 urban population-specific study produced deep evidence about a high-risk group. The 2016 project established a large national LGBTI baseline. In 2017, a transgender-specific national survey and school/document-change work appeared in parallel. In 2018, systematic legal-policy synthesis became publicly available. In 2019, health-care barriers and identity-document procedures became report and manual forms. Workplace research further differentiated the field in 2020. In 2021, a new national health survey and public-opinion research separated community experience from social-attitude evidence.

“Densification” here means an increase in connectable document roles. A researcher, service provider, or reader can move from a national survey to a health-care problem, then toward a health report and care blueprint; from school/document experience toward legal-gender-recognition analysis and an identity-document manual; from workplace research toward scholarship on employment protection; from the 2021 health survey toward later Nature Mental Health and JAMA Network Open studies (Fappani 2024; Wang et al. 2023; Hou et al. 2026). Each added role creates another public entry point into the evidence base.

This framework also makes community knowledge labor visible. Questionnaire design, recruitment, interviewing, anonymization, tabulation, bilingual editing, manual writing, policy review, website maintenance, and later digital archiving are all infrastructural work. Journal articles frequently preserve final variables and models; grey literature often preserves the path by which a service problem became a research agenda. The two publication systems together produce a fuller history of evidence.

A transgender-history archive can therefore preserve important document processes alongside important events. A survey release can change which experiences enter public discussion. A manual can translate an abstract right into a practical route. A mirror can restore discoverability to an organizational output whose original platform has changed. The historical value of documentary interface densification lies in these accumulating connections.

12. Practical citation guide for researchers, journalists, and archivists

Researchers citing a statistic can record “document + year + target population + denominator + question or variable.” When the figure comes from later scholarly reanalysis, the record can add “analytic sample + selection rule.” The 2,060 valid questionnaires in the 2017 report and the 1,309-person sample in the 2019 article are distinct states in one data lineage (Beijing LGBT Center and Department of Sociology, Peking University 2017; Chen et al. 2019).

Journalists and public writers citing policy or service information can record “rule/manual version + applicable period + issuing organization.” A 2019 document-change manual describes practice knowledge around that period; a 2021 public-security specification supplies later national regulatory context. Local implementation may add further regional documents, which can enter the same ledger (Rainbow Lawyers 2019; Ministry of Public Security 2021).

Archivists can preserve two layers: the document object and the publication context. The first includes PDF, DOCX, or webpage text, checksum, language, and version. The second includes authorship, release date, original URL, event page, repost, and mirror data. If the material later enters a journal article, the archive can add a “scholarly reuse” relationship. A future reader then encounters a document life rather than an isolated attachment.

Teaching and reading guides can organize the corpus by function. A reader can begin with a baseline survey, move to a focused population or setting report, then read a legal review and service manual, and finish with a peer-reviewed paper derived from the same evidence ecology. This sequence makes population experience, institutional structure, action tools, and academic analysis visible in one course of reading.

Conclusion

Transgender grey literature produced in and about mainland China from 2014 to 2021 forms a historical line worthy of study in its own right. National and regional surveys established baselines. Population- and setting-specific reports raised contextual resolution. Legal-policy reviews organized institutional interfaces. Health and identity-document guides transformed knowledge into practical tools. Later journal articles built analytic samples from community-generated databases. Digital archives then extended the period during which these outputs could be discovered and cited.

The grey-literature provenance matrix compares authorship, time, population, geography, method, use, and version. The document-life ledger traces original publication, mirrors, archive capture, and scholarly reuse. Together they expand “a report existed in a given year” into a richer historical record: who formed the question, who collected evidence, for whom the document was written, how later research reused it, and through which surviving edition it remains visible.

The most important change across 2014–2021 can be described as documentary interface densification. Transgender experience gradually acquired multiple public entrances: broad baselines, focused evidence, legal synthesis, service tooling, academic models, and durable archives. Preserving the relationships among these entrances allows mainland Chinese transgender history to retain the specificity of community experience, the chronology of institutional change, and the traceability of research evidence.

References

1. Chen, Runsen, Xuequan Zhu, L. Wright, Jack Drescher, Y. Gao, L. Wu, X. Ying, J. Qi, C. Chen, Y. Xi, L. Ji, H. Zhao, J. Ou, and Matthew R. Broome. 2019. “Suicidal Ideation and Attempted Suicide Amongst Chinese Transgender Persons: National Population Study.” Journal of Affective Disorders 245: 1126–1134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2018.12.011
2. Liu, Ye, Runsen Chen, Jianjun Ou, Xuequan Zhu, Lijuan Wu, Yuanyuan Wang, et al. 2020. “The Desire and Status of Gender-Affirming Hormone Therapy and Surgery in Transgender Men and Women in China: A National Population Study.” The Journal of Sexual Medicine 17(11): 2291–2298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2020.07.081
3. Spielmann, Julia, Siqi Feng, Daniel A. Briley, and Chadly Stern. 2022. “Mental Health Contributors Among Transgender People in a Non-WEIRD Society: Evidence From China.” Social Psychological and Personality Science 13(3): 747–757. https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506211039388
4. Hou, Jiayu, et al. 2026. “Gender Identity Milestones and Hormone Utilization in Transgender Men and Women in China.” JAMA Network Open 9(1): e2552440. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.52440
5. Wang, Yuanyuan, Zhishan Hu, Ke Peng, Joanne Rechdan, Yuan Yang, Lijuan Wu, et al. 2023. “A National Transgender Health Survey from China Assessing Gender Identity Conversion Practice, Mental Health, Substance Use and Suicidality.” Nature Mental Health 1: 254–265. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44220-023-00041-z
6. Chen, Y., S. Chen, S. Arayasirikul, et al. 2020. “A Cross-Sectional Study of Mental Health, Suicidal Ideation and Suicide Attempt among Transgender Women in Jiangsu Province, China.” Journal of Affective Disorders 277: 869–874. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.09.002
7. Yan, H., et al. 2019. “High HIV Prevalence and Associated Risk Factors among Transgender Women in China: A Cross-Sectional Survey.” Journal of the International AIDS Society 22: e25417. https://doi.org/10.1002/jia2.25417
8. Yan, Zi-Han, et al. 2019. “Identity, Stigma, and HIV Risk among Transgender Women: A Qualitative Study in Jiangsu Province, China.” Infectious Diseases of Poverty. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40249-019-0606-9
9. Wang, Liying, et al. 2023. “Health Service Utilization and Its Associations with Depression and Sexual Risk Behaviors Among Transgender Women in Shanghai, China.” Transgender Health 8(6): 516–525. https://doi.org/10.1089/trgh.2021.0009
10. Yang, Xiaoshi, et al. 2015. “Sex Partnership and Self-Efficacy Influence Depression in Chinese Transgender Women: A Cross-Sectional Study.” PLOS ONE 10(9): e0136975. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0136975
11. Lin, T., Y. Cheng, T. L. Hughes, et al. 2022. “LGBTQ Health and Wellbeing in China: A Trend Analysis of English- and Chinese-Language Research, 2011–2018.” https://www.moderntreatise.com/s/LGBTQ-Health-and-Wellbeing-in-China-A-Trend-Analysis-of-English-and-Chinese-Language-Research-201120.pdf
12. 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/9780231185790
13. Chiang, Howard. 2021. Transtopia in the Sinophone Pacific. Columbia University Press. https://howardchiang.faculty.eastasian.ucsb.edu/publications/books/
14. Liu, Sha. 2023. Performative Authenticity: Chinese Transgender People’s Digital Gender Practices. PhD thesis, London School of Economics. https://etheses.lse.ac.uk/4608/
15. Engebretsen, Elisabeth L., William F. Schroeder, and Hongwei Bao, eds. 2015. Queer/Tongzhi China: New Perspectives on Research, Activism and Media Cultures. NIAS Press. https://cnlgbtdata.com/files/uploads/2024/06/Queer_Tongzhi_China.pdf
16. Guo, Lifu. 2018. “Tongzhi Solidarity under Chinese Authoritarian Government: A Case Study of the Beijing Tongzhi Center.” https://repository.dl.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp/record/49786/
17. Bao, Hongwei. 2018. “From ‘Celluloid Comrades’ to ‘Digital Video Activism’: Queer Filmmaking in Postsocialist China.” https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/49485/
18. Bai, Tianyi. 2026. “No-One Signed Up: Fatigue, Failure, and Fragile Optimism in Chinese Trans Advocacy.” https://doi.org/10.22459/mic.11.01.2026.13
19. Kronk, Clair A., Avery R. Everhart, Florence Ashley, et al. 2022. “Transgender Data Collection in the Electronic Health Record: Current Concepts and Issues.” Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 29(2): 271–284. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocab136
20. Henrich, Joseph, Steven J. Heine, and Ara Norenzayan. 2010. “Beyond WEIRD: Towards a Broad-Based Behavioral Science.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33(2–3): 111–135. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X10000725
21. Guo, Shaohua. 2020. The Evolution of the Chinese Internet: Creative Visibility in the Digital Public. Stanford University Press. https://www.sup.org/books/asian-studies/evolution-chinese-internet
22. Reed, Geoffrey M., Jack Drescher, Richard B. Krueger, et al. 2016. “Disorders Related to Sexuality and Gender Identity in the ICD-11: Revising the ICD-10 Classification Based on Current Scientific Evidence, Best Clinical Practices, and Human Rights Considerations.” World Psychiatry 15(3): 205–221. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20354
23. Fappani, Valeria. 2024. “The Protection of Transgender Workers in China: Between Law and Society.” Rivista di Diritto dell’Asia Orientale 1: 51–74. https://doi.org/10.30687/RIDAO/4713-223X/2024/01/003
24. Zhang, Q., et al. 2020. “Epidemiological Considerations in Transgender Health: A Systematic Review with Focus on Higher Quality Data.” International Journal of Transgender Health 21(2): 125–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/26895269.2020.1753136
25. Asia Catalyst. 2015. Too Dark to See the Light: A Survey of Transgender Female Sex Workers in Beijing and Shanghai. China Development Brief publication record. https://chinadevelopmentbrief.org/publications/life-dark-see-light-survey-living-conditions-transgender-female-sex-workers-beijing-shanghai/
26. UNDP. 2014. Being LGBT in Asia: China Country Report. https://www.undp.org/china/publications/being-lgbt-asia-china-country-report
27. 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
28. Beijing LGBT Center and Department of Sociology, Peking University. 2017. Chinese Transgender Population General Survey Report: Transgender and Gender-Nonconforming People. https://digital.transchinese.org/社群及NGO文件/统计报告/Chinese_Transgender_Population_General_Survey_Report.pdf
29. China Development Brief. 2017. “2017 Chinese Transgender Population General Survey Report.” https://chinadevelopmentbrief.org/publications/2017-chinese-transgender-population-general-survey-report/
30. China Development Brief. 2017. “中国跨性别群体生存现状调查报告圆满发布.” https://www.chinadevelopmentbrief.org.cn/news/detail/17772.html
31. Beijing Impact Law Firm, Guangzhou Gender and Sexuality Education Center, and Guangzhou Trans Center. 2017. 跨性别校园与证件修改调查报告. https://digital.transchinese.org/社群及NGO文件/统计报告/跨性别校园与证件修改调查报告_page/
32. UNDP. 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
33. UNDP China. 2018. “UNDP and China Women’s University Release Legal Gender Recognition Report.” https://www.undp.org/china/press-releases/undp-and-china-womens-university-release-legal-gender-recognition-report
34. Amnesty International. 2019. China: “I Need My Parents’ Consent to Be Myself”: Barriers to Gender-Affirming Treatments for Transgender People in China. https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/asa17/0269/2019/en/
35. Rainbow Lawyers. 2019. 跨性别证件修改手册. https://digital.transchinese.org/社群及NGO文件/手册指南/跨性别证件修改手册_page/
36. Chinese Transgender Digital Archive. 2020. “2020年《跨性別就業與職場調查》報告.” https://digital.transchinese.org/社群及NGO文件/统计报告/2020年《跨性別就業與職場調查》報告.docx_page/
37. Beijing LGBT Center. 2021. 2021全国跨性别健康调研报告. https://digital.transchinese.org/社群及NGO文件/统计报告/2021全国跨性别健康调研报告_page/
38. Chinese Transgender Digital Archive. 2026. “社群及NGO文件.” https://digital.transchinese.org/社群及NGO文件/
39. Williams Institute. 2021. Public Opinion of Transgender Rights in China. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/opinion-trans-rights-china/
40. Ministry of Public Security of the PRC. 2021. “户口居民身份证管理工作规范（试行）（公通字〔2021〕12号）.” https://gaj.cq.gov.cn/zwgk/jczwgk/zcwj_224735/gabzcwj/202111/t20211112_9968734.html
41. Asia Pacific Transgender Network. 2017. Blueprint for the Provision of Comprehensive Care for Trans People. https://www.weareaptn.org/resource/blueprint-for-the-provision-of-comprehensive-care-for-trans-people/
42. Transgender Resource Center Hong Kong. 2017. “2017中国跨性别群体生存现状调查报告.” https://www.tgr.org.hk/index.php/zh/2017/11/20/2017-chinese-transgender-population-general-survey-report/
43. Equal Eyes. 2017. “China: 2017 Chinese Transgender Population General Survey Report.” https://equal-eyes.org/database/2017/12/11/china-2017-chinese-transgender-population-general-survey-report
44. China Daily. 2017. “Medical Needs Unmet for Many in Transgender Community.” https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2017-11/20/content_34778453.htm
45. China Daily. 2017. “Medical Services for Transgender People Needed, Survey Finds.” https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2017-11/21/content_34798757.htm
46. People’s Daily Online. 2018. “90% of Chinese Transgenders Threatened and Insulted, Received ‘Therapy’: Survey.” https://en.people.cn/n3/2018/0329/c90000-9442973.html
47. CNLGBTDATA. 2023. “2021全国跨性别健康调研报告.” https://cnlgbtdata.com/doc/314/
48. Chinese Transgender Digital Archive. 2026. “中国跨性别群体—生存现状调查报告.” https://digital.transchinese.org/社群及NGO文件/统计报告/中国跨性别群体-_生存现状调查报告_page/