I don't think gender identity disorder was ever viewed as a sexual deviancy per se. This is a quote from the authors of the DSM5 in their article '
Memo Outlining Evidence for Change for Gender Identity Disorder in the DSM-5'
"In the DSM-IV and DSMIV-TR, the three major diagnostic classes (GID, Sexual Dysfunctions,and the Paraphilias) all appeared in the section termed Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders. The placement of these three diagnostic classes in the same section in DSM-IV was probably influenced by several considerations, including clinical utility (e.g., that clinicians and researchers who study these phenomena tend to affiliate at common scientific meetings, tend to publish in the same periodicals, and probably have at least some familiarity with all of the conditions more so than clinicians and researchers who specialize in other areas of interest to psychiatry"
So the main reason identified for the prior placement is clinical utility, not that GID was a form of deviancy. The rationale for changing this structure:
"Yet, it is also recognized that each of these three diagnostic classes have their own specialists and the theoretical overlap among these conditions is far from complete. For example, sexual dysfunctions are of little direct relevance to GID as it manifests in children. Some critics have also complained that inclusion of GID in a section of the manual that also includes the paraphilias is somewhat stigmatizing. Although there can be a co-occurrence of one paraphilia, Transvestic Fetishism, with GID in adolescents and adults, it was the consensus of the entire Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders Work Group that the three diagnostic classes be uncoupled, with each having a separate chapter in DSM-5."
So yes, GID in adults can co-occur with transvestic fetishism, but this was not the main reason for chapter placement, and insufficient to justify retaining it. The main reasons for the change were to remove stigma of associating GIDS (especially in children) with adult sexual disorders and paraphilias, and the decision that all three separate diagnostic classes were not sufficiently related to justify being in the same chapter just for utility. This was of course part of a major revision in which the entire structure of the DSM was changed. For example, OCD and PTSD were no longer classified with anxiety disorders and were moved into their own chapters. This doesn't mean that they are no longer disorders.
The main point is that the name of GID was changed to remove the word 'disorder' from the title and change it to Gender dysphoria to reduce stigma. However, GID required the presence of dysphoria (distress and impairment) for diagnosis, just as GD does. So the name change was to focus on the distress rather than identity, not that identity per se was previously considered a disorder.
In fact, Zucker et al. explicitly compare GD to disorders which do not have the word 'disorder' in the title "the proposed name change to GD.....is consistent with some other diagnostic terms in the DSM, such as Anorexia Nervosa, Encopresis, and Enuresis, which do not have the term ‘‘disorder’’ in the diagnostic name".
There was a slight conceptual change in the way the diagnosis is viewed, but actually little real change to the diagnostic criteria.
The two misrepresentations of activists are: 1) that having the 'wrong' gender identity per se was previously considered a disorder, but now it isn't, but only the distress associated with this is. In fact, distress (dysphoria) was
always required for diagnosis of GID and the diagnostic criteria did not change in any major way 2) that it was moved out of the 'disorders' chapter and into it's own chapter because it's no longer considered a disorder. See quotes above.
I'm not aware that GD is now considered a symptom, although that may be the conceptual change referred to by Zucker et al. Do you have a source for that?
