Gay and transexuals

[Jaguar]

Why would you post a link to an article locked behind a paywall? It's useless.

Not everything in life is free, Mr. Loader. Here's a new concept for you: Buy the magazine. I do.

 

[magpie]

I think I quoted the wrong post. You mentioned body dysmorophic disorder and transexuality. BDD isn't the same case as the homosexuality classification. It has applications beyond transexuals. For example, one of my advisors who's a clinical psychologist used Michael Jackson as the primary example of someone who might have body dysmorphic disorder. Homosexuality was created specifically for homosexuals, while body dysmorphic disorder isn't only for transexuals. Transexuals are diagnosed with it because of the distress they have about their physical sex, not because they're transexuals. Distress is the driving mechanism behind most disorder classifications. For example, it's okay to be black. It's okay to not like being black. But if you're outright distressed about being black, that distress makes it an unhealthy mental state and it should be open to discussion whether it's abnormal (on the assumption that normal functioning leads us away from distress rather than causing distress).

Tl;dr it isn't being transexual that leads to a body dysmorphic disorder diagnosis, it's the distress of "being the wrong sex" that leads to the diagnosis. The treatment for a transexual who's distressed about their real sex would be to lead them towards acceptance of who they really are. Once they aren't distressed, the disorder is considered gone.

Hypoactive sexual desire disorder doesn't have the same visibility of case differences, but it's the same thing. It isn't the lack of sexual desire that's a disorder, it's being distressed about a lack of sexual desire. A friend of the family has cancer, and his prostate was obliterated by chemo in an earlier stage. Now he's fixated on the fact that he can't please his wife. He feels inferior as a husband and a man because he can't get an erection. He's used penis pumps, he's used injections... he has no sexual desire, but he has a want to pleasure his wife. That distress is leading him into all sorts of unhealthy places. It isn't specifically targeting asexuals, asexuals just happen to meet the definition. And if they're distressed, they should talk to someone. But if they aren't distressed, they don't have HSDD. Distress is probably the most important of the four Ds needed for a mental disorder (distressing, dysfunctional, deviant, and dangerous). I tend to see that as the hierarchy of them.

Ideally, yes. But in that case why don't we have a disorder in the DSM for people who are distressed upon realizing they have same sex attraction? They didn't have to get rid of homosexuality as a disorder diagnosis completely, they could've just switched it around a bit.

Sorry, this is awkward, but in relation to trans people I was actually thinking of gender dysphoria.

Individuals with gender dysphoria may or may not regard their own cross-gender feelings and behaviors as a disorder. Advantages and disadvantages exist to classifying gender dysphoria as a disorder.[10] Because gender dysphoria is classified as a disorder in medical texts (such as the previous DSM manual, the DSM-IV-TR, under the name "gender identity disorder"), many insurance companies are willing to cover some of the expenses of sex reassignment therapy. Without the classification of gender dysphoria as a medical disorder, sex reassignment therapy may be viewed as cosmetic treatment, rather than medically necessary treatment, and may not be covered.[59] In the United States, transgender people are less likely than others to have health insurance, and often face hostility and insensitivity from healthcare providers.[60]

The DSM-IV-TR diagnostic component of distress is not inherent in the cross-gender identity; rather, it is related to social rejection and discrimination suffered by the individual.[51] Psychology professor Darryl Hill insists that gender dysphoria is not a mental disorder, but rather that the diagnostic criteria reflect psychological distress in children that occurs when parents and others have trouble relating to their child's gender variance.[58] Transgender people have often been harassed, socially excluded, and subjected to discrimination, abuse and violence, including murder.[11][20]

In December 2002, the British Lord Chancellor's office published a Government Policy Concerning Transsexual People document that categorically states, "What transsexualism is not ... It is not a mental illness."[61] In May 2009, the government of France declared that a transsexual gender identity will no longer be classified as a psychiatric condition.[62]

In August 31, 2010, Thomas Hammarberg, Commissioner for Human Rights within the Strasbourg-based Council of Europe, an independent institution, opposed the mental disorder classification and the sterilization of transgender persons as a requirement for legal sex change.[63] The Principle 3 of The Yogyakarta Principles on The Application of International Human Rights Law In Relation to Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity states, "Persons of diverse sexual orientation and gender identities shall enjoy legal capacity in all aspects of life. Each person's self-defined sexual orientation and gender identity is integral to their personality and is one of the most basic aspects of self-determination, dignity and freedom," and the Principle 18 states, "Notwithstanding any classifications to the contrary, a person's sexual orientation and gender identity are not, in and of themselves, medical condition and are not to be treated, cured or suppressed."[citation needed]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_dysphoria

Being distressed about a lack of sexual desire isn't a disorder if being distressed about same sex attraction isn't a disorder. If you feel like it's unusual for you and you want to get treated for a lack of sexual desire that's fine. But it's not a mental illness. Let's have some consistency.

Also, this: "distressing, dysfunctional, deviant, and dangerous." Sometimes people become distressed personally by what they find in themselves that society deems distressing. So an asexual person might become distressed when they realize society finds asexuality unusual. They go to a therapist for help, and when the therapist realizes they find their asexuality distressing, the fact that they find it distressing makes them fit the criteria for a disorder. So the person walks away now realizing that their asexuality isn't just unusual, it's a disorder. Do you think this is helpful?

It's probably helpful for the man with the penis pump, but then what diagnosis can a man get who "accidentally" keeps getting turned on by gay porn and it's leading him into all these unhealthy places? It is so distressing for him. Where's his Same Sex Attraction Disorder? I am serious.

 

[magpie]

Okay, so I was bored so I read through this entire thread and I am going to quote some random things to respond to. I'm not looking to make a specific argument or point or anything, so this is just a collection of random posts I am responding to. I will break it up into multiple posts because this might be a tad long.



And society as a whole can be wrong about things. Not too long ago, it was acceptable to have slaves. Not too long ago, it was unacceptable for women to have jobs of their own. But you know what? As pessimistic as I am, I've noticed one thing. Society as a whole tends to better itself over time. Do we sometimes take backwards steps? Of course. But people today have a lot more rights/equality/whatever, than they did before. As resources have become easier to obtain over time (at least in the developed world), we can now focus our energy on social issues as opposed to killing someone for our next meal.

Look, psychology/psychiatry is far from perfect. We all get that. But in relatively recent years, the field has moved toward empiricism. We aren't just making random guesses and assumptions anymore. The field now uses the scientific method, a rigidly defined principle of testing and gathering new information. Can there be mistakes? Yes. Do we know everything? Of course not. But that is no reason to dismiss the entire field. Every field has gotten something wrong at some point. Are we going to dismiss the concept of DNA because Darwin originally postulated that gemmules were the mode in which inherited information was passed onto one's offspring? That's ridiculous.

Obfuscating clinical study results is not a rigidly defined principle of testing and gathering new methods. Psychiatry's methods of diagnosis are not scientific. At best it's a classification system, but it's a classification system based off observations. It's like classifying plants with a little book about plants. This plant is blue, thorny, has a lot of petals. So I'm going to look it up in this dubiously accurate book and see what kind of plant it must be. And I mean, we can classify the plants in the book any way we want based off whatever apparent similarities stick out to us. But that doesn't tell us anything about the molecular structure of the plants. Or what is going on inside the plants.

But it is weird that you come in here amidst such outrage at the wrongs of psychiatry in the past (in regards to homosexuality only of course) and say every field has gotten something wrong at some point. (Or maybe it wasn't outrage at psychiatry, maybe it was just outrage at AGA.) Like it doesn't matter that these were real people. Or maybe they were just people.

 

[Bilateral Entry]

Not everything in life is free, Mr. Loader. Here's a new concept for you: Buy the magazine. I do.

Code of Conduct
1. Advertising

No advertising is allowed on the forum, whether for profit or not for profit.

 

[Jaguar]

Code of Conduct
1. Advertising

No advertising is allowed on the forum, whether for profit or not for profit.

When you're done trolling, let me know.

 

[great_bay]

It appears I should had had done more research for gender and the brain.

 

[Bilateral Entry]

Not everything in life is free, Mr. Loader. Here's a new concept for you: Buy the magazine. I do.

Someone's a freeloader because they don't subscribe to the same magazine as you do? And you expect us to take that argument seriously?

 

[belgianvalid]

I have nothing against them personally and religion has became more understanding of everyone's preferences.