Skip to main content

View Diary: When homosexuality was mental illness (134 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It's listed as a MENTAL DISORDER?! (3+ / 0-)

    Sorry for bad typing I'm on iPod.

    Did not know that. That is unfucking believable. Those HACKS are a disgrace to psychology. This the most pathetic pseudo-science I've seen in the field since the recovered memory craze ("um, your child was molested by his teacher, a robot and a clown in an arplaine? We'll get right on that." And they did to! I wonder how many innocent people were convicted by those sham trials?).

    •  Oh yes (4+ / 0-)

      And so is crossdressing.

      •  That is... (3+ / 0-)

        ... one of the most fucked up things I have ever heard (And how do you classify someone dressing as a member of the opposite gender as a mental illness anyways? That's not something you can even classify. I can understand they can say wanting to change genders is a mental illness (and be hideously wrong about it) but how do you even go about classifying wearing a certain type of clothes as a mental illness?!)

        •  The Transvestic Fetishism diagnosis in GID-IV-TR (4+ / 0-)

          was created largely by Raymond Blanchard, and is defended by him here.  

          Blanchard is the chairman of the paraphilia subcommittee for DSM-V and is a good friend of Ken Zucker. He is disliked (to put it mildly) by most Ts for his advocacy of a theory that Ts are motivated only by sex, never by identity.

          What these people have in common is a reduction of transsexuality to sexuality, and a denial that gender identity plays any part.  In this they are out of step with the vast majority of gender therapists, but as I said this game with the DSM is a political maneuver -- a right wing political maneuver. It is a piece of the "culture wars ". They would love to turn homosexuality back into a mental illness, but jerking transpeople around is all they can get away with right now.

      •  As I recall, though, that's a qualified listing (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        At least according to what I can find online (my actual copy of the DSM-IV is at the office), it's only diagnosed if "the fantasies, urges, or behaviors ...cause significant distress in the individual or be disruptive to his or her everyday functioning."

        In other words, if someone gets off on cross-dressing but isn't disturbed by it or experiencing social and/or occupational stress because of it, there's no grounds for diagnosing an illness. (Not, of course, that it would stop someone from relying on the fact that it's in the Big Book o' Mental Illnesses in the first place to stigmatize it.)

        •  Is the "social and/or occupational stress" caused (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Dom9000, Transactivist, musing85

          by the "illness" or by the social stigma?

          This is the exact same argument the homophobes used for hhhaving homosexuality in DSM: the "illness" inherently causes distress. Pay no attention to the effects of stigmatization, they are not relevant.

          It's a circular argument which always circles back to the discomfort of the psychologist masqueraded as his objective "knowledge" about an "illness".

          The sick people are these gender cops, obsessed with classifying human diversity and passing laws to control it.

          •  Could be either, could be both, could be none (0+ / 0-)

            I know that much about counseling/social work/therapy--it's almost never the case that there's a single cause of anything. I would like to believe, though the tenor of comments here suggests that I might be naive for doing so, or at least operating from a less-than-adequate knowledge basis, that any competent and ethical therapist would tailor the therapy provided to such a client according to the cause(s) of the dysfunction. If the stress comes largely from social pressure, then the proper therapeutic approach should be to help the client deal with that pressure in more holistic ways, develop resistance to it, coping strategies, or what have you. If the stress is internally directed (i.e., the client is truly traumatized by his/her desire to cross-dress), then that's a different kettle of fish and should, I would argue, require a different therapeutic approach.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site