Homosexuality: The Mental Illness That Went Away

by Phil Hickey on October 8, 2011

Post edited and updated January 2, 2013, to reflect clarifications as a result of interactions with the many people who have left comments.  I thank them for their input.

********************

According to the American Psychiatric Association, until 1974 homosexuality was a mental illness.  Freud had alluded to homosexuality numerous times in his writings, and had concluded that paranoia and homosexuality were inseparable.  Other psychiatrists wrote copiously on the subject, and homosexuality was “treated” on a wide basis.  There was little or no suggestion within the psychiatric community that homosexuality might be conceptualized as anything other than a mental illness that needed to be treated.  And, of course, homosexuality was listed as a mental illness in DSM-II.  (The DSM – Diagnostic and Statistical Manual – is the APA’s standard classification of their so-called mental disorders, and is used by many mental health workers in the USA and other countries.)

Then in 1970 gay activists protested against the APA convention in San Francisco.  These scenes were repeated in 1971, and as people came out of the “closet” and felt empowered politically and socially, the APA directorate became increasingly uncomfortable with their stance.  In 1973 the APA’s nomenclature task force recommended that homosexuality be declared normal.  The trustees were not prepared to go that far, but they did vote to remove homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses by a vote of 13 to 0, with 2 abstentions.  This decision was confirmed by a vote of the APA membership, and homosexuality was no longer listed in the seventh edition of DSM-II, which was issued in 1974.

What’s noteworthy about this is that the removal of homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses was not triggered by some scientific breakthrough.  There was no new fact or set of facts that stimulated this major change.  Rather, it was the simple reality that gay people started to kick up a fuss.  They gained a voice and began to make themselves heard.  And the APA reacted with truly astonishing speed.  And with good reason. They realized intuitively that a protracted battle would have drawn increasing attention to the spurious nature of their entire taxonomy.  So they quickly “cut loose” the gay community and forestalled any radical scrutiny of the DSM system generally.

The APA claimed that they made the change because new research showed that most homosexual people were content with their sexual orientation, and that as a group, they appeared to be as well-adjusted as heterosexual people.  I suggest, however, that these research findings were simply the APA’s face-saver.  For centuries, perhaps millennia, homosexual people had clung to their sexual orientation despite the most severe persecution and vilification, including imprisonment and death.  Wouldn’t this suggest that they were happy with their orientation?  Do we need research to confirm this?  And if we do, shouldn’t we also need research to confirm that heterosexual people are happy with their orientation?  And if poor adjustment is critical to a diagnosis of mental illness, where was the evidence of this that justified making homosexuality a mental illness in the first place?

Also noteworthy is the fact that the vote of the membership was by no means unanimous.  Only about 55% of the members who voted favored the change.

Of course, the APA put the best spin they could on these events.  The fact is that they altered their taxonomy because of intense pressure from the gay community, but they claimed that the change was prompted by research findings.

So all the people who had this terrible “illness” were “cured” overnight – by a vote!  I remember as a boy reading of the United Nations World Health Organization’s decision to eradicate smallpox.  This was in 1967, and by 1977, after a truly staggering amount of work, the disease was a thing of the past.  Why didn’t they just take a vote?  Because smallpox is a real illness.  The human problems listed in DSM are not.  It’s that simple.  You can say that geese are swans – but in reality they’re still geese.

The overall point being that the APA’s taxonomy is nothing more than self-serving nonsense.  Real illnesses are not banished by voting or by fiat, but by valid science and hard work.  There are no mental illnesses.  Rather, there are people.  We have problems; we have orientations; we have habits; we have perspectives.  Sometimes we do well, other times we make a mess of things.  We are complicated.  Our feelings fluctuate with our circumstances, from the depths of despondency to the pinnacles of bliss.  And perhaps, most of all, we are individuals.  DSM’s facile and self-serving attempt to medicalize human problems is an institutionalized insult to human dignity.  The homosexual community has managed to liberate themselves from psychiatric oppression.  But there are millions of people worldwide who are still being damaged, stigmatized, and disempowered by this pernicious system to this day.

  • tedshepherd

    My view is different. Homosexuality is in fact natural. Priests andnuns have taken vows of chastity. This depresses the birthrate among them. Do you regard their vows as unnatural too? Have you discussed this point of view with your priest? Scientists have observed homosexual behavior in many species, not just humans. In a world suffering from drastic overpopulation of people, it is not homosexuals willingly abstaining from parenthood that is destructive and damaging. Rather, it is the uniquely heterosexual vice of producing children that the parents are either unwilling or unable to support, emotionally and financially, to adulthood. Can you name a single significant problem facing humanity today that excess population does not worsen?

  • Pingback: The Gay Marriage Quiz Answers | Your Brain: The Final Frontier()

  • Sweetie

    Wow… bald-faced lying. Great article.

    “What’s noteworthy about this is that the removal of homosexuality from
    the list of mental illnesses was not triggered by some scientific
    breakthrough. There was no new fact or set of facts that stimulated
    this major change. Rather, it was the simple reality that gay people
    started to kick up a fuss.”

    No, what’s noteworthy is that Dr. Hooker’s 1956 study was the first to be conducted without a polluted sample resulting in an illusory correlation. What’s also noteworthy is that it took the APA 17-18 years to finally correct the mistake. Researchers before Hooker who looked at the issue of homosexuality being a mental disorder studied gay men with a history of treatment for mental illness. That was a polluted sample that resulted in the false (illusory) correlation between homosexuality and mental illness that formed the basis of the listing of homosexuality as a mental disorder in the DSM. Hooker did something totally new. She specifically avoided a polluted sample and thus her findings showed the world the truth: homosexual men could not be differentiated vs. heterosexual men in terms of saneness.

  • Sweetie

    Crystal clear perhaps but flat wrong.

    Dr. Hooker’s 1956 study was the first to be conducted without a polluted
    sample resulting in an illusory correlation. It was political bias against gay people that caused the APA to take 17-18 years to finally correct the mistake. People love to claim that the removal was political. It was. It was delayed significantly.

  • cajaquarius

    Disorder implies a negative connotation that isn’t there. Homosexuality causes no inherent social harm in and of itself. It is a benign variation, like left handedness and heterochromatic eye color. Pedophilia does cause harm. This isn’t difficult to grasp. I am not sure how much simpler we can make it for you.

  • cajaquarius

    I could link the same problems to dark skinned people yet if I attempted to argue such correlation as a fact that proves dark skinned people are morally inferior or dangerous to public health not many places of higher learning or scientific inquiry would take me seriously. You have correlation without causality, as always with anti-gay statistics and “science”.

  • cajaquarius

    If homosexuality were creating these disorders then these disorders would be present in one hundred percent of homosexual people. They are not. Ergo, average life expectancy, increased rate of mental illness, and so on are correlations without causality.

  • cajaquarius

    None of which have causality tying them to homosexuality in any inherent fashion. That is the real reason homosexuality has stayed out of the DSM since the seventies. It never should have been there to begin with.

  • cajaquarius

    “Yeah I think they were born that way but it’s still no excuse to not seek a cure.”

    There is nothing wrong with it. My being gay is no different then someone being left handed. Abnormal does not denote automatic negative connotation.

  • cajaquarius

    Even today anti-gay “science” depends on correlation without causality. I have yet to meet an argument I couldn’t rebut as a result. Add to this the fact that they now claim science is some big atheist conspiracy and they wonder why “Christian” has become synonymous with “Stupid” in the western world. It is laughable.

  • cajaquarius

    The latter causes harm to the people performing them and to others they violate by their actions. Homosexuality doesn’t. The removal was political but it never should have been in the DSM to begin with. It is no different then the way they used to believe left handed people had something wrong with them because most people are right handed.

  • cajaquarius

    “… not based upon SCIENCE it is simply theory and hypothesis.”

    Gravity is also a theory. Just throwing that out there.

    “In fact Sigmund Freud stated in his extensive study of homosexuality that it has a direct link to paranoia which is still classified as a mental disorder.”

    I am gay and not paranoid. So much for that hypothesis.

    “Another study showed that while homosexuality in itself was not harmful that is was the lack of sexual versatility and the clinging of the person to one gender that is the basis for the psychosis and the fact that homosexuals only view their gender as attractive or worthy of affection.”

    So only bisexual men are healthy then? A weird position but whatever, I guess.

  • cajaquarius

    “Regardless of what some psychiatrists and psychologists erroneously believe, homosexuality IS a personality disorder. That is to say that it is an aberration of the norm. It is not a crime or an abomination but takes as its cause familial and personal experiences.”

    Disorder denotes a negative trait. Homosexuality is a disorder insofar as being left handed is a disorder. It is a benign variation from the norm.

    “Trans-sexuality is a different form of genderl misidentification. Chromosomes are the determinant of our gender. To not identify with one’s XX or XY chromosomes is also a personality disorder.”

    Chromosomes are determinant of our biological sex. The gender of our mind can differ. And disorder, once again, doesn’t fit since there is nothing inherently problematic or symptomatic of a man wanting to shave his legs and wear skirts or a biological female who feels like a male soul trapped in a female husk.

    “It can never be argued that such personality disorders just happen. They can be treated and cured by competent psychiatrists by getting to the source of the distortion of the person’s disorder and curing it – not by shock treatment, prayer or medication – but by psycho-analysis as it should be practised – competently.”

    I can also cure someone of being left handed by striking their left hand with a ruler whenever they use it growing up. I can force a girl with two different colored eyes to wear contacts to make them a uniform color too. Neither of these serves a purpose though, other than to make me seem cruel and capricious. There is certainly nothing therapeutic in such endeavors.

  • Bill_Waters

    Actually, you could argue that certain dark skinned individuals are potential health threats by merit of their birth country. Hence why blood donor clinics ask if you’ve lived in or visited such-and-such places during screening. In underdeveloped nations, such as Zambia, HIV awareness and prevention are not widely available. By contrast, homosexuals in developed countries know all the risks, have access to affordable protection, and STILL account for the majority infected. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that 1 in 5 gay/bisexual men are infected. World Health Organization prescribes ALL homosexual men antiretrovial drugs because they are 19 times more likely than the general population to be infected.

  • Bill Waters

    The life expectancy of a schizophrenic is ten to twenty-five years less than average life expectancy, which is 77.6 years in North America. By your logic any schizophrenic that lives past 67 years old disproves schizophrenia.

  • cajaquarius

    A strawman argument. Schizophrenia has other negative, uniform symptoms besides shorter life expectancy. Your rebuttal is invalid. Thank you for playing.

  • Maybe?

    First: “My view is different”. did you catch the word “View”? It’s a conscience decision, and is the same for anyone who is gay. It’s a selective “view” or a choice.

    “Vows” are again a choice, but for different reasons. One is a dedication to their religion, the latter is a dedication to a lifestyle choice also, but based on lust and physical self satisfaction.

    In proportion to the populace, they are directly cited in more immoral criminal acts (Public sex with random partners) than any other group walking the face of the earth by far and well past the point of statistical significance scientifically.

  • cajaquarius

    A blatant lie. The majority of infected according to the World Health Organization and the CDC in the US are heterosexual women, not homosexuals. Your rebuttal is invalid. Thank you for playing.

  • Maybe?

    As far as over population, you could give every family on earth 3/4 acres and, you would not use but 3/4 of Australia. The rest of the world would be untouched.

    There is enough green technology that each could grow their own food and remain sustainable.

    Your opinion means nothing, facts mean everything.

    You have been sold a bill of goods.

  • Maybe?

    Perry N. Halkitis, PhD, MS

    Steinhardt School of Culture, Education and Human Development, New York University

    Over the last 30 years, efforts to prevent new HIV infections among gay and bisexual men have been guided by paradigms that hold individuals responsible for their health behaviors. These approaches, rooted primarily in social-cognitive frameworks (Halkitis, 2010b), have resulted in maintaining new infections in the United States at a steady state for the last decade (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC],
    2011b). In addition, the population of men who have sex with men (MSM) has continued to be the only risk category for which new infections are rising (Hall et al., 2008). In fact, gay, bisexual, and other MSM acquire HIV at rates 44 times greater than other men and 40 times greater than women (CDC, 2011a).

    Seems your information is invalid.

  • cajaquarius

    Growing populations are not the same as most numerous population. The most affected population of HIV sufferers is still women. But it is a moot argument, anyways. HIV is not a condition inherent to being homosexual. You are providing correlation but no causality. I didn’t have to even respond but chose to since passing up the opportunity of showing how anti-gay “science” relies on lying would be silly on my part.

    So, not only was that not a rebuttal to my own post, the whole argument is not valid, period. No more valid than me using statistics on prison populations and urban crime to claim having dark skin makes you more prone to criminal behavior.

    So, you still lose. Thanks for playing.

  • Maybe?

    I did not lose and your information is invalid. I copied and pasted from CDC.

    Your twisted attempts to change reality does nothing in the real world.

    “Growing populations are not the same as most numerous population. The most affected population of HIV sufferers is still women.”

    Please quantify your statement. You can’t.

    Now, read the following “The Internet Blowhard’s Favorite Phrase”. I am sure you can figure out a simple search on Google, but doubt you have the capacity to comprehend.

    “HIV is not a condition inherent to being homosexual.”

    I never suggested it was, again, you attempt to twist. They are the most prominent carriers who spread this disease.

    They burn in their unnatural lust to a degree that they refuse to use condoms, hence CDC and WHO putting out alerts and warning specifically to this demographic.

    Gays are the reason it runs so rampant. To be more specific, gay males are the root cause.

    “In addition, the population of men who have sex with men (MSM) has continued to be the only risk category for which new infections are rising (Hall et al., 2008). In fact, gay, bisexual, and other MSM acquire HIV at rates 44 times greater than other men and 40 times greater than women (CDC, 2011a).”

    So who’s more educated here, you are all of the scientist at CDC?

    I would be willing to bet you are gay and are taking this personal.

    Typical.

  • Maybe?

    That analogy is as dumb as saying if a significant portion (say 3% as an example) of the population has reactions to peanuts that all of them would.

    I hope you are not a college grad, if so, the world is screwed big-time.

  • tedshepherd

    The definition of mental illness does not include irrational behavior as a certain component. If merely being irrational in someone’s behavior is sufficient to diagnose mental illness, then every one who makes a bet where the odds are against him is mentally ill. That would include everyone who buys a lottery ticket or bets in a casino. Such a sweeping definition of illness is of no use. It certainly has no basis in the thought of practicing mental health experts. Now, of course, a pathological extreme of gambling may be a sign of mental illness. I’m speaking of just ordinary people who enjoy a raffle or lottery or visit to a casino, risking no more money than they can afford to lose. I see them as healthy. Don’t you? For that matter, to enter into a second marriage after a disastrous first marriage is generally (not invariably) irrational. Does that make it insane?

  • cajaquarius

    Correlation does not imply causal links. You supposedly work in statistics so you should know that, but I am guessing like most things with you Christians that’s just another lie to lend your ridiculous, retarded argument credence.

    According to the WHO, the greatest number of HIV cases still occur in Africa and primarily affect women there. Much occur as a direct result of rape due to the incorrect belief that you can cure HIV by having sex with a virgin that still runs rampant in sub-saharan Africa to this day, among other social factors.

    100 percent of people who stick their hand in the fire will be burned. For your retarded analogy to make sense 100 percent of homosexuals would have to have HIV. I shouldn’t have to explain this to somebody who supposedly works works in statistics but here we are it seems.

    I am gay but there’s nothing really to take personally. You’ve been using lies, obfuscations, correlation without causal support, and resorting to ad hominem to support your points because you have no rational point. Thank you for playing. Thanks also for resorting so often to lies. You’ve made winning this culture war all too easy for us.

  • cajaquarius

    Let’s see if I can explain basic logic to you on a level even you’re mythology polluted brain can understand.

    The claim being made is that homosexuality leads to a greater amount of disease, both mental and physical, as well as early death. Not just that some homosexuals suffer a greater degree of these issues but that it is a factor inherent to the orientation itself. Are you still with me, sweetheart?

    For these to be symptoms of the orientation itself they would need to be present in all people who have this orientation in the same way that delusions and audio-visual hallucinations of some sort are present in everyone who has schizophrenia. That is what makes delusions and hallucinations a symptom of schizophrenia. It is a symptomology present in all of them.

    Not just some. Not just most. All of them. Class dismissed.

  • Sweetie

    The purposeful ignorance goes beyond religious influence. It is a larger cultural problem. It has been nearly 60 years since we learned that homosexuality is not a mental illness and yet few people have any idea who Dr. Hooker was and what her research found. Religious propaganda and ideology plays a very large role in that perpetuating of ignorance but it’s also greatly due to our larger cultural problem of not placing enough importance on facts that have been discovered through credibly rigorous processes. There is a greater emphasis on people expressing opinions than there is on people expressing facts that they learned.

    That sounds like religion vs. atheism but it’s simpler than that. It’s really about the mistaken emphasis on self-expression over factual expression. It is demagoguery and entertainment media versus people who are careful with their opinions. Some religious people go to great lengths to be rigorous (as much as one can be within an irrational context) in their expression of opinions but that is rare for our culture.

    I have, for instance, noted that the quality of journalistic articles I’ve read on the Christian Science Monitor has often been a bit higher than most other news outlets’. Of course that site has its agenda and subsequent blind spots from biases like any other. However, what our culture needs even more than freedom from religious oppression is freedom from the oppressive mistaken notion that everyone’s opinions are of equal merit, that opinion does not rest upon fact. The signal to noise ratio of our corporate plutocracy, though, favors ignorance because it’s much easier to maintain power over people who are divided and lack the intellectual tools needed to better demand the representation and treatment they feel they deserve.

    It seems just as easy to be religious and be a proponent of people loving one another rather than doing things like opposing marriages as it is to be the opposite. The foundation of religious ideology is faith. Since faith requires no evidence… So, the bias against gay people really does not have to be religious in nature for it to exist and be a significant problem that points to larger cultural problems.

    One might argue that all non-evidentiary thought is religious given my point about faith but that argument is so abstracted from daily life that it’s really not the main issue. We all have to operate on faith to some degree since there is no objective purpose to our existence or reason for it. So, simply denigrating people for being faithful is counterproductive. A more productive approach is to ask them to place more emphasis on factual evidence as a basis for their behaviors (i.e. be less religious). This, of course, can also be dangerous as some forms of rationality can be quite inhumane, depending upon the logic one employs and thus the faithful ideological framework this rationality is plugged into.

  • fllwyrrlgin

    Perhaps you have not read the article or any of the comments here. It is a debate about science, not biblical values.

  • Maybe?

    No, being homosexual is a symptom of a mental disorder, this explains homosexuality and the other data you stated with statistical significance (Scientific proof). Yet the lobby and the money to back it prevails over scientific fact. It happens every day.

    Although I am not currently not in the fields as a practice, I have the credentials of both sociologist and psychologist, but use my knowledge and skills outside of counseling.

    I currently have several working for my companies, along with A.I. Engineers (More science) and the basis my companies are in the marketing field.

    This is what I do all day… everyday. I manipulate the minds of the weak with known and hardwired triggers to make sales online and in print.

    I have forgotten more about the human mind than you could even fathom on your best day and myself on my weakest.

    The only difference between myself and others is morals, which you lack.

    You help reinforce their delusion, I call it what it is. Who’s the bad guy here? It’s you, and you are so deluded that you buy the lie yourself.

    What you are leading too is allowing murders walk the streets because you feel sorry for them and live the lie of not having the power of decision in our personal lives, and that is not how we are wired.

    You are just as deluded as gays in general, and as i stated earlier, are likely gay yourself. Hence your rabbit defense of you know not what.

  • all too easy

    At least they had the capacity to and did change, unlike the anti crowd. How wonderfully eloquent you are when criticising others and prolific. You go on for years repeating the same blunders over and over and over and never seem to notice you are a million miles from home. Promoting hatred won’t fill your soul.

    You don’t acknowledge your errors and they are legion. LEGION

  • DrewTwoFish

    Yes, and I’m sure that the what motivated Bob’s pursuit of Sally was the impetus to increase the population.

    Please…

  • cajaquarius

    If credentials meant anything when I came to science then all your cute brinkmanship on your alledged accomplishments would mean something. Unfortunately for you, to count as real science you have to actually back up things with evidence. Not that I expect a pretender salesman playing at being a real psychologists understand.

    Homosexuality is not a symptom of a disorder or a disorder itself because it is a benign variation like I originally said. Things are neutral until they’re proven to be either inherently harmful or inherently beneficial. I have successfully rebutted every feeble attempt you’ve made to provide that “evidence”.

    The only politics in play here are being played by team mythology – the facts are on my side, friend. Your mythology is not enough to scientifically declare homosexuality a symptom or a disorder. Thanks for playing once again.

  • Maybe?

    “The concept of pedophilia has traditionally been used as a
    homogeneous mental disorder by most authors and therapists. The present study, investigating different parameters in men who offend against children, shows that men who sexually offend against boys significantly differ from those who sexually offend against girls only. They are
    differences with respect to sexual orientation, prevalence, number of victims and being sexually abused during childhood. In the course of therapy, most men who sexually offend against boys turned out to be homosexual. These findings are discussed in relation to the life situation of young homosexual boys, and with regard to therapeutic work
    with sex offenders.”

    Imagine that! You can take any part of it and look it up yourself. Then go look at the statistics of child rapist and you will see that the predominate offenders are gay men. This is highly suggestive of psychological issues that are likely in the vast majority of gay men because being gay is a mental illness. The changes of DSM were based on the ability to not show the symptoms. Just because someone does not act does not mean they lack the craving. This is psychology 101.

    Gay’s not being classified as a disorder is illogical and does not pass any scientific scrutiny or modern psychological principles. It absolutely goes against all modern science.

    You’re not my friend, let’s get that clear, you are wrong on a scientific basis, you are wrong on an ethical basis and you have mental issues.

    You will not openly state your sexual “preferences” (cool word huh? It’s telling if you look at DMS), which again leads to you being gay, and someone with psychological issues is in no way stable enough to understand science on a professional level.

    I don’t work in that field, so I can say what I please without any risk (like losing a license), so I will tell the truth here.

    You don’t let nuts analyze nuts. That’s the blind leading the blind.

    Concerning evidence, you haven’t provided any to support that gay’s are not mentally ill.

  • Maybe?

    It should have never been changed. It was politically motivated and gays sitting on the council. There was no other reasons and has been openly admitted on several occasions.

    Do you really think gay’s would vote against gay’s?

  • all too easy

    “The foundation of religious ideology is faith. Since faith requires no evidence… ”
    The foundation of religious ideology is faith? Not God? Faith in what? Is faith god? Religion is built upon anything you or anyone else happens to believe as long as there is no evidence supporting what it is that is believed?
    The foundation of religion my or may not require facts. Its foundation may include or omit that which is provable? Is there a difference in your understanding between religious ideology and religion?

  • all too easy

    “So your phrase “‘real’ mental disorder” has no meaning for me. There are real problems which arise from biological pathology, and there are real problems which do not arise from biological pathology.”
    In addition, there are real biological problems that haven’t yielded everything we seek to learn, yet, but they are not caused by anything like bad habits or lack of discipline, and respond generally incredibly well to the presence of certain drugs.

  • cajaquarius

    There was never any evidence to support it being in the DSM to begin with. That is why, political or not at it’s start, it has never been added back then. It is why I, a night shift security guard, can shit stomp arguments on your side no matter how smart or credentialed my advesary – the burden of proof is on you md yours and remains unmet.

    It really is that simple.

  • cajaquarius

    Oh boy, another chance to make an example of you.

    [Concerning evidence, you haven’t provided any to support that gay’s are not mentally ill.]

    The burden of proof isn’t on me. Are leprechauns and dragons real because nobody has any proof that they aren’t? If you want to prove homosexuality is a mental illness then you have to pony up the evidence. It is your extraordinary claim so you are the one who needs to back it up with extraordinary evidence.

    [… go look at the statistics of child rapist and you will see that the predominate offenders are gay men.]

    As an expert panel of researchers convened by the National Academy of Sciences noted in a 1993 report: “The distinction between homosexual and heterosexual child molesters relies on the premise that male molesters of male victims are homosexual in orientation. Most molesters of boys do not report sexual interest in adult men, however” (National Research Council, 1993, p. 143, citation omitted). (http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/faculty_sites/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html )

    Also, most victims of sexual assault are women/girls, not men/boys. So, more lies from the Christian rebuked. Too easy.

    [ This is highly suggestive of psychological issues that are likely in the vast majority of gay men because being gay is a mental illness.]

    Wild conjecture with no evidence. One in four women is sexually assaulted by the age of 18. This means that a frighteningly large number of men do not understand consent and would brutalize a woman or little girl given the chance. Would it be safe to say that because many straight men have an issue with rape and rape enabling that all straight men are rapists and rape enablers? It would be if we used your logic.

    [Just because someone does not act does not mean they lack the craving. This is psychology 101.]

    Wild conjecture with no evidence. Plenty of gay men go their whole lives with one guy or with a primary interest in adult men. Your mythology polluted brain is making leaps that are unsupported by evidence. What’s new?

    [Gay’s not being classified as a disorder is illogical and does not pass any scientific scrutiny or modern psychological principles. It absolutely goes against all modern science.]

    Your making assumptions and claims based off a handful of sources is not science. Much like Noah’s Ark isn’t science. Still waiting on the evidence. That burden is yours, still.

    [You’re not my friend, let’s get that clear, you are wrong on a scientific basis, you are wrong on an ethical basis and you have mental issues.]

    It was facetious on my part. You are a belligerent liar who I have exposed at every turn, carefully and methodically. I have dealt with your kind before. I actually volunteer at the local LGBT center and address high school students at assemblies here and there so I am well versed in carefully dissecting these empty talking points with patience and calm charity. I have had more than a small number of Christian students voice the same concerns and “truth” and have been happy for the opportunity to set them straight. Your insults are as meaningless as your arguments are unsupported by evidence.

    [You will not openly state your sexual “preferences” (cool word huh? It’s telling if you look at DMS), which again leads to you being gay, and someone with psychological issues is in no way stable enough to understand science on a professional level.]

    I am gay. Not that it matters. Being gay isn’t a psychological issue according to any body of Western science so it is irrelevant. The only thing my orientation towards romantically connecting to other men causes in this instance is a personal attachment to the subject at hand.

    [I don’t work in that field, so I can say what I please without any risk (like losing a license), so I will tell the truth here.]

    Whenever a Christian starts speaking of “telling the truth” I have learned to take them with a healthy degree of skepticism. They come in two flavors: the ignorant-by-design sort who don’t know much of anything they speak of and the lying psychopathic sort who the former listen to trying to smear a minority for their own gain (sell books, get people to send them money, etc).

    I am not sure which you are. It doesn’t matter, really. You are my enemy and the enemy of my brethren either way.

    [You don’t let nuts analyze nuts. That’s the blind leading the blind.]

    Most scientifically employed people and those who write the books on Psychology and Psychiatry in Britain and the States are mostly straight yet have no issue with me, nor do they consider me a “nut”.

  • Maybe?

    Yeah, it’s not supposed to be there, but they are working on not charging pedophiles that rape kids because they are not sick either…right? Or is it because 94% of male children who are raped are by gay men?

    You tell me.

  • Pingback: WILL LEE DANIELS, BISHOP YVETTE FLUNDER AND DR. FORREST HARRIS CONVINCE THE BLACK CHURCH/COMMUNITY TO AFFIRM HOMOSEXUALITY? | Wm. Dwight McKissic, Sr.()

  • Pingback: The Bible-Believing Church in Gay-Affirming America (Wm Dwight McKissic, Sr.)()

  • Pingback: Freedom to discriminate | jordan-francis-patrick-smith()

  • phone2000

    the bible clearly states it is a disorder and rebellion against GOD..sperm serves only one purpose …it swims until it finds an egg

  • LFM

    Great read on this history of homosexuality and mental illness.
    http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/faculty_sites/rainbow/html/facts_mental_health.html

  • all too easy

    I always wanted to be a lesbian.

  • Outis

    “Whenever a Christian starts speaking of “telling the truth” I have learned to take them with a healthy degree of skepticism. They come in two flavors: the ignorant-by-design sort who don’t know much of anything they speak of and the lying psychopathic sort who the former listen to trying to smear a minority for their own gain (sell books, get people to send them money, etc).”

    The minute you try and classify a group of individuals as broad as the Christians, you’re going to be completely bias, and blatantly rude. The fact that you cant adress someone’s beliefs respectfully means that your arguments are based on a personal level, and more likely going to be wrong.

    “The burden of proof isn’t on me. Are leprechauns and dragons real because nobody has any proof that they aren’t? If you want to prove homosexuality is a mental illness then you have to pony up the evidence. It is your extraordinary claim so you are the one who needs to back it up with extraordinary evidence.”

    Heres your evidence

    http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/111663.php

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/23/homosexuality–choice-born-science_n_2003361.html

    http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1815538,00.html

    http://outfrontonline.com/news/the-gay-brain-what-makes-us-lgbt/

    I can get you 100 more, or you could look for something you obviously dont want to find.

    Now, in all the definitions of a mental illness, medical and layman, they all include one thing; a mental condition (difference) that affects the victims behavior.

    Heres the definitions;

    https://www.nami.org/Learn-More/Mental-Health-Conditions

    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/mental%20illness?s=t

    http://www.merriam-webster.com/medical/mental%20disorder

    Look it up all you want; your condition is a mental illness, and no amount of political backlash is going to change the facts. Now, this definition HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE EFFECTS OF HOMOSEXUALITY. Thats a completely different topic.

    http://www.behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/2011/10/08/homosexuality-the-mental-illness-that-went-away/

    Its interesting how the facts never changed, but the liberalistic influence did, and there was a reclassification.

    “[Just because someone does not act does not mean they lack the craving. This is psychology 101.]

    Wild conjecture with no evidence. Plenty of gay men go their whole lives with one guy or with a primary interest in adult men. Your mythology polluted brain is making leaps that are unsupported by evidence. What’s new?”

    The author is referring to how

    “[ This is highly suggestive of psychological issues that are likely in the vast majority of gay men because being gay is a mental illness.]

    Wild conjecture with no evidence. One in four women is sexually assaulted by the age of 18. This means that a frighteningly large number of men do not understand consent and would brutalize a woman or little girl given the chance. Would it be safe to say that because many straight men have an issue with rape and rape enabling that all straight men are rapists and rape enablers? It would be if we used your logic.”

    Again, you misunderstand the issue, and the authors logic. The author is making the claim that the number of homosexual rapists to homosexuals is higher than the number of straight rapists is to heterosexuals. I have been unable to find statistics on the comparison, but given that most rapists are homosexuals, im inclined to believe the authors claim.

    “As an expert panel of researchers convened by the National Academy of Sciences noted in a 1993 report: “The distinction between homosexual and heterosexual child molesters relies on the premise that male molesters of male victims are homosexual in orientation. Most molesters of boys do not report sexual interest in adult men, however” (National Research Council, 1993, p. 143, citation omitted). (http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/… )”

    “As an expert panel of researchers convened by the National Academy of Sciences noted in a 1993 report: “The distinction between homosexual and heterosexual child molesters relies on the premise that male molesters of male victims are homosexual in orientation. Most molesters of boys do not report sexual interest in adult men, however” (National Research Council, 1993, p. 143, citation omitted). (http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/… )

    Pedophilia is defined as a sexual attraction toward children; homosexual pedophilia is a subclass under homosexuality; it doesnt matter if “Most molesters of boys do not report sexual interest in adult men,” because its still a form of homosexuality.

    “The claim being made is that homosexuality leads to a greater amount of disease, both mental and physical, as well as early death. Not just that some homosexuals suffer a greater degree of these issues but that it is a factor inherent to the orientation itself. Are you still with me, sweetheart?

    For these to be symptoms of the orientation itself they would need to be present in all people who have this orientation in the same way that delusions and audio-visual hallucinations of some sort are present in everyone who has schizophrenia. That is what makes delusions and hallucinations a symptom of schizophrenia. It is a symptomology present in all of them.”

    The claim being made is that due to the fact that homosexuals are more AT RISK for disease, a decrease in mental health, and lower lifespans. This can be proved because the majority of homosexuals suffer from these adjectives, and the majority of their heterosexuals dont suffer from these things.

  • Outis

    Except nothing happens when you turn 18; you’re not going to suddenly understand the impact of consent any better than you did when you were 17. Pedophilia is no different from homosexuality in the regard that if you excuse the fact that they’re both mental illnesses. For example, you might find that a 12 year old is more intellectually responsible, well-prepared, and more mature/developed than a 18 year old. Age does nothing in that regard, because theres no way of measuring it. Consent by underage people should be allowed through a series a tests, because the age system makes no logical sense.

    “A human abusing an animal = consent impossible

    A human abusing a corpse = consent impossible”

    The corpse is not alive, and is inanimate. Its not different from fucking a lamp. Animals cannot give consent in the human language, but consent shouldnt limited to this language alone; consent can be expressed in many ways.

    http://www.onlinedebate.net/forums/showthread.php/14297-Animals-*can*-consent-to-sex

    Heres something to think about.

  • Persimmon

    Re : “Disorder denotes a negative trait”. Disorder denotes ‘not in order’. Being left-handed is not a personality disorder and should not be put forward as a comparison. Transgender and Trans-sexual are similarly disorders of gender/identity and may be used comparatively.
    Re: ” Chromosomes are determinant of our biological sex. The gender of our mind….” There is no separation between our mind and our personality/identity. They are synonymous. Chromosomes ARE the determinant of gender and mis-identification of gender is indeed symptomatic of a personality disorder.
    If it is your perception that a COMPETENT Psychiatrist will, metaphorically speaking, strike a homosexual with a ruler to bring about a change of condition, then you are greatly misguided. As for males wanting to wear a skirt or a male being trapped in a female husk – the only entrapment is being trapped in a damaged psyche – and that entrapment is by choice.
    There is nothing wrong with being homosexual – it is, however, a personality disorder. A treatable disorder. Its just easier to continue as before, isn’t it?
    Having an opinion on a subject is not the same as having expertise on a subject.

  • Diego

    If I was to make a statement about this, I would say that there are indeed no mental illnesses, but there are cerebral illnesses; like any other organ in the human body, the brain can be fouled by desease and sickness, which does not make people suffering from them in anyway unfit for life or society.

  • Outis

    Man, it astonishes me how people assume theres proof without even trying to find it. You obviously havent tried to even find proof of homosexuality being a mentally illness; if you had, a quick Google search would sufficed to find the evidence. So many different studies offer proof of the existence of a mental difference within homosexuals minds. Then, from there, knowing the definition of a term “mental illness” would have helped you. Mental illness describes an abnormality in a persons brain that affects their behavior; homosexuals definitely fit the bill.

  • A J MacDonald Jr

    “In The Seven Deadly Sins, Solomon Schimmel explains why psychology must incorporate many of the ethical and spiritual values of religion and moral philosophy if it is to effectively address the emotional problems faced by modern men and women, be they believers or agnostics. Drawing on the psychological insights of the Bible, Aristotle, Maimonides, Aquinas, and Shakespeare, among others, he shows how all of us can learn from them about the relationship between virtue and psychological well-being and vice and emotional distress. This insightful and fascinating work guides us to master our passions rather than be enslaved by them so that we can become more humane and build a happier, caring society.” Google: “The Seven Deadly Sins: Jewish, Christian, and Classical Reflections on HUman Psychology”

  • cajaquarius

    [The minute you try and classify a group of individuals as broad as the Christians, you’re going to be completely bias, and blatantly rude. The fact that you cant adress someone’s beliefs respectfully means that your arguments are based on a personal level, and more likely going to be wrong.]

    Of course, it isn’t all Christians, just the ones pushing this anti-gay crusade. And I do approach their beliefs, honestly. I tear away their nonsense and strip away their grotesque abuses of logic and fabricated evidence put forth by the likes of the Family Research Council, National Organization for Marriage, Mass Resistance, and others. I merely cast light on it. I don’t cause the rot, I simply reveal your fruit for what it is. Nothing more, nothing less.

    [Heres your evidence (that homosexuality is a mental illness)]

    I see four links claiming that there is different brain architecture involved in what makes a homosexual a homosexual but nothing that corroborates that it is a mental illness. It is nothing more than a benign variation, no different from being left handed (another condition that involved different wiring in the brain).

    [Now, in all the definitions of a mental illness, medical and layman, they all include one thing; a mental condition (difference) that affects the victims behavior.]

    The forked tongue of the Christian attempts to strike again.

    The definition of mental illness, taken from one of your sources (Let’s go with Merriam-Webster) is as follows: “a mental or bodily condition marked primarily by sufficient disorganization of personality, mind, and emotions to seriously impair the normal psychological functioning of the individual—called also mental illness.”

    You are peddling more of your poisonous logic and I am afraid it will avail you nothing with me. Notice the “…serious impair to the normal psychological functioning of the individual”.

    An illness requires symptoms. It is inherently negative. That is why it is called disease. Disease. A lack of ease. This brings us, full circle to why you and Maybe failed here and will continue to fail in the greater culture – there are no symptoms and there is no disease. It’s original classification was unfounded. That is why it has never been added back no matter how much you may wish it would be.

    [Now, this definition HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE EFFECTS OF HOMOSEXUALITY. Thats a completely different topic.]

    Maybe and his brethren set that goal post, not I. He and others here have attempted to argue that the manifested negative features of homosexuality (pedophilia, STDs, and so on) were symptoms of homosexuality itself. He attempted to corroborate his unfounded view and I rebutted by pointing out the ill-conceived nature of the very evidence they sought to use.

    [Again, you misunderstand the issue, and the authors logic. The author is making the claim that the number of homosexual rapists to homosexuals is higher than the number of straight rapists is to heterosexuals. I have been unable to find statistics on the comparison, but given that most rapists are homosexuals, im inclined to believe the authors claim.]

    Most rape victims are women and the most common perpetrator is male. Even if the data showed a higher incidence of sexual assault between gay male couples, most rapists are men. When two men make up a relationship the chances that one of them is a perpetrator will go up because there are two men involved. It is very basic math. Men are the problem, not the orientation.

    But it is all moot because it is irrelevant data. You cannot link this to the orientation itself so it is not a symptom of homosexuality in and of itself. It doesn’t support your argument, only gives me yet another example of a forked tongue Christian twisting evidence to support their “Truth”.

    [Pedophilia is defined as a sexual attraction toward children; homosexual pedophilia is a subclass under homosexuality; it doesnt matter if “Most molesters of boys do not report sexual interest in adult men,” because its still a form of homosexuality.]

    Not according to the leading researchers studying pedophilia, any university, the World Health Organization, or the American Psychiatric Association. You are reading what you want into it because it is in your best interest to transform homosexuals into a demonized caste in society. A tired game and all too easy to rebut.

    [The claim being made is that due to the fact that homosexuals are more AT RISK for disease, a decrease in mental health, and lower lifespans. This can be proved because the majority of homosexuals suffer from these adjectives, and the majority of their heterosexuals dont suffer from these things.]

    The claim being made was that these increased risks somehow prove that homosexuality is a disease. When I demanded the symptoms of this so called mental illness I was fed these risks. I have successfully rebutted that claim, as you can see from the original statement.

    How easily the lies of the Christian fail when light is cast upon them. Is this the best your God can do? Are you really His best champion? You who must resort to lying and half-truth to get people to believe in this “truth” you try to peddle?

    If this is the best your God can do I have little to fear from Him.

  • cajaquarius

    A mental illness is an abnormality that has a negative impact on the person in question. A love or disdain for sour foods is also based in the brain. Being left handed is also due to wiring differences in the brain. These are not mental illnesses, however.

    Mental difference is no more mental illness than dark skin is inferior to light colored skin.

  • cajaquarius

    [Being left-handed is not a personality disorder and should not be put forward as a comparison. Transgender and Trans-sexual are similarly disorders of gender/identity and may be used comparatively.]

    If we define disorder in your terms then, yes, being left handed is a disorder because the majority are right handed, thus being left handed (around 10% of the population) is ‘disordered’. Not in order. Not the norm. Disorder in a medical and psychological sense is not merely ‘not in order’ though. If it was then being a MENSA genius would be a neurological disorder since being a genius is rare and thus not in order with the norm. Disorder in medicine and psychology is a lack of order that leads to a reduced quality of life and/or reduced functioning.

    Considering one of the latest stories in the media concerning transgender people is one who was a Navy SEAL one of the most selective and most rigourous special forces programs in the Western world, I fail to see impaired function or quality of life. Because transgender and trans-sexual people are no more negatively symptomatic than left handed people, it is a perfect analogy.

    [There is no separation between our mind and our personality/identity. They are synonymous. Chromosomes ARE the determinant of gender and mis-identification of gender is indeed symptomatic of a personality disorder.]

    Our understanding of the human brain and it’s workings are in their infancy. We understand the brain about as well as human beings in 1800 understood the moon. They had telescopes and has even mapped it in some ways but it was still tens of thousands of kilometers beyond our reach.

    Gender is a construct of society. Groups like the Betek of Malaysia prove that manliness and femininity are learned traits. Considering how little we know of the brain and how fragile gender as a concept is, you can’t say anything for sure.

    [As for males wanting to wear a skirt or a male being trapped in a female husk – the only entrapment is being trapped in a damaged psyche – and that entrapment is by choice. There is nothing wrong with being homosexual – it is, however, a personality disorder. A treatable disorder.]

    Why treat what has no negative ramifications?

    [Having an opinion on a subject is not the same as having expertise on a subject.]

    I couldn’t agree more. The World Health Organization, Harvard, Standford, the American Psychiatric Association; they have all spoken and they agree with me.

  • all too easy

    Fictional, contrived, non-existent mental illnesses were created by Hickey and his pals because they had no patients/clients. Did any of them succeed helping anyone with any DSM diagnosis, ever, even once? Nothing in the literature of which I’m aware.

  • all too easy

    Everyone visiting a psychiatrist gets a label and is forced to take toxic drugs. It is capitalism at its best. Their goal is to place everyone under their control forever. The toxins kill all who take them, even one time. Forty seven years after taking one Wellbutrin, Mary, not her real name, still can’t tie her shoes or pet her cat without sneezing. Thanks to that one pill.

    Everyone who takes an antipsychotic drug becomes bipolar, even though there is no such thing. Then, they become manic and wind up chasing mailman or trapeze artists afraid of heights. It is all in my latest book, “HOW TO SUE YOUR SHRINK FOR BIG BUCKS BECAUSE SHE TRIED TO KILL YOU WITH LEGAL DRUGS THAT SAID RIGHT ON THE LABEL, PLUS SHE TOLD YOU THREE TIMES, DANGEROUS SIDE EFFECTS MAY OCCUR, CONTACT YOUR PRESCRIBING PHYSICIAM IMMEDIATELY IF YOU START BARKING AT GOLDFISH. EARN MILLIONS TODAY, JUST BUY ME TODAY FOR THREE HUNDRED BUCKS AND I WILL GIVE YOU ALL THE TOOLS YOU NEED TO WHIP THEM BAD DOCS AND CLEAR SEVENTY-FIVE MILL.”

    O yes. I almost forgot. HATE YOUR PSYCHIATRIST right now.

  • Steve’s Gift Shoppe

    What’s noteworthy about this is that the removal of homosexuality from
    the list of mental illnesses was not triggered by some scientific
    breakthrough. There was no new fact or set of facts that stimulated
    this major change. Rather, it was the simple reality that gay people
    started to kick up a fuss. (Quoted)…. and so, now, it is being promoted and propagandized to further the gay / nazi agenda. Shameful. Pizza anyone? Cake? Flowers? Catering? Chicken? 44 magunum?

  • Persimmon

    No, being left-handed is NOT a disorder. Neither is it a disorder of gender identity and should not be used in comparison.
    ‘Not in order’ in this instance means not in accordance with his/her personality as defined by his/her individual chromosomes of gender. We are not talking about intellect. Nor are we talking about quality of life. Your analogy is most imperfect analogy.
    As regards the “understanding of the human brain”, you would have correctly stated that YOUR understanding of the human brain is in its infancy. Your use of the term “our understanding” should not be used all-inclusively.
    Gender is NOT a “construct of society”.
    Having an opinion on a subject is not the same as having expertise on a subject – (my quote). I re-affirm the quote. Do you really think that The World Health Organization, Harvard, Stanford, the American Psychiatric Association are not capable of being misguided, being left behind? Do you really think those with TRUE expertise – those who heal their patients without medication, shock therapy, who go about doing – not teaching, know less about the human psyche/personality, its disorders and treatments/cures for, than those who go about beating their chests in self-promotion over their self-professed expertise, shouting it loudly in self-promotion while getting into positions far beyond their ability do? Yes? Then you must live in a flat earth world. A world where he who shouts loudest should be listened to. I don’t.

  • William Parsons

    All life exhibits 7 signs by which it may be identified and assessed: growth, nutrition, transport, elimination, respiration, repair, and reproduction. Homosexuals cannot reproduce, ergo, are not functioning within normal parameters. This is a scientific fact, and is a long way from suggesting that any human should be mistreated or deprived of basic dignity and rights. However, it does suggest that the normalization of homosexuality is politically, and not scientifically based

  • MikanJeni Cagle

    Could an article be any more biased? I notice you’ve ‘conveniently” failed to mention the report on homosexuality from the ENCYCLOPEDIA OF SUICIDE which states how homosexual men are the highest group for suicide in the world. It also refutes the false claim that the amount of suicides among deviant men are primarily due to a lack of social acceptance by comparing the Suicides in the United States by deviant men Vs. Suicides by the sexually deviant in areas such as Paris, France where homosexuality has been openly accepted for centuries. Indeed the suicide rates are even higher in areas where it is accepted, perhaps not surprisingly regardless of population.

  • cajaquarius

    [It also refutes the false claim that the amount of suicides among deviant men are primarily due to a lack of social acceptance by comparing the Suicides in the United States by deviant men Vs. Suicides by the sexually deviant in areas such as Paris, France where homosexuality has been openly accepted for centuries.]

    More lies from the fork tongued Christian. Homosexuality has, at best, been accepted for only a century in even the most liberal parts of Europe and there is still a huge undertone in places like France of homophobia and religious bigotry as we saw with the gay marriage fiasco there when the Christlings and their Muslim brothers-in-arms crawled from their fetid shadows to harass the LGBT in the streets there during the whole ordeal. The malignant cancer of bible/qua-ran-thumping delusion is present even in the most liberal societies, ever waiting in the shadows.

    You are a liar and your God is a weak, vicious, pathetic creature no more worthy of my consideration than excrement on the bottom of my shoe.

  • cajaquarius

    It never should have been classified as a disease to begin with. Science was never on the side of the empty headed, ignorant Christians – you animals merely controlled the world for awhile. That age, thankfully, has come and gone.

  • cajaquarius

    [‘Not in order’ in this instance means not in accordance with his/her personality as defined by his/her individual chromosomes of gender.]

    The X and Y chromosomes do not define personality or psyche of an individual. They may have an effect on it but they do not define it because, as I have already proven, gender is a construct.

    [We are not talking about intellect. Nor are we talking about quality of life. Your analogy is a most imperfect analogy.]

    As I have already pointed out, the quality of a persons life is unaffected by homosexuality or gender identity in and of itself. The analogy still stands.

    [As regards the “understanding of the human brain”, you would have correctly stated that YOUR understanding of the human brain is in its infancy. Your use of the term “our understanding” should not be used all-inclusively.]

    Actually, considering we only started really mapping out the brain in 2013 using electroencephalography and even the neurologists using this have compared it to looking down at a network of lights from a satellite in space, my terminology was correct. Psychology and neurology have only existed for a few hundred years in any reasonable form.

    [Besides, we are not talking about the human brain, but the human psyche.]

    Because that has nothing to do with the brain. Sure, whatever you say, pal. Thanks for showing you have no idea what you are talking about, by the way. Saves me time.

    [Having an opinion on a subject is not the same as having expertise on a subject – (my quote). I re-affirm the quote. Do you really think that The World Health Organization, Harvard, Stanford, the American Psychiatric Association are not capable of being misguided, being left behind?]

    Oh, sure, they can be but you have yet to provide compelling evidence that they have been left behind so I think I will err on the side of science and facts.

    [Do you really think those with TRUE expertise – those who heal their patients without medication, shock therapy, who go about doing – not teaching, know less about the human psyche/personality, its disorders and treatments/cures for, than those who go about beating their chests in self-promotion over their self-professed expertise while getting into positions far beyond their ability do?]

    Again, not seeing any evidence of these miracle doctors who cure their patients with magic and prayers. I think I will err on the side of science and facts here too.

    [Yes? Then you must live in a flat earth world.]

    I can prove that the world is not round with evidence and support my view that it is round. You, on the other hand, cannot prove that homosexuality and transgender people suffer from any sort of disorder worthy of treating.

    [A world where he who shouts loudest should be listened to. I don’t.]

    What you don’t believe in is evidence that contradicts your magical view of the world where angels and demons are to blame for chemical imbalances and maladies of the flesh.

  • cajaquarius

    So I take it you believe that the normalization of homosexuals, people who are rendered sterile, the elderly who are post menopausal, and so on is a political ploy and questionable (I would be willing to bet you have some horsesh*t excuse for why the latter two don’t count but the icky gays do so I stand ready to tear you apart when you, predictably, respond with this nonsense, just so you know).

    The fact is, it is either normalization or mistreatment. There is no middle ground. There are no alternatives. There is no compromise. You are either treating people as full human beings or you are treating them as subhuman.

  • Jack

    Still a mental illness and always will be. A manifest perversion against God and nature. Makes no sense according to biological evolution and Freud had it right.

  • Persimmon

    “As you have already proven”? Not in the slightest! Only to your own satisfaction.

    X and Y chromosomes determine the gender of an individual and are the SOLE determinant of it. Where there is confusion of gender identity there is psychological damage. This does not impair intellect – Turing is a prime example of this – nor does it impair ability. Even extra chromosomes of gender do not prevent the affected person from living a meaningful, functional and happy life – but that does not detract from the fact that non-identification with one’s gender-specific chromosomes is a personality disorder.

    Do you really think competent psychiatrists are dependent upon brain-mapping? Neurologists are not psychiatrists – of any calibre!

    ‘Psyche’ in the context I had used related to identity – to personality – that portion of self which becomes damaged and in many instances requires curative treatment by a competent ‘psych(e)’iatrist – one who treats and heals the psyche – not the brain. Identity disorders. Personality disorders. ‘Psych’ological disorders.

  • Persimmon cont’d

    Cont’d.
    “I have yet to provide compelling evidence”? What would you consider compelling evidence? I can only provide compelling argument here. To list the myriad misconceptions in Medicine as practised by GPs, many Psychiatrists, in Medical Dictionaries – even in Nobel Awards to individuals who only have part of the story – the balance would be beyond their realm of understanding and of those making such awards – is beyond the purpose of these posts which concern the personality disorder of homosexuality and associated disorders.
    The problem with psychiatry is that everyone thinks he is the expert – so much better than others – and with no desire to broaden the scope of their understanding, do not engage in meaningful discussion with those more learned – in the interest of their patients and their professional integrity. Each simply goes his own way. In consequence of which their patients are inappropriately treated and usually medicated instead, and, without appropriate treatment, do not get well. They simply provide a lucrative source of income for psychiatrists whose main interest is in filling their appointment book and strutting their stuff.
    Your unwillingness to understand what I am saying is evidenced in “my magical view of the world where angels and demons are to blame for chemical imbalances and maladies of the flesh”. If I am making a correct interpretation of your statement – I would clarify that my knowledge has nothing to do with chemical imbalances as the cause of homosexuality and associated disorders of gender identity. It is caused by damage to the individual’s psyche.

  • Brandon Broze

    You can try to rationalize your bigotry and heteronormative bullcrap all you want… but a traditionalist idiot is still a traditionalist idiot.

    D-bag likely DOES NOT KNOW actual gay people and, thusly, makes loads of crap up about them based on rumors and lies he heard via Fox News or one of SEVERAL OTHER far-right propaganda mills.

    I find it HILARIOUS that you think that preaching hate, bigotry and/or discrimination is somehow “moral”, while preaching love, acceptance, tolerance and *leaving harmless folks alone who are hurting no one and simply want to be full citizens like the rest of us* is “immoral.”

    What a warped ‘moral compass’… Please don’t tell me you profess to be a “Christian”, too?? What would your precious Jesus say? Do you REALLY THINK He’d support OSTRACIZING one of his ‘children’ (or God’s children)?? Please…

  • Brandon Broze

    Stop getting your “news” from biased, far-right outlets, freak show.

    “In 1952, the APA listed homosexuality in the DSM as a sociopathic personality disturbance. Homosexuality: A Psychoanalytic Study of Male Homosexuals,
    a large-scale 1962 study of homosexuality, was used to justify
    inclusion of the disorder as a supposed pathological hidden fear of the
    opposite sex caused by traumatic parent–child relationships. This view
    was widely influential in the medical profession.[18] In 1956, however, the psychologist Evelyn Hooker
    performed a study that compared the happiness and well-adjusted nature
    of self-identified homosexual men with heterosexual men and found no
    difference”

    That’s just ONE piece of evidence disputing your absurd idea that, “There was no scientific evidence to take it out of the DSM”! As early as 1956!

    “In 1956, Hooker presented the results of her research in a paper at the American Psychological Association’s convention in Chicago.
    The NIMH was so impressed with the evidence Hooker found they granted
    her the NIMH Research Career Award in 1961 to continue her work.

    Her studies contributed to a change in the attitudes of the
    psychological community toward homosexuality and to the American
    Psychiatric Association’s decision to remove homosexuality from its handbook of disorders in 1973. This in turn helped change the attitude of society at large.”

  • Maggie Thomas

    Wow so this one opinion about” there is just people” is the last word? Obsurd

  • Maggie Thomas

    I understand your comment here but the Bible is also full of science , just sayin.

Previous post:

Next post: