• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is homosexuality a mental illness?

Southern Man

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
2,219
Reaction score
296
Location
The Beautiful Yadkin Valley
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
The definition of mental illness is:
Any of various psychiatric conditions, usually characterized by impairment of an individual's normal cognitive, emotional, or behavioral functioning, and caused by physiological or psychosocial factors (1).
Much is made about the American Psychiatric Association 1973 decision to de-list homosexuality as a mental illness. However less than 19% of its members voted for delisting, and even proponents concede that “Gay activism was clearly the force that propelled the APA to declassify homosexuality.(2)”

Homosexuality is clearly an impairment of normal behavioral functioning. Again back to medical definitions, normal is: “agreeing with the regular and established type.” Here the “regular and established type” is clearly heterosexual behavior. Major national surveys of sexual behavior have consistently shown that less than three percent of the American population identify themselves as homosexual or bisexual. The National Health and Social Life Survey found that 2.8% of the male, and 1.4% of the female, population identify themselves as gay, lesbian, or bisexual (3). Therefore, based on these small percentages, homosexual behavior functioning does not agree with the regular and established behavior, therefore it is not “normal” behavior.

Homosexuality is caused by physiological factors. Again, the medical definitions: “physiological: being in accord with or characteristic of the normal functioning of a living organism”, and “life: the property or quality that distinguishes living organisms from dead organisms and inanimate matter, manifested in functions such as metabolism, growth, reproduction, and response to stimuli”. Therefore a living being that does not behave in a manner that allows reproduction is not in accord with its normal functioning.

Homosexuality is also caused by psychosocial factors. There is some argument that homosexuals are ‘born that way’, however research on identical twins and maternal X chromosome inheritance has failed to provide a correlation with sexual orientation (4). Claims that the hypothalamus is a determination of sexuality have been shown to be unsubstantiated (5). Perhaps some homosexuals are genetically predisposed, but there is little argument that other homosexuals choose their lifestyle. Even the APA admits that “no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors (6)” If homosexuality isn’t caused by genetics in all cases, then it must be caused by psychosocial factors in some cases.

This leads us back to the definition of mental illness. Homosexuality impairs normal behavioral functioning, the behavior impairs the individual’s ability to reproduce normally, and at least in some cases is caused by psychosocial factors. Therefore the answer to the question “Is homosexuality a mental illness?” must be found to be “yes”.

Endnotes

1. Medical Dictionary

2. http://www.connect2mason.com/homosex...ental_illness2

3. See Laumann et al., The Social Organization of Sex: Sexual Practices in the United States (1994).

4. Sexual Orientation, Determinants of

5. HOMOSEXUALITY 1; HMS1 - OMIM Result

6. http://www.apa.org/pi/about/newslett...re-update.aspx
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,659
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
The definition of mental illness is:

Much is made about the American Psychiatric Association 1973 decision to de-list homosexuality as a mental illness. However less than 19% of its members voted for delisting, and even proponents concede that “Gay activism was clearly the force that propelled the APA to declassify homosexuality.(2)”

Homosexuality is clearly an impairment of normal behavioral functioning. Again back to medical definitions, normal is: “agreeing with the regular and established type.” Here the “regular and established type” is clearly heterosexual behavior. Major national surveys of sexual behavior have consistently shown that less than three percent of the American population identify themselves as homosexual or bisexual. The National Health and Social Life Survey found that 2.8% of the male, and 1.4% of the female, population identify themselves as gay, lesbian, or bisexual (3). Therefore, based on these small percentages, homosexual behavior functioning does not agree with the regular and established behavior, therefore it is not “normal” behavior.

Homosexuality is caused by physiological factors. Again, the medical definitions: “physiological: being in accord with or characteristic of the normal functioning of a living organism”, and “life: the property or quality that distinguishes living organisms from dead organisms and inanimate matter, manifested in functions such as metabolism, growth, reproduction, and response to stimuli”. Therefore a living being that does not behave in a manner that allows reproduction is not in accord with its normal functioning.

Homosexuality is also caused by psychosocial factors. There is some argument that homosexuals are ‘born that way’, however research on identical twins and maternal X chromosome inheritance has failed to provide a correlation with sexual orientation (4). Claims that the hypothalamus is a determination of sexuality have been shown to be unsubstantiated (5). Perhaps some homosexuals are genetically predisposed, but there is little argument that other homosexuals choose their lifestyle. Even the APA admits that “no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors (6)” If homosexuality isn’t caused by genetics in all cases, then it must be caused by psychosocial factors in some cases.

This leads us back to the definition of mental illness. Homosexuality impairs normal behavioral functioning, the behavior impairs the individual’s ability to reproduce normally, and at least in some cases is caused by psychosocial factors. Therefore the answer to the question “Is homosexuality a mental illness?” must be found to be “yes”.
I actually think you make a very good case for it. What real difference does it make, though? If it is a mental illness, that should be all the more reason that we treat homosexuals with respect. And allow them to swing their arms alllll they want as long as they don't hit heterosexuals in the nose with them.
 

Technocratic

Active member
Joined
Sep 7, 2010
Messages
359
Reaction score
103
Location
Soviet Technate
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
As a probing question, would not the corrolary be that your own heterosexuality must have been trained and psychosocial?

When, then, were you trained to find women attractive? Did it not come naturally to you? :lol:
 

rivrrat

Goddess of Bacon
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
13,988
Reaction score
6,593
Location
Charlottesville, VA
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The definition of mental illness is:

Much is made about the American Psychiatric Association 1973 decision to de-list homosexuality as a mental illness. However less than 19% of its members voted for delisting, and even proponents concede that “Gay activism was clearly the force that propelled the APA to declassify homosexuality.(2)”

Homosexuality is clearly an impairment of normal behavioral functioning. Again back to medical definitions, normal is: “agreeing with the regular and established type.” Here the “regular and established type” is clearly heterosexual behavior. Major national surveys of sexual behavior have consistently shown that less than three percent of the American population identify themselves as homosexual or bisexual. The National Health and Social Life Survey found that 2.8% of the male, and 1.4% of the female, population identify themselves as gay, lesbian, or bisexual (3). Therefore, based on these small percentages, homosexual behavior functioning does not agree with the regular and established behavior, therefore it is not “normal” behavior.

Homosexuality is caused by physiological factors. Again, the medical definitions: “physiological: being in accord with or characteristic of the normal functioning of a living organism”, and “life: the property or quality that distinguishes living organisms from dead organisms and inanimate matter, manifested in functions such as metabolism, growth, reproduction, and response to stimuli”. Therefore a living being that does not behave in a manner that allows reproduction is not in accord with its normal functioning.

Homosexuality is also caused by psychosocial factors. There is some argument that homosexuals are ‘born that way’, however research on identical twins and maternal X chromosome inheritance has failed to provide a correlation with sexual orientation (4). Claims that the hypothalamus is a determination of sexuality have been shown to be unsubstantiated (5). Perhaps some homosexuals are genetically predisposed, but there is little argument that other homosexuals choose their lifestyle. Even the APA admits that “no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors (6)” If homosexuality isn’t caused by genetics in all cases, then it must be caused by psychosocial factors in some cases.

This leads us back to the definition of mental illness. Homosexuality impairs normal behavioral functioning, the behavior impairs the individual’s ability to reproduce normally, and at least in some cases is caused by psychosocial factors. Therefore the answer to the question “Is homosexuality a mental illness?” must be found to be “yes”.

Endnotes

1. Medical Dictionary

2. http://www.connect2mason.com/homosex...ental_illness2

3. See Laumann et al., The Social Organization of Sex: Sexual Practices in the United States (1994).

4. Sexual Orientation, Determinants of

5. HOMOSEXUALITY 1; HMS1 - OMIM Result

6. http://www.apa.org/pi/about/newslett...re-update.aspx

And, since heterosexuality must be caused by 'psychosocial factors' too, and the vast majority of heterosexuals engage in behavior that impairs their ability to reproduce, I would argue that they're mentall ill as well.

So, I guess if you consider using birth control and abtaining from sex to be "mental illnesses" too, then sure. :lol: Heteros, bis, and homosexuals are all mentally ill.
 

Southern Man

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
2,219
Reaction score
296
Location
The Beautiful Yadkin Valley
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I actually think you make a very good case for it. What real difference does it make, though? If it is a mental illness, that should be all the more reason that we treat homosexuals with respect. And allow them to swing their arms alllll they want as long as they don't hit heterosexuals in the nose with them.
The arguent doesn't advocate treating anyone with disrepect. The issue here is that pshrinks are doing gays a disservice by telling them that their condition is normal.
 

Southern Man

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
2,219
Reaction score
296
Location
The Beautiful Yadkin Valley
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
As a probing question, would not the corrolary be that your own heterosexuality must have been trained and psychosocial?

When, then, were you trained to find women attractive? Did it not come naturally to you? :lol:
My sexuality isn't part of the discussion.
 

Southern Man

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
2,219
Reaction score
296
Location
The Beautiful Yadkin Valley
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
And, since heterosexuality must be caused by 'psychosocial factors' too, and the vast majority of heterosexuals engage in behavior that impairs their ability to reproduce, I would argue that they're mentall ill as well.

So, I guess if you consider using birth control and abtaining from sex to be "mental illnesses" too, then sure. :lol: Heteros, bis, and homosexuals are all mentally ill.
Your premise is flawed. Birth control merely "controls" the ability to procreate. It simply allows folks to enjoy natural sex without the resultant natural process of pregnancy until such time that they want it to occur.
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,659
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
The arguent doesn't advocate treating anyone with disrepect. The issue here is that pshrinks are doing gays a disservice by telling them that their condition is normal.
I see. Well, I'm thinking that the average homosexual already knows he's/she's not normal when compared to the rest of society. But it's quite normal to most of them. I think it's pretty common knowledge that a particular homosexual can be "cured" to abstain. But change? Be cured? I don't think so. I don't think one's sexual orientation should be looked on as something that needs to be "cured." It simply is what it is.
 

rivrrat

Goddess of Bacon
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
13,988
Reaction score
6,593
Location
Charlottesville, VA
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Your premise is flawed. Birth control merely "controls" the ability to procreate. It simply allows folks to enjoy natural sex without the resultant natural process of pregnancy until such time that they want it to occur.
You said, and I quote:

"behavior impairs the individual’s ability to reproduce normally"

Using birth control does that. So does abstaining. So does having oral sex.


I see. Well, I'm thinking that the average homosexual already knows he's/she's not normal when compared to the rest of society. But it's quite normal to most of them. I think it's pretty common knowledge that a particular homosexual can be "cured" to abstain. But change? Be cured? I don't think so. I don't think one's sexual orientation should be looked on as something that needs to be "cured." It simply is what it is.
I disagree. I don't consider my sexuality abnormal. I am normal, and I surely don't need a shrink or anyone else to tell me that.
 

Aunt Spiker

Cheese
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
28,433
Reaction score
16,986
Location
Sasnakra
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
As a probing question, would not the corrolary be that your own heterosexuality must have been trained and psychosocial?

When, then, were you trained to find women attractive? Did it not come naturally to you? :lol:
Actually - gender specific issues are natural. As the case of Jane and John shows us (twins - both boys at birth - one was mutilated during a botched circumcision. They made decision to raise him as a 'her' - didn't work. "she" grew up with gender identity issues as a result of their approach to the situation).

You can make a being dress like a girl
Act like a girl
Talk like a girl
Play like a girl.

But if the being is not female - it will not become female. . . and vise versa.
Gender identity is natural and instinctive - how *much* it's sculpted and to *what* extent is where the culture, social and family aspects come into the equation.

I think the same for sexuality - there's a level of 'natural' to it - and the extent to how *much* and to *what* extent is culture, social and family wise. . . among other inferences.
 

Southern Man

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
2,219
Reaction score
296
Location
The Beautiful Yadkin Valley
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I see. Well, I'm thinking that the average homosexual already knows he's/she's not normal when compared to the rest of society. But it's quite normal to most of them. I think it's pretty common knowledge that a particular homosexual can be "cured" to abstain. But change? Be cured? I don't think so. I don't think one's sexual orientation should be looked on as something that needs to be "cured." It simply is what it is.
So be it for the "normal" argument then. But the pshrink also tells the gay that he doesn't suffer from a mental illness; a disservice.
 

Southern Man

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
2,219
Reaction score
296
Location
The Beautiful Yadkin Valley
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
You said, and I quote:

"behavior impairs the individual’s ability to reproduce normally"

Using birth control does that. So does abstaining. So does having oral sex.
All you did was repeat your flawed premise. Perhaps this topic is too close to you for you to debate logically.
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,659
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
So does having oral sex. I disagree. I don't consider my sexuality abnormal. I am normal, and I surely don't need a shrink or anyone else to tell me that.
Your sexuality isn't abnormal to you. It is abnormal in the sense that it isn't 'typical or regular or conforming to the norm.' One wouldn't think you would have a problem with that definition. To think that a homosexual believes he/she IS typical or conforming to the norm seems odd.
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,659
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
So be it for the "normal" argument then. But the pshrink also tells the gay that he doesn't suffer from a mental illness; a disservice.
There's enough information out there for homosexuals to make their own distinctions. If a particular homosexual thinks he has a mental illness, then he probably does. But why would one want to foist a label on someone that would be detrimental to them? If they don't think they're broke, why tell them they are?
 

rivrrat

Goddess of Bacon
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
13,988
Reaction score
6,593
Location
Charlottesville, VA
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
All you did was repeat your flawed premise. Perhaps this topic is too close to you for you to debate logically.
No, I repeated YOUR flawed premise. You're the one that used the silly qualification of "behavior impairs the individual’s ability to reproduce normally".

Feel free to show how using birth control and/or having oral sex isn't behavior that impairs the individual's ability to reproduce normally. Otherwise, one might have to conclude that the topic is too close to YOU to debate logically.
 
Last edited:

Southern Man

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
2,219
Reaction score
296
Location
The Beautiful Yadkin Valley
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
There's enough information out there for homosexuals to make their own distinctions. If a particular homosexual thinks he has a mental illness, then he probably does. But why would one want to foist a label on someone that would be detrimental to them? If they don't think they're broke, why tell them they are?
I suppose you could make that argument with anyone who had a mental illness and was happy about it. But what about the ones who aren't happy? What about the ones who want a cure?
 

Southern Man

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
2,219
Reaction score
296
Location
The Beautiful Yadkin Valley
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
No, I repeated YOUR flawed premise. You're the one that used the silly qualification of "behavior impairs the individual’s ability to reproduce normally".

Feel free to show how using birth control and/or having oral sex isn't behavior that impairs the individual's ability to reproduce normally. Otherwise, one might have to conclude that the topic is too close to YOU to debate logically.
Clearly you are too emotional about this issue to put forth a logical argument. Just let it be then.
 

Technocratic

Active member
Joined
Sep 7, 2010
Messages
359
Reaction score
103
Location
Soviet Technate
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The definition of mental illness is:

Much is made about the American Psychiatric Association 1973 decision to de-list homosexuality as a mental illness. However less than 19% of its members voted for delisting, and even proponents concede that “Gay activism was clearly the force that propelled the APA to declassify homosexuality.(2)”
While activism was important, the acknolwedgement of that motive force should not be used to construe that the actual rationale for de-listing was political. On the contrary, a comprehensive analysis of the literature was studied, and the reasoning behind listing homosexuality as a mental disorder was seen as fraudulent or had poor methodology.

For example, classifying homosexuality as a mental disorder was founded almost exclusively on a non-representative sampling of people. Most were psych ward patients or criminals already admitted for mental disorders. That's a terrible methodology. You might as well conclude people with mustaches are mentally disabled by taking your sample from the mustached people in psych wards. THey used the reality that many had increased levels of criminal behaviour, deviant behaviour, or suicide tendenciesgot they were dealing with ward patients.

Moreover, a great deal of mental problems gays have stem from cultural persecution and pressures. To claim being gay is the cause of the psycho social distress is a classic false cause fallacy: being gay doesn't make gays sad, depressed, or "ill." The people around them do. Many American Christians suffer from persecution syndrome, and already display similiar traits, except, they aren't actually persecuted. Gays are, and thus, their severe. I guess Christians must be mentally disabled.


Edit: ** Ironically, there's actually a much better case for claimng religious people have a mental illness than are gays, given religious people in general believe they have personal relationship with an invisible, imaginary friend who lives in the clouds. But hey, we all know religion is "a sacred cow" and thus excluded from the definition of mental illness arbitrarily. Gays are mental because they are attracted to the same sex, but Christians aren't, even though they talk to people who don't exist. I get it. Let's move on. :lol:

Homosexuality is also caused by psychosocial factors. There is some argument that homosexuals are ‘born that way’, however research on identical twins and maternal X chromosome inheritance has failed to provide a correlation with sexual orientation (4). Claims that the hypothalamus is a determination of sexuality have been shown to be unsubstantiated (5). Perhaps some homosexuals are genetically predisposed, but there is little argument that other homosexuals choose their lifestyle. Even the APA admits that “no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors (6)” If homosexuality isn’t caused by genetics in all cases, then it must be caused by psychosocial factors in some cases.
The fact that there isn't a gay "gene" that predetermines if someone will manifest as gay doesn't mean it's not biological. Of course there can be environmental factors at work that cause it (prenatal, for instance). But sexual attraction is a biological concept, and it certainly has a biological component.

Regardless, it not being black and white biology doesn't make it a mental disability, so this whole paragraph of yours is irrelevant. Even if it were purely chosen (and it's not), abnormal doesn't equal mentally ill.

Edit: *And there actually is a correlation between genetics and homosexuality according to twin studies.

This leads us back to the definition of mental illness. Homosexuality impairs normal behavioral functioning, the behavior impairs the individual’s ability to reproduce normally, and at least in some cases is caused by psychosocial factors. Therefore the answer to the question “Is homosexuality a mental illness?” must be found to be “yes”.
The problem is that your definition of mental illness rests entirely on a culturally subjective criterion of "normal." And you have yet to demonstrate that being abnormal is a mental illness. According to that logic, abolitionists in the South, being abnormal in their behaviour, must have been mentally ill, as it impaired a subjective "proper" social functioning durng the antebellum period.

Women who don't have a strong drive to become mothers and don't want kids are abnormal then too, therefore mental. That certainly impairs the action of reproducing to not want kids.

And as for impairment of the abilility to reproduce, plenty of gays do that, and have done that, for thousands of years.


Edit: That's subjective, just as it would be subjective to claim Chinese exchange students are mentally ill because they avert gaze in conversations and take a round-about- route in conversation. That's "normal" there. So, according to the "normal = good, abnormal = mentally ill" theory of medicine, Mr. Wok is mentally lill in NJ, but not in Bejing.

There's nothing wrong with not wanting to reproduce. It doesn't make you ill, as it's not really impeding your life fulfilment. The modern definition of mental illness is not the one you used. In fact, it doesn't mention normal in it at all. Actually, mental ilness isn't an academic term either. Funny that the dictionary of psychiatry refers to the term as a "colloquialism." So, where did you get your definiton, and what type of psychiatric group uses a colloquialism as a serious definition?

I suggest the following resource: http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_mental_health.html

The final flaw of your definition is that, being based on adhereace to social norms, if social norms change, suddenly, people who were "mentally ill" stop being so because it's no longer abnormal. That's a sign of a bad conceptualization of illness. But in objectve terms, research that lead to the declassification have shown that gays as a group are not actually more mentally disturbed than the general population on account of being gay.

"In a review of published studies comparing homosexual and heterosexual samples on psychological tests, Gonsiorek (1982) found that, although some differences have been observed in test results between homosexuals and heterosexuals, both groups consistently score within the normal range. Gonsiorek concluded that "Homosexuality in and of itself is unrelated to psychological disturbance or maladjustment. Homosexuals as a group are not more psychologically disturbed on account of their homosexuality" (Gonsiorek, 1982, p. 74; see also reviews by Gonsiorek, 1991; Hart, Roback, Tittler, Weitz, Walston & McKee, 1978; Riess, 1980). Confronted with overwhelming empirical evidence and changing cultural views of homosexuality, psychiatrists and psychologists radically altered their views, beginning in the 1970s."

Your own methodology destroys itself.
 
Last edited:

rivrrat

Goddess of Bacon
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
13,988
Reaction score
6,593
Location
Charlottesville, VA
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Clearly you are too emotional about this issue to put forth a logical argument. Just let it be then.
So you're incapable of a logical discussion on the subject? Why even bother posting a thread if you're not able to discuss what you posted?
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,659
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
I suppose you could make that argument with anyone who had a mental illness and was happy about it. But what about the ones who aren't happy? What about the ones who want a cure?
The ones who aren't happy will seek counselling. It's out there. There are degrees of mental illness, even if that premise is correct. In fact, it's not too big a stretch to think we all suffer from some mental illness to some degree. Neurotics, while easily trainable, do, in fact, suffer from a form of mental illness if taken to the extreme. However, neurotic personalities can most often live very happy and useful lives. Obsessive-compulsive people can lead very happy and useful lives even if they do check the stove 15 times before they leave the house.

While I said you made a very good case for it being a mental illness, and I can relate on that level, I don't agree with you. I think that the majority of homosexuals are hardwired that way. They could no more be attracted to the 'other sex' than I could be attracted to another woman. Just ain't happenin'. Since this is obviously a bone of contention even in the psychiatric community, why attempt to label homosexuals as mentally ill? Just doesn't serve a worthwhile purpose.
 

rivrrat

Goddess of Bacon
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
13,988
Reaction score
6,593
Location
Charlottesville, VA
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Your sexuality isn't abnormal to you. It is abnormal in the sense that it isn't 'typical or regular or conforming to the norm.' One wouldn't think you would have a problem with that definition. To think that a homosexual believes he/she IS typical or conforming to the norm seems odd.
Yeah, the whole 1/3 of the women in the country having been aroused by another woman and 1/5 of the women reporting having sex with other women is so "abnormal".

Gimme a break. Bisexuality is pretty common among women.

But regardless, conformity to ever-changing social behaviors isn't what makes one "normal".
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,659
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Yeah, the whole 1/3 of the women in the country having been aroused by another woman and 1/5 of the women reporting having sex with other women is so "abnormal". Gimme a break. Bisexuality is pretty common among women. But regardless, conformity to ever-changing social behaviors isn't what makes one "normal".
First, I must ask, why are you so defensive? Next, I don't believe for one minute that 1/3 of the women in this country have been aroused by another woman. Nor that 1 in 5 reported having sex with another woman. GimME a break. The dictionary's definition of "normal" is "not deviating from the norm." The homosexual lifestyle is not normal when compared to the rest of society. To not accept that is just a pure defensive mechanism of some sort or other, imo.

As to your last line, homosexuality is not merely a social behavior. It's biological failure. Please don't take offense at that. I consider myself a biological failure by deciding not to have children.
 
Last edited:

Southern Man

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
2,219
Reaction score
296
Location
The Beautiful Yadkin Valley
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
While activism was important, the acknolwedgement of that motive force should not be used to construe that the actual rationale for de-listing was political. On the contrary, a comprehensive analysis of the literature was studied, and the reasoning behind listing homosexuality as a mental disorder was seen as fraudulent or had poor methodology.

For example, classifying homosexuality as a mental disorder was founded almost exclusively on a non-representative sampling of people. Most were psych ward patients or criminals already admitted for mental disorders. That's a terrible methodology. You might as well conclude people with mustaches are mentally disabled by taking your sample from the mustached people in psych wards. THey used the reality that many had increased levels of criminal behaviour, deviant behaviour, or suicide tendenciesgot they were dealing with ward patients.

Moreover, a great deal of mental problems gays have stem from cultural persecution and pressures. To claim being gay is the cause of the psycho social distress is a classic false cause fallacy: being gay doesn't make gays sad, depressed, or "ill." The people around them do. Many American Christians suffer from persecution syndrome, and already display similiar traits, except, they aren't actually persecuted. Gays are, and thus, their severe. I guess Christians must be mentally disabled.


Edit: ** Ironically, there's actually a much better case for claimng religious people have a mental illness than are gays, given religious people in general believe they have personal relationship with an invisible, imaginary friend who lives in the clouds. But hey, we all know religion is "a sacred cow" and thus excluded from the definition of mental illness arbitrarily. Gays are mental because they are attracted to the same sex, but Christians aren't, even though they talk to people who don't exist. I get it. Let's move on. :lol:



The fact that there isn't a gay "gene" that predetermines if someone will manifest as gay doesn't mean it's not biological. Of course there can be environmental factors at work that cause it (prenatal, for instance). But sexual attraction is a biological concept, and it certainly has a biological component.

Regardless, it not being black and white biology doesn't make it a mental disability, so this whole paragraph of yours is irrelevant. Even if it were purely chosen (and it's not), abnormal doesn't equal mentally ill.

Edit: *And there actually is a correlation between genetics and homosexuality according to twin studies.



The problem is that your definition of mental illness rests entirely on a culturally subjective criterion of "normal." And you have yet to demonstrate that being abnormal is a mental illness. According to that logic, abolitionists in the South, being abnormal in their behaviour, must have been mentally ill, as it impaired a subjective "proper" social functioning durng the antebellum period.

Women who don't have a strong drive to become mothers and don't want kids are abnormal then too, therefore mental. That certainly impairs the action of reproducing to not want kids.

And as for impairment of the abilility to reproduce, plenty of gays do that, and have done that, for thousands of years.


Edit: That's subjective, just as it would be subjective to claim Chinese exchange students are mentally ill because they avert gaze in conversations and take a round-about- route in conversation. That's "normal" there. So, according to the "normal = good, abnormal = mentally ill" theory of medicine, Mr. Wok is mentally lill in NJ, but not in Bejing.

There's nothing wrong with not wanting to reproduce. It doesn't make you ill, as it's not really impeding your life fulfilment. The modern definition of mental illness is not the one you used. In fact, it doesn't mention normal in it at all. Actually, mental ilness isn't an academic term either. Funny that the dictionary of psychiatry refers to the term as a "colloquialism." So, where did you get your definiton, and what type of psychiatric group uses a colloquialism as a serious definition?

I suggest the following resource: Homosexuality and Mental Health
Fist of all you ignore the medical definition of mental illness. Secondly, you ignore the fact that definition requires abnormal behavior and causation.
 

Technocratic

Active member
Joined
Sep 7, 2010
Messages
359
Reaction score
103
Location
Soviet Technate
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
My sexuality isn't part of the discussion.
That is a wonderful deflection, but an inadequate response. You argue tacitly that homosexuality is environmentally created, if not also from a biological predisposition. A corrolary is clearly that your heterosexuality is aso so. Therefore, when did you first get trained by your environment to like girls?

The reality is that you never were. Biology kicks in an hormones direct you. No one has to tell you you like girls, or boys, or anything, really.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom