Page 1 of 16 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 158

Thread: Homosexuality "psychological illness"?

  1. #1
    love

    Default Homosexuality "psychological illness"?

    before raging, I was just in a very mature and collected (as I'd like to keep it on here) conversation about whether or not homosexuality is a mental illness due to imbalances in the brain in both humans and other animals.

    The reasoning was this:

    we are animals. We are homo sapiens sapiens, and just like all those before us, and all those living with, in, and around us now, we aren't built to have "sexualities", "communities", "societies", "laws", etc.

    We are built to eat, drink, stay alive, and mate.

    Men are biologically built to be attracted to women's breasts because of fertility, and hips because of their ability to be able to hold a child.

    Women are biologically built to be attracted to healthy, strong males who can give her healthy children.

    So, because homosexuality goes against our basal instincts - to mate - but has been around since, really, the beginning of most species (not just humanity)...can this be "Diagnosed", so to speak?

  2. #2

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by love View Post
    before raging, I was just in a very mature and collected (as I'd like to keep it on here) conversation about whether or not homosexuality is a mental illness due to imbalances in the brain in both humans and other animals.

    The reasoning was this:

    we are animals. We are homo sapiens sapiens, and just like all those before us, and all those living with, in, and around us now, we aren't built to have "sexualities", "communities", "societies", "laws", etc.

    We are built to eat, drink, stay alive, and mate.

    Men are biologically built to be attracted to women's breasts because of fertility, and hips because of their ability to be able to hold a child.

    Women are biologically built to be attracted to healthy, strong males who can give her healthy children.

    So, because homosexuality goes against our basal instincts - to mate - but has been around since, really, the beginning of most species (not just humanity)...can this be "Diagnosed", so to speak?
    You are dead wrong. I'll add a ^_^ so you know I'm not mad. The American Psychological Association, and the American Psychiatric Associations took Homosexuality off their lists of things they diagnose people with. As did the American Pediatric Association.

    Also how do you explain the animals in nature that have shown natural homosexual pairings. I'm sure you have heard of penguins and flamingos at least?

  3. #3
    love

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by iplayWoW View Post
    You are dead wrong. I'll add a ^_^ so you know I'm not mad. The American Psychological Association, and the American Psychiatric Associations took Homosexuality off their lists of things they diagnose people with. As did the American Pediatric Association.
    Well, not to sound dismissive, but the APA, etc, are kind of irrelevant to the points made in the discussion i had with that friend of mine.
    can you share anything else other than "well these people don't count it"?

  4. #4

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by love View Post
    Well, not to sound dismissive, but the APA, etc, are kind of irrelevant to the points made in the discussion i had with that friend of mine.
    can you share anything else other than "well these people don't count it"?
    Not to sound dismissive, but all of the APAs have merit, as previously they all believed that Homosexuality was unnatural and could be diagnosed as an illness or disease, and if I may be so bold as to say, they probably know much more about what you are talking about than you do. (And me too, for that matter, as I'm no health professional.) It would ignoring an Oncologist who said you had Cancer. I'm sure you wouldn't do that, would you?

  5. #5
    love

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by iplayWoW View Post
    Not to sound dismissive, but all of the APAs have merit, as previously they all believed that Homosexuality was unnatural and could be diagnosed as an illness or disease, and if I may be so bold as to say, they probably know much more about what you are talking about than you do. (And me too, for that matter, as I'm no health professional.) It would ignoring an Oncologist who said you had Cancer. I'm sure you wouldn't do that, would you?
    I'm open to your reasoning but you're kind of using a circular argument: "It's not because they say it's not because it's not"

  6. #6

    Default

    Two things.

    First, the APA et al. are indeed quite relevant, as the DSM and kin like the ICD define what we call illnesses, mental or otherwise. Homosexuality is not defined as a mental illness by any of these authoritative texts: ergo, it cannot be classified as an illness.

    Second, if homosexuality is not at least partly genetic, what is the substrate that the result of our (and others') behaviour acts upon? I would hope your answer is biology and genetics, and not magic.

  7. #7
    love

    Default

    by the way, iplayWoW, I'm really not trying to sound like such a jerk, i think it's just the way everything's written down on the internet - no facial expressions or vocal tone, you know? haha

  8. #8

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by love View Post
    I'm open to your reasoning but you're kind of using a circular argument: "It's not because they say it's not because it's not"
    Haha. You aren't open to anything other than being right. You simply can't toss evidence out because you disagree with it. You said they didn't have merit. I showed you why, and since you can't disprove my statement, as it only contains facts, you accuse me of circular argument. <------ The smiley face shows I'm not mad.

  9. #9

    Default

    Yes, all species are built to mate. But have you ever thought of the very real threat of overpopulation that has plagued species such as deer and is probably happening with ours as well? Homosexuality helps slow down breeding so that species don't overpopulate too quickly.

    Also, if women are built biologically to be attracted to healthy, strong males, why are there people who prefer sickly and meek males? While I admit I'm unusual because I'm not sexually attracted to men (Asexuality isn't a mental illness either) , I do prefer stereotypical 'nerds' over 'jocks' and there are plenty of other women who do as well. That does not mean they are mentally ill.

    A mental illness is an unusual response in the brain that causes a lot of distress in both the individual and others. Of course, there are responses that can be maladaptive, such as overuse of certain defense mechanisms, but that in itself isn't considered a mental illness. Everyone has maladaptive traits and everyone deviates from the "norm" in some way. Homosexuality does not count as this because while yes, some people are distressed by being gay, but some people are destressed by being shy and shyness is just a personality trait, not a mental illness (However it can be a symptom of mental illness, but not one by itself). Homosexuality would not cause distress and pain on its own, it is society's views of it that causes it. It's not like Clinical Depression where the person is obviously suffering and in severe cases can barely function as a human being because the disorder is so crippling. Being gay won't cripple anyone.

    I'm not quite sure what you're getting at here. Yes, at one point it was labeled a disorder, but you also have to remember that a lot of things are labeled as a disorder. The DSM is constantly changing, with adding and removing things, and different cultures label different things as illnesses and even have different ones alltogether.

  10. #10
    love

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Oranges View Post
    Two things.

    First, the APA et al. are indeed quite relevant, as the DSM and kin like the ICD define what we call illnesses, mental or otherwise. Homosexuality is not defined as a mental illness by any of these authoritative texts: ergo, it cannot be classified as an illness.
    well, that's kind of semantics. take away the words "illness" specifically, and look at it without all of these human-made definitions. what then?



    Second, if homosexuality is not at least partly genetic, what is the substrate that the result of our (and others') behaviour acts upon? I would hope your answer is biology and genetics, and not magic.
    perhaps "psychological illness" wasn't all the way correct - if you mean it would have something to do with genes, way down on a chromosomal level, I'd agree with you. I'm just wondering your opinion on something like: why isn't it considered some sort of physical defect for lack of ability to mate, if we're looking at it like we're animals? because of a cushiony society who doesn't want to be politically incorrect, or because of something i'm not understanding?

    ---------- Post added at 01:26 ---------- Previous post was at 01:25 ----------



    Quote Originally Posted by iplayWoW View Post
    Haha. You aren't open to anything other than being right. You simply can't toss evidence out because you disagree with it. You said they didn't have merit. I showed you why, and since you can't disprove my statement, as it only contains facts, you accuse me of circular argument. <------ The smiley face shows I'm not mad.
    Well... no. I'm completely open to "not being right". But you haven't presented any evidence other than "well the APA doesn't classify it as one."
    if you disregard definitions and look at it like you've never heard of the DSM, what then?

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 21-May-2011, 08:58
  2. "Obama" now substituting "hey" "yo" "sup"??
    By mm3 in forum Mature Topics
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 07-Nov-2008, 04:29

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
ADISC.org - the Adult Baby / Diaper Lover / Incontinence Support Community.
ADISC.org is designed to be viewed in Firefox, with a resolution of at least 1280 x 1024.