-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
One reason why homosexuality is not a mental illness
- Thread starter Agnostic75
- Start date
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
Meh. I have found Yahoo Answers to only be slightly better than ChaCha or any of the paid question services.
I know that by the DSM III it was gone, during the 70's I believe.
I have to ask though, why the evolution vs. creationism board?
I know that by the DSM III it was gone, during the 70's I believe.
I have to ask though, why the evolution vs. creationism board?
Agnostic75
Well-Known Member
Shadow Wolf said:
Just to get extra traffic from this forum.
As you will note, there are a number of other threads on the first page of this forum that are not related to evolution.
As you know, some religious conservatives at this forum claim that natural selection cannot account for homosexuality. So, in a very loose sense, whether or not homosexuality is a mental illness is somewhat related to evolution.
sandandfoam
Veteran Member
What's mental illness anyway?
The DSM mindset is not helpful.
The DSM mindset is not helpful.
Agnostic75
Well-Known Member
I withdraw the article that I mentioned from the opening post since it was not scientific enough. Of course, I still maintain that homosexuality is not a mental illness, and that is what the majority of experts believe.
It's not? If we are not to use the standards set by professional psychologists (in this case, the American Psychiatric Association; other nations may have their own organizations that set standards) then what, exactly, should we be using?
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
The DSM has a long history of controversy and politics. Even the upcoming DSM V is not free from heated debate and disagreement; even among the task forces assigned to decide what to classify and how to classify it have had some bitter feuds over certain things.
I understand that. What I'm asking is what, exactly, should we be using if not standards set forth by a professional association of experts on human psychology? What are the viable alternatives? Did using theories of demon possession produce better mental health care? What about Humorism and the four temperaments? Are any of these other systems genuinely better at producing useful results than the DSM approach? No? Then it's nonsensical to say the DSM mindset is not helpful when it is vastly superior to methods we used for treating and classifying mental illnesses in the past. Is it perfect? Of course not. But I'll take the cultural biases inherent in the DSM to the crazy of demon possession theories any day of the week, thanks.
Last edited:
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
The very sad thing is, for all the controversy that revolves around the DSM, so much of the mental health care is so heavily built around it there do not seem to be many alternatives out there. And the ones that exist tent to be ones like reparative therapy. Unfortunately it's model isn't going to be replaced by a better one anyone time soon, and there probably won't be many opportunities for research into a better one as long as pharmaceuticals are a cash crop.
Agnostic75
Well-Known Member
Shadow Wolf said:
Reparative therapy has proven to be a poor alternative for homosexuals. The majority of the time, homosexuals who are, for example, alcoholics, or drug abusers, do better with the same therapy that is used for heterosexual alcoholics, and drug abusers.
Repative therapy assumes that there is something that needs fixing in the first place, but science does not say that.
You mentioned controversy, and politics, but you did not mention the biggest factor of all, which is religion. The vast majority of the most outspoken opponents of homosexuaity, and proponents of reparative therapy, are religious conservatives. NARTH (National Association of Research and Therapy for Homosexuals) is an organization that consists primarily, or solely, of religious conservatives, and is the leading proponent of reparative therapy. NARTH claims that homosexuality is caused by enviroment. That is very unlikely since the vast majority of children who are raised by homosexuals turn out to be heterosexuals. In addition, when one identical twin is a homosexual, the majority of the time, the other twin is a heterosexual. Identical twins typically have more similar enrivonments than non-twin siblings do. If homosexuals was caused 100% by environment, we would expect that there would be homosexual identical twins than there are. NARTH has claimed that twin studies show that homosexuality cannot be caused 100% by genetics. They might be right, but that would not necessarily mean that homosexuality is caused 100% by environment since there is a third possibility, which is a combination of genetics and environmnent, a possibility that a growing number of experts believe is likely.
You must know that in the U.S., when you say politics, you are also frequently saying religion. During the Republican presidential primaries, a number of Republican candidates appealed to religion in an attempt to attract more conservatives, and some moderates, or to solidify the base. Michele Bachman and her husband have a reparative therapy clinic. Very few, if any of the Republican primary candiates approve of President Obama's new policy about gays in the military.
Regarding science, confirmation bias, and presuppositionalism are important factors as far as religious conservatives are concerned.
The same goes for controversies about creationism, as the Dover trial shows.
Regarding the DSM, few people have considered a very important fact, which is that there is not any reasonable scientific evidence that homosexuality belonged in the DSM in the first place.
If the American Psycyhiatric Association has in some cases made claims that are based upon inadequate science, the same applies much more so to religious conservatives who often use science only as a convenience when it agrees with their religious beliefs. As biologist, and theistic evolutionist Ken Miller has noted, intelligent design is a religious, and philosophical claim, not a scientific claim. The same goes for the claims that homosexuality is a mental illness, and that homosexuality is caused 100% by environment.
Consider the following:
Henry Morris, Ph.d., Institute for Creation Research, was an inerrantist. He said that the main reason for insisting on the universal Flood as a fact of history and as the primary vehicle for geological interpretation is that Gods word plainly teaches it! No geologic difficulties, real or imagined, can be allowed to take precedence over the clear statements and necessary inferences of Scripture. (Henry Morris, Biblical Cosmology and Modern Science, 1970, p. 32-33.
Stanton Jones, Ph.D., psychology, and Mark Yarhouse, Ph.D., psychology, are conservative Christians. They wrote a book about homosexuality that is titled 'Homosexuality, The Use of Scientific Research in the Church's Moral Debate.' Chapter 4 is titled 'Is homosexuality a psychopathology?' After discussing a lot of scientific issues in that chapter, the authors conclude with the following paragraph:
"Finally, we have seen that there has never been any definitive judgment by the fields of psychiatry or psychology that homosexuality is a healthy lifestyle. But what if it were? Such a judgment would have little bearing on the judgments of the Christian church. In the days of Nero iit was healthy and adaptive to worship the Roman emperor. By contemporary American standards a life consumed with greed, materialism, sensualism, selfishness, divorce and pride is judged healthy, but God weighs such a life and finds it lacking."
Those are some good examples of religious conservatives who use science only as a convenience when it agrees with their religious beliefs. I at least give them credit for openly admitting that religion is their primary bias.
Do you object to homosexuality, same-sex marriage, and allowing openly homosexual people in the military. Over 30 countries allow gays in the military, including Canada, Britain, and Israel. Israel has had that policy for 20 years. The majority of Americans approve of the new policy.
Simurgh
Atheist Triple Goddess
Regarding the original post, it appears to me that homosexuality has never qualified as a mental illness according to the DMS criteria set forth. While it was listed as a mental illness until it was declassified as such in 1973, the classification was built on religious, political, and social filters that constructed it to be a mental illness based on prevailing norms.
All this time the real problem was how homosexuals have been treated by people who claim to be normal. I agree, that homophobia fills more of the criteria of a mental illness than homosexuality ever has.
dgirl1986
Big Queer Chesticles!
Exactly
dgirl1986
Big Queer Chesticles!
I would not consider homophobia to be a mental illness. I have found that homophobia can be from how they were raised, the fact they themselves are homosexual and do not want to admit it etc.
A true phobia is a mental illness, but people tend to throw that word around pretty casually instead of using it in a diagnostic sense. Homophobics who are genuinely phobic (as in profound, uncontrollable, irrational fears that significantly impede their life) would be suffering from a mental illness. I can't say I've ever heard of any case of homophobia being a true phobia, though. Not like claustrophobia, where people may literally be paralyzed in panic and fear of the very idea of entering to a tight space.
dgirl1986
Big Queer Chesticles!
You make an excellent point.
Musty
Active Member
How a person was raised plays a role in many peoples mental illness including phobias.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
Not that I disagree, as homophobia does most certainly seem to be how someone is raised and their current environment, but there are some disorders that you can only get by being raised in a certain culture:
Culture-bound syndrome - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia