Library Idiocy

[Subduction Zone]

And I still say that people need to grow the hell up and make it a point to read a book of opposing viewpoints that discusses a topic where one of those sides is really going to **** them off.

And if they refuse to listen to the opposing side then they need to shut the **** up.

 

[paradox]

This was our claim:

"The only reason it was removed is because of gay activists demanding it to be removed:"

You linked that article specifically to support that claim, but that article refuted it.

Can you please quote the portion which refutes my claim?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Lmao what a legend!!!
I remember my history teacher catching a guy who forged his parents signature on his report card.
She seemed more upset at the fact that it wasn’t even a good forgery lol

That's what this teacher's reaction pretty much was. She accepted it happens and is going to happen, she has no power or knowledge of it regardless, but do try to put a little effort into, lol.

 

[paradox]

LMAO! All sources have "misinformation" at times.

Not this one which you deliberately ignored:
What is SOCIOPATHIC PERSONALITY DISTURBANCE? (Psychology Dictionary)

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

How about Romeo and Juliette?
That involves child predation by today’s standards. Romeo is roughly 14-17 depending on who you ask and even in the context of the play itself is more sexually experienced. Juliette meanwhile is like 12-14, depending on who you ask. And far less experienced and indeed very naive.
If it were written today, Romeo would likely be arrested for sexually abusing a minor.
You gonna argue that libraries ban Shakespeare of all people now?

Actually, we do know how old Juliet was. The play itself (through the character of Juliet's nurse) tells that "Even or odd, of all the days of the year, come Lammas tide at night shall she be 14." Thus, as the play opens, she is 13 still.

 

[SomeRandom]

Not this one which you deliberately ignored:
What is SOCIOPATHIC PERSONALITY DISTURBANCE? (Psychology Dictionary)

That article is about sociopathy, not homosexuality. The only reason it has a category of “sexual deviation” is because sexual orientation can coexist in a diagnosis of sociopathy. Meaning gay people can be sociopaths too, just like straight folks.
It’s not claiming that homosexuality is in itself a psychiatric disorder at all. Just that homosexuality and other sexual “deviation” doesn’t preclude one from being a potential sociopath

 

[SomeRandom]

Actually, we do know how old Juliet was. The play itself (through the character of Juliet's nurse) tells that "come Lamas-tide at night shall she be 14." Thus, as the play opens, she is 13 still.

The Oxford edition I have does say that. But when we read the play in school the text seemed a little garbled. Probably because we had an awful cheap edition lol
Our teacher said she was 12. Not sure if she was joking or not though

 

[Subduction Zone]

Can you please quote the portion which refutes my claim?

The article describes how they were a big part of convincing the psychiatrists that they were wrong in their classification. This paragraph is very telling:

"Ultimately, activists were successful in part by pointing out the gaps in the APA’s own reasoning behind classification. The declassification movement made heavy use of the fact that, until this time, the members had not really defined what a mental illness was, only asserted that they existed and had a distinct etiology, though the brain’s complexity prevented complete precision. “In fact, the controversy over the homosexuality diagnosis was able to reach such heights of publicity in part because the APA had never had cause to reach consensus on a standardized definition of mental illness,” Lewis writes."

They convinced that psychiatrists that they were wrong. You tried to say that it was because activists demanded that it be remove. They did not remove it because of demands, but because they showed them that they were wrong.

 

[paradox]

That article is about sociopathy, not homosexuality. The only reason it has a category of “sexual deviation” is because sexual orientation can coexist in a diagnosis of sociopathy. Meaning gay people can be sociopaths too, just like straight folks.
It’s not claiming that homosexuality is in itself a psychiatric disorder at all

It does clearly state that homosexuality is sexual deviation for which in turn says it's sociopathic personality disorder:

SOCIOPATHIC PERSONALITY DISTURBANCE
Four types of disorder are classified under this heading
...
Third, sexual deviation, comprising persons who exhibit such deviations as homosexuality, transvestism, pedophilia, fetishism, and sexual sadism (rape, sexual assault, mutilation, etc.), when these practices are not symptomatic of more extensive syndromes such as schizophrenic or obsessional reactions.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Surely you can find a better comparison than food, we are talking about flavors of sexuality, do you for example find pedophilia disgusting and if so would you consider allowing books about pedophilia in public library, this wouldn't abuse or harm anyone?

As minors cannot legally give informed consent, Pedophilia, if acted upon, is a crime -- it is rape. But comparison. When my lover and I are intimate, we are very much consenting and very much adults. So bad example, too.

Now, if you can demonstrate why my intimate relationship with my consenting adult partner should be criminalized, we would be having another conversation.

Sorry but I'm not racist and definitely don't hold opinion that homosexuals should be treated in a racist way.

I did say that I find these books disgusting but it's only only that, these books also encourage young people to read them, but we know kids and young people don't develop personality until grown up.

I beg your pardon? Kids don’t “developer personality?” Of course they do. And the more they know about the world in which they live, the more they will be able to find their own way to live comfortably and well within it. We don’t pretend there’s no gravity just because kids can’t understand how it might work. We let them watch mom and dad drink wine, even if we won’t let them drink it themselves. My best friend has two children, 6 and 9, and they’ve both known me and my lover since the day the were born – I am a beloved (if slightly eccentric) “uncle” to them. My job is to buy them all the birthday presents their mother would not like to think about – you know, skateboards and the like. When the boy was 6, we were all seated on a balcony at a street festival when he turned to my lover and me and asked, “can two men be married.” We (and his parents) simply answered, “yes,” and he left the matter alone. He is the kid at his school (at 9 years old) who tells kids at his school that “you shouldn’t pick on people who are different.” I think that knowing what life is really like has made him quite wise for his years.

Aren't laws that prohibit murder, pedophilia, torture etc. judged based on moral principles? don't these examples have all immoral behavior in common?

No, they are not based on moral principals. They are based on the harm they do to others. You should be able to see that easily. It’s very easy to see the harm caused by murder, pedophilia, torture, theft, arson, treason, and drunk driving. It’s a lot harder to see the harm caused by pleasuring yourself when you have a little time alone and not much to do. That’s why it not illegal to masturbate, whether your church likes it or not. (Except in a few near-theocracies like Saudi Arabia and Indonesia – but what can you say about places that think women shouldn’t be able to drive or be seen in public?)

Did I say that being gay is immoral? you took this out of context in regard to previous posts.

No, you said it was disgusting to you, and for that reason you are defending the effort to have it banned from the library.

My point about morality is that it is essential criteria in decision making in regards to laws but it is not the only criteria.

And I respectfully disagreed. Show me an example of a law that you would consider a moral criterion essential to, and what that moral consideration is, and why it is essential.

 

[paradox]

The article describes how they were a big part of convincing the psychiatrists that they were wrong in their classification. This paragraph is very telling:

"Ultimately, activists were successful in part by pointing out the gaps in the APA’s own reasoning behind classification. The declassification movement made heavy use of the fact that, until this time, the members had not really defined what a mental illness was, only asserted that they existed and had a distinct etiology, though the brain’s complexity prevented complete precision. “In fact, the controversy over the homosexuality diagnosis was able to reach such heights of publicity in part because the APA had never had cause to reach consensus on a standardized definition of mental illness,” Lewis writes."

They convinced that psychiatrists that they were wrong. You tried to say that it was because activists demanded that it be remove. They did not remove it because of demands, but because they showed them that they were wrong.

Did they not demand that it be removed?

Funny because using same judgement they should have removed the rest of sexual deviations from personality disorders just because of "brain complexity".
The fact that only homosexuality was removed but not the rest of deviations is clearly due to protests.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

The Oxford edition I have does say that. But when we read the play in school the text seemed a little garbled. Probably because we had an awful cheap edition lol
Our teacher said she was 12. Not sure if she was joking or not though

Lady Capulet. This is the matter:—Nurse, give leave awhile,
We must talk in secret:—nurse, come back again;
I have remember'd me, thou's hear our counsel.
Thou know'st my daughter's of a pretty age.

Nurse. Faith, I can tell her age unto an hour.

Lady Capulet. She's not fourteen.

Nurse. I'll lay fourteen of my teeth,—
And yet, to my teeth be it spoken, I have but four—
She is not fourteen. How long is it now
To Lammas-tide?

Lady Capulet. A fortnight and odd days.

Nurse. Even or odd, of all days in the year,
Come Lammas-eve at night shall she be fourteen.
Susan and she—God rest all Christian souls!—
Were of an age: well, Susan is with God;
She was too good for me: but, as I said,
On Lammas-eve at night shall she be fourteen;
That shall she, marry; I remember it well.


Therefore, in "a fortnight and odd days" (or a little over 2 weeks) Juliet will turn 14. She is, therefore, 13.

 

[SomeRandom]

It does clearly state that homosexuality is sexual deviation for which in turn says it's sociopathic personality disorder:

Yes, deviation as in it’s not common. Or were you under the impression that homosexuality is highly prominent in our species?
Homosexuality only accounts for like what 5-10 percent of the population or something?
Also the article later mentions sexual behaviours observed in prison. Meaning that sexual abuse occurs and if an otherwise straight man was having sex (consensually or not) with another man, I would hazard a guess that that would also be deemed as “homosexual deviation:”

Beware inferring layman definitions into words used by scientists.
Scientists are far more precise in their language and refuse to make any moral judgments on purpose. That is for realm of religion.
Also again, sexual orientation does not preclude one from being diagnosed with a seperate psychiatric disorder. It is not making the claim that homosexuality is in itself a cause for diagnosing someone with a psychiatric disorder, merely saying that such phenomenons can occur simultaneously

 

[SomeRandom]

Lady Capulet. This is the matter:—Nurse, give leave awhile,
We must talk in secret:—nurse, come back again;
I have remember'd me, thou's hear our counsel.
Thou know'st my daughter's of a pretty age.

Nurse. Faith, I can tell her age unto an hour.

Lady Capulet. She's not fourteen.

Nurse. I'll lay fourteen of my teeth,—
And yet, to my teeth be it spoken, I have but four—
She is not fourteen. How long is it now
To Lammas-tide?

Lady Capulet. A fortnight and odd days.

Nurse. Even or odd, of all days in the year,
Come Lammas-eve at night shall she be fourteen.
Susan and she—God rest all Christian souls!—
Were of an age: well, Susan is with God;
She was too good for me: but, as I said,
On Lammas-eve at night shall she be fourteen;
That shall she, marry; I remember it well.


Therefore, in "a fortnight and odd days" (or a little over 2 weeks) Juliet will turn 14. She is, therefore, 13.

See the edition we read for class didn’t have all that lol
Not sure why.
Underfunded crappy public schools, amirite?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Not this one which you deliberately ignored:
What is SOCIOPATHIC PERSONALITY DISTURBANCE? (Psychology Dictionary)

That is because it is merely a dictionary. It is not a valid source when discussing psychology. At best it can only tell you what terms mean at the time of publication.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

It does clearly state that homosexuality is sexual deviation for which in turn says it's sociopathic personality disorder:

Does the American Psychological Association (APA) recognize this "dictionary?" I generally trust sources that come from the vast majority of practitioners in any field than a supposedly "authoritative" text written (as this one is) by a very few.

Individuals have their idiosyncrasies -- that's something it's like to be human. What the vast majority of professionals agree on within their professional organizations seems to me far more trustworthy.

I ask, of course, because I'm aware that the APA has its own Dictionary of Psychology, and it does not say anything like your source.

 

[Sand Dancer]

No not that, you said homosexuality is not diagnosis of mental disorder because it was "learned" it is not,
can you please enlighten me how it was learned? according to which psychiatric research was that learned?

They have done brain scans where the hypothalamus of gay men are like those of hetero women. The hypothalamus of gay women are like hetero men. Also they determined that maternal stress and/or having older brothers depletes or lessens testosterone levels in a fetus. Sexuality tends to be on a spectrum. Feminine sexuality tends to be more fluid that masculine sexuality.

 

[Sand Dancer]

I don’t think any of it should be publicly funded or made available to children. ( I can’t speak to any double standards beyond knowing it is a real possibility).

your point is valid it may not be porn, not all of it is. However books which are offensive to the tax base are going to have problems. This is a core fail of making everything public.

The books are probably in the adult section, not the children's section.

 

[paradox]

I beg your pardon? Kids don’t “developer personality?” Of course they do.

Yes they do but it takes almost entire childhood, until they surpass adolescence
Social and Personality Development in Childhood | Noba (nobaproject.com)

Children can be easily manipulated due to undeveloped personality, including influencing sexual orientation, on another side it's not easy to manipulate grown up people.

No, they are not based on moral principals. They are based on the harm they do to others.

Yes they do harm to others which is considered immoral, I'm not sure what are we debating here because not all laws are strictly about harming or not harming someone while no laws are immoral in nature.

That’s why it not illegal to masturbate, whether your church likes it or not.

It's illegal to mastrubate in public even though it doesn't harm anyone, so why is it illegal then? see, it's not all about abuse and harming others, you think of morality as of some church dogma, but morality is much more than just that.

And I respectfully disagreed. Show me an example of a law that you would consider a moral criterion essential to, and what that moral consideration is, and why it is essential.

OK, your point is that harming others is criteria to law decision making, my point is that harming others is immoral.
However not all laws are about harming others while all the decision making regarding laws is directly affected on whether something is morally just or not simply because there is no such law today which is not morally correct.
An example, no need for one, there is no immoral law, all laws are morally just, excluding exceptions by mistake or political manipulation.

Now, if you can demonstrate why my intimate relationship with my consenting adult partner should be criminalized, we would be having another conversation.

I have not said that gay relationship should be criminalized because I don't consider homosexuality to be a crime but rather mental disorder.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I have not said that gay relationship should be criminalized because I don't consider homosexuality to be a crime but rather mental disorder.

How you may consider me to be "mentally disordered" is -- I think you should know this, because it is a fact -- thoroughly offensive.