Library Idiocy

[paradox]

Why would I provide a source that defines "sociopathic personality disturbance" when I just pointed out that it's not a recognized mental disorder?

Because:
1.) I'm unable to find APA definition of "sociopathic personality disturbance" to verify it's not mental disorder.
2.) You differentiate the two but APA dictionary does not seem to.
3.) There is no way in verifying you are what you said you are - a psychology major. even though it seems like you know what you're saying.

I guess you didn't read the article I just posted for you about the history of homosexuality in the psychiatric/psychology community.

The DSM-I (which came out in 1952) classified homosexuality as a "sociopathic personality disturbance" because way back then, they viewed homosexuality as pathological. The DSM-II (which came out in 1968) identified homosexuality as "sexual deviation." All of this, plus more detailed explanation is in the article I posted for you. You should read it.

I did read it but not thoroughly, sadly I have no way to search scholarly articles of other countries to compare research and conclusions, I don't speak other languages to crawl trough non-English sites, it's just too difficult and time consuming.

In any case I see all of this with great suspicion because I see it as politically motivated.

 

[Subduction Zone]

OK man I apologize for my silly mistake (which I already corrected), but you really do not need to admit your mistake shown in post #274. (there is no need)

btw. there is a saying which says:

What mistake on my part? There was none. You appear to be still very confused about this. Pointing out that the ALA never banned the work is not the same as saying that the attempts to ban it were not questioned.

Why is this such a hard concept to understand? Pointing out that Elvis was never accused of committing the OJ simpson murders is not the same as saying that no one was accused of those crimes. That is all that I said. One particular group was never accused of banning or trying to ban Brave New World. That does not mean that I said no one was accused of that action.

 

[Secret Chief]

Regarding the DSM, homosexuality was removed in 1987. The WHO publishes the globally used International Classification of Diseases (ICD) which removed it in 1992 (with the publication of ICD-10). Obviously both are regularly updated. Otherwise we'd still be considering mental disorders to include hysteria, delirium, "abnormal orificial sexuality" and masturbation, amongst many others long since consigned to the dustbin of history.
(and if it cuts any mustard I have a B.Sc degree in Psychology with Statistics).

 

[Subduction Zone]

Because:
1.) I'm unable to find APA definition of "sociopathic personality disturbance" to verify it's not mental disorder.

That should have been your first hint that it is not a mental disorder.

2.) You differentiate the two but APA dictionary does not seem to.

That may be because you are using a dictionary improperly.

3.) There is no way in verifying you are what you said you are - a psychology major. even though it seems like you know what you're saying.

True, but he does appear to have a far clearer grasp on the topic.

I did read it but not thoroughly, sadly I have no way to search scholarly articles of other countries to compare research and conclusions, I don't speak other languages to crawl trough non-English sites, it's just too difficult and time consuming.

In any case I see all of this with great suspicion because I see it as politically motivated.

It was not politically motivated. You are now forgetting your earlier loss. The people falsely accused did defend themselves and managed to get a change in how homosexuality was categorized.

If you were falsely accused of beating your wife would you not oppose such an accusation? Would such a fight on your part be a "political" one? Neither political party stepped up to help the gays in their quest. The Democrats did not become openly gay friendly until the AIDS epidemic made their need obvious.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Regarding the DSM, homosexuality was removed in 1987. The WHO publishes the globally used International Classification of Diseases (ICD) which removed it in 1992 (with the publication of ICD-10). Obviously both are regularly updated. Otherwise we'd still be considering mental disorders to include hysteria, delirium, "abnormal orificial sexuality" and masturbation, amongst many others long since consigned to the dustbin of history.

And I am doing my part too. I oppose the suffering of everybody, but especially the suffering of women. So I am trying to end women's suffrage.

Did I use my dictionary correctly?

 

[paradox]

What mistake on my part? There was none. You appear to be still very confused about this. Pointing out that the ALA never banned the work is not the same as saying that the attempts to ban it were not questioned.

Why is this such a hard concept to understand? Pointing out that Elvis was never accused of committing the OJ simpson murders is not the same as saying that no one was accused of those crimes. That is all that I said. One particular group was never accused of banning or trying to ban Brave New World. That does not mean that I said no one was accused of that action.

Haha, you've been shown the mistake you made and still insist you didn't.
**mod edit**

 

[paradox]

No, it's just obvious your running you mouth and have no background or info on what you speak about.

When you're given a logical argument such as contradiction then you're supposed to logically refute it and prove it's not contradition.
I'm sorry but "running you mouth" is not a logical argument.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

When you're given a logical argument such as contradiction then you're supposed to logically refute it and prove it's not contradition.
I'm sorry but "running you mouth" is not a logical argument.

You didn't give a logical argument. You gave a highly illogical one utter void of credibility and knowledge of how psychology works along with its history.
And your promoting Freud. Does your mom, any sisters or daughters, wife or girlfriend envy you for having a penis and wanting one or their own? If we're holding up Freud we must conclude that is a yes.

 

[paradox]

You didn't give a logical argument. You gave a highly illogical one utter void of credibility and knowledge of how psychology works along with its history.

Do you hear yourself?
You just called APA definition "void of credibility and knowledge"

Please logically refute it in regard to homosexuality.

And your promoting Freud.

No sister, I do not promote Freud nor vouch that his practices should be used today, what I said about Freud was his work and genius in historical context.

Does your mom, any sisters or daughters, wife or girlfriend envy you for having a penis and wanting one or their own?

Now you're being rude.

I think I was not rude so far and I payed attention to limit discussion to rational discourse and not to insult gay population in discriminate way.
But I do understand that this debate is seen as such due to it's controversial nature.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Haha, you've been shown the mistake you made and still insist you didn't.
**mod edit**

You could not point out or explain my supposed mistake.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Do you hear yourself?
You just called APA definition "void of credibility and knowledge"

Please logically refute it in regard to homosexuality.

No, she said that about your argument. You know, the one where you keep making the mistake of using a dictionary as a reference.

No sister, I do not promote Freud nor vouch that his practices should be used today, what I said about Freud was his work and genius in historical context.


Now you're being rude.

I think I was not rude so far and I payed attention to limit discussion to rational discourse and not to insult gay population in discriminate way.
But I do understand that this debate is seen as such due to it's controversial nature.

I think that we will have to disagree about this claim of yours.

 

[paradox]

You could not point out or explain my supposed mistake.

Let me give you one advice.

When somebody makes an apology to you, you accept it and move on, you do not continue your rant on.
That further proves my previous statement that you lack the manners of an upbringing person.

 

[muichimotsu]

What is sexual deviation?

Sexual deviation - Oxford Reference

APA calls this "sexual deviance"

APA Dictionary of Psychology

however APA obviously doesn't list homosexuality which is self-contradictory to their own definition,
but we all know why, because APA was influenced by politics and protests rather than by profession.


heterosexuality does not qualify as sexual deviation and is thus not in need for treatment.

~~~~~~~~~

I must admit that I'm exhausted by this debate, what remains is fair judgement instead of personal opinions.

What's sexual deviation? Maybe being a serial rapist? Violating children sexually? This shouldn't be complicated, you're making someone's sexual orientation that is directed at people their own age and would, I'm pretty sure, value their consent in the relationship, comparable to someone being a sex offender, which is not only a criminal concern, but a moral one

You keep circling back to that without substantiating it with anything that's not clearly cherry picked by other people's analysis of this superficial idea. APA didn't have a clear definition of mental illness and that was what was being called out. Trans people would've been considered mentally ill, are you going to go down THAT rabbit hole too with no evidence or understanding of clinical diagnosis or mental illness beyond what fits your preconception?

Heterosexuality and homosexuality are only different in a specific quality of attraction: as in whether the person is the same sex as the person who's gay or straight (plus the several other sexual orientations). Neither should be considered sexually deviant, because the attractions are not deviant remotely, since sex is not purely procreative, it's as much social. Sexual attraction to entities that cannot consent, e.g. children and animals, are deviant because it shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how sex works, communication, intimacy, CONSENT!

Oh, so you can be perfectly objective, hm? You have no biases whatsoever?

 

[muichimotsu]

But the fact is that the government you speak of allows people to vote, and that' what they did.

Majority right is not an absolute, especially when they just ignore due process or the values of diversity, equity and inclusion. You're advocating ochlocracy

 

[Subduction Zone]

Let me give you one advice.

When somebody makes an apology to you, you accept it and move on, you do not continue your rant on.
That further proves my previous statement that you lack the manners of an upbringing person.

It was not a real apology. You had to add a false claim to it.

And you really should not talk about the manners of others. You have been exceedingly rude here.

 

[paradox]

It was not a real apology. You had to add a false claim to it.

And you really should not talk about the manners of others. You have been exceedingly rude here.

If you want to play outsmarting game it would be better we start private conversation, but please let be civilized and just get over it.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Now you're being rude.

I'm prone to doing that to people who are rude, and rambling on about how homosexuality is a sexual deviancy is very rude.
Amd, yes, you bring up Freud and even over exaggerated the effectiveness of his "treatments." Then or now he was a sex obsessed pervert but you call him a genius. He had a few good ideas, but human sexuality is where he just absolutely embarrassing to bring up anything he's attached to in such a discussion.

You just called APA definition "void of credibility and knowledge"

 

[Dao Hao Now]

For your information Sigmund Freud is the founding father of conversion therapy, he was the first to come up with solutions that show positive results of 25%,
beside his methods since 1960's there have been several other conversion therapy studies so far:
What We Know | What does the scholarly research say about whether conversion therapy can alter sexual orientation without causing harm? | What We Know (cornell.edu)

All ineffective and potential to cause harm except one which says:

Which means 65% of the participants saw "improvements in their psychological, interpersonal, and spiritual well-being"

Just in case you don't find this to be a reliable source here is one that is reliable:
Retrospective self-reports of changes in homosexual orientation: a consumer survey of conversion therapy clients - PubMed (nih.gov)

Therefore in regards to Freud's method which you call "garbage" there is so far only one which is better while also not causing harm, proving that Freud was a genius for his times,
not only because he was first one to invent a method that yields positive results but also because this proves that homosexuality is mental condition.

But anyway conversion therapy isn't something you're forced upon, in fact there are gay people who willingly wish to apply and these methods apply to them and prove useful obviously.

In regards to psychologydictionary.org calling Freud's method "new", I understand this as a method that yields positive results since all other methods so far were ineffective and harmful until that point.
Why don't they mention this study from 2000 as "new" instead I don't know so you might have a point about that. likely they didn't update page.


Reliable but have you actually try to use it?

I find it not informative at all, in comparison to psychologydictionary.org the information is very lacking.

This is from the APA:

Psychiatric News Main Frame

Which includes:
"It is fitting," commented APA President Rodrigo Muñoz, M.D., "that this position opposing reparative therapy has been adopted on the 25th anniversary of the removal of homosexuality as a mental disorder from the DSM. There is no scientific evidence that reparative or conversion therapy is effective in changing a person's sexual orientation." He added that "there is, however, evidence that this type of therapy can be destructive."

And:
The statement points out that "potential risks of 'reparative therapy' are great, including depression, anxiety, and self-destructive behavior, since therapist alignment with societal prejudices against homosexuality may reinforce self-hatred already experienced by a patient."

It goes on to emphasize that "many patients who have undergone 'reparative therapy' relate that they were inaccurately told that homosexuals are lonely, unhappy individuals who never achieve acceptance or satisfaction." These so-called therapies rarely if ever help patients understand that they can lead productive, satisfying lives even though they are attracted to people of the same gender some or all of the time. Therapists using these techniques also fail to help patients learn ways in which they can deal with society's stigmatization of homosexuality, according to the statement.

This last part is one reason why it is unethical to ban books from libraries as per the OP.

It is not uncommon that LGBTQ individuals have been indoctrinated into a belief, by religious doctrines/beliefs and the societies influenced by them, that said individuals internalize these prejudices and conclude that there is something “wrong” with them (i.e. a “mental deficiency” et. al).

This may be at least partially relieved by learning that their preferences are in fact shared by others and are nothing to be ashamed of by reading books or other materials which my be sought out in libraries.
This is precisely what those, who wish to ban books and punish libraries for making available such books, attempt to do….. to silence any voices that don’t align with their misguided moral sensibilities.

 

[paradox]

Psychiatric News Main Frame

Which includes:
...
There is no scientific evidence that reparative or conversion therapy is effective in changing a person's sexual orientation.

The article which you linked is from January 15, 1999

And is contradictory to the following research from 2000 which causes no harm:
Retrospective self-reports of changes in homosexual orientation: a consumer survey of conversion therapy clients - PubMed (nih.gov)

See also:
What We Know | What does the scholarly research say about whether conversion therapy can alter sexual orientation without causing harm? | What We Know (cornell.edu)

I give up from this debate, I'm really exhausted.
You guys believe what ever you wish, we live in a free world after all.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Because:

1.) I'm unable to find APA definition of "sociopathic personality disturbance" to verify it's not mental disorder.

The fact that you can't find it should be your first clue.

It’s not used anymore.

2.) You differentiate the two but APA dictionary does not seem to.

What you’ve cited about “sociopathic personality disturbance” didn’t come from the APA Dictionary. Rather, it came from Psychologydictionary.org. And if you read it, you will see it is referring to a diagnosis from the very first edition of the DSM that was published in 1952, rather than a current diagnosis that is used. There’s your problem, I think.

3.) There is no way in verifying you are what you said you are - a psychology major. even though it seems like you know what you're saying.

Well, if it seems like I know what I’m saying, and I’m providing the evidence to back it up …. then perhaps I’m being honest with you here. But please don’t take my word for it. You can verify everything I’ve said, as I’ve tried to do by posting links that back up my assertions.

I did read it but not thoroughly, sadly I have no way to search scholarly articles of other countries to compare research and conclusions, I don't speak other languages to crawl trough non-English sites, it's just too difficult and time consuming.

What language do you speak? Maybe I can find one for you.

In any case I see all of this with great suspicion because I see it as politically motivated.

Why? What evidence is that based on?

I ask because all evidence provided for you thus far has indicated that it is not “politically motivated” and rather is, “evidence-based.”