858
859

[Serious] What's an offensive, but legitimate question you want to know the answer to?serious replies only (self.AskReddit)

Thatguywithashirt が 投稿

並べ替え:
論争中 (提案されたアイデア)
ベストトップ新着古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]sappy17389 174ポイント175ポイント  (459子コメント)

How is being gay not considered a mental illness?

[–]oogapalooza 229ポイント230ポイント  (218子コメント)

Because it isn't a mental illness.

[–]7hr0wawayaccount 125ポイント126ポイント  (156子コメント)

How isn't it?

[–]oogapalooza 102ポイント103ポイント  (44子コメント)

Attraction is biological. No one chooses to prefer blondes over brunettes. No one chooses muscles over beer belly. No one chooses who they are attracted to, it is out of our control. Whether you prefer men or women is not related to the mind. You can't take a pill and gradually find yourself attracted to the opposite sex like you would take a pill to even out the hormones that aggravate depression. Its completely illogical to suggest that sexual preference is a mental illness.

[–]AnAnonymousFool -1ポイント0ポイント  (9子コメント)

How come it even exists though? It's unnatural.

Just so people know I support gay marriage and homosexuality but I just don't understand it

[–]segasaurus 3ポイント4ポイント  (14子コメント)

What about pedophilia?

[–]OuttaSightVegemite -4ポイント-3ポイント  (1子コメント)

Since the majority of pedophiles are straight men, I don't think that argument stands.

[–]mikkylock 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

I read an article about a doctor who is lobbying to have pedophilia marked as a sexual orientation. He's NOT saying that it's okay...but he is saying it's something that is genetic. It's an interesting thought, to say the least.

コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

    [–]stereofailure 5ポイント6ポイント  (4子コメント)

    No one chooses to be attracted to children either, but we still consider that a mental disorder. Choice is actually a really weird thing to highlight in an argument over whether something is a disorder/illness as people rarely choose to be schizophrenic, OCD, etc. either. As for the pill thing, the curability at present time is an absurd way to define what's a disease or not.

    [–]wackawacka2 -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Let's leave it to consensual sex among adults. A child is off limits, period. It's not even close to being the same concept.

    [–]ospino [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

    Not in harm caused, but in a discussion if atypical sexual attraction is a mental illness it's the same issue.

    [–]uptotwentycharacters -3ポイント-2ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Pedophilia harms people. Homosexuality does not.

    [–]7hr0wawayaccount 91ポイント92ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I just looked up the mental illness definition and turns out I had a very wrong idea of what it meant. Thanks for the explanation and correction.

    [–]Auriela 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I honestly don't know much about the subject, but it seems like we don't have enough insight into the biological and physiological aspects that contribute to sexual orientation.

    Maybe it's a technical limit, or just something that hasn't yet been researched enough. Although homosexuality has been researched extensively, there's much to learn and labeling homsexuality as a mental illness is jumping to a conclusion without enough understanding either individually or as a society.

    Here is a good article about how scientists are studying what makes homosexuals and heterosexuals different. So far there doesn't seem to be any evidence to indicate that it's a illness of someone's mentality. Sexual orientation seems to be equal parts societal and biological.

    コメントをもっと表示する (11 返事)

      [–]CanGreenBeret 121ポイント122ポイント  (99子コメント)

      While I can agree that being gay is definitley something different about a person's brain, "illness" implies something else.

      In modern society, there is nothing harmful to one's self or to society itself for being gay.

      It is simply a fact that is true about some people.

      [–]RoboLegGaming 1ポイント2ポイント  (17子コメント)

      Although, being gay in prehistoric society is pretty bad, as you dont get kids.

      [–]PureChaosDI 23ポイント24ポイント  (14子コメント)

      there is a theory i heard that being gay is a built in population control. I mean at it's core it is a mutation. in plenty of historic societies it was considered an illness because it was different it was unexpected, we didn't know what caused it, nowadays it isn't because we know it's widespread and that it can't be "cured" because it isn't something that needs to be cured.

      S***, nearly every species on the planet has homosexuality, that can't be a coincidence.

      man this turned into a ramble didn't it?

      [–]Consecro 4ポイント5ポイント  (8子コメント)

      I was looking for this. In my opinion the science sounds logical behind this.
      Not to mention, being around Gay guys is a privilege and incredibly uplifting.

      [–]whatthehellisit1 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Perhaps in prehistoric societies being gay wasn't overly analyzed and was just fine and dandy.

      コメントをもっと表示する (4 返事)

        [–]Mupps5 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

        if the need for a kid was there you could still get a girl pregnant. you just wouldn't enjoy the sex as much I suppose.

        コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

          [–]HALL9000ish 15ポイント16ポイント  (12子コメント)

          I'd personaly go with "mental disorder."

          I don't find that term insulting, it just means "atypical" to me. I'm also autistic, so I have a much more significant mental disorder. I don't consider this a bad thing.

          [–]CanGreenBeret 26ポイント27ポイント  (11子コメント)

          "disorder" still implies something is different in a destructive/deficient way.

          Autism is a disorder in that it makes life more difficult in a objective completing-tasks and interacting with society way.

          Being gay is not a disorder in that it doesn't actually make doing things or interacting more difficult. It only makes things difficult when others choose to make it so.

          I'm not trying to say that others don't choose to make your life difficult, because I'm sure that happens.

          [–]HALL9000ish 8ポイント9ポイント  (7子コメント)

          I could make the same argument about neurotipical syndrome (what autistics refer to normal people as), but your the majority, so what your good at and bad at is considered normal. I'm good at other things and bad at other things, it evens out. Most of the difficulty comes with interacting with neurotipicals. Swap the ratios around and you guys would be having the same trouble. Same thing with gay people.

          Disorder, you must remember, does not imply worse. That's disabilty.

          コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

            [–]kon22 -2ポイント-1ポイント  (11子コメント)

            Isn't it as much of an illness as being daltonic is? Call it condition, if you want, but it can be argued that is something not normal.

            [–]CanGreenBeret 13ポイント14ポイント  (7子コメント)

            I agree its not normal but my argument is that the requirement for being an illness is both abnormality and internal or external detriment.

            Gay people aren't weaker or dumber or less capable.

            Having blonde hair in a society with only dark hair is as much as an illness as homosexuality.

            コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

              [–]MasterFubar -4ポイント-3ポイント  (2子コメント)

              There is something harmful to oneself in the fact that one is significantly less likely to have biological children when gay.

              If you think that's nothing, check all the clinics out there specializing in reproductive disorders. If being sterile is considered an anomaly, why shouldn't being gay also be considered so?

              コメントをもっと表示する (6 返事)

                [–]Isord 20ポイント21ポイント  (1子コメント)

                Mental illness requires that you be negatively impacted by whatever it is you are considering a mental illness. Homosexuality does not negatively impact your ability to eat, sleep, breath, or interact with other people. OTHER people may have their own issues, but the person who is homosexual does not.

                [–]immibis -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                I think the word "disorder" fits better, if anything.

                コメントをもっと表示する (9 返事)

                  [–]immibis 95ポイント96ポイント  (5子コメント)

                  Circular reasoning that explains nothing. Still has 20 upvotes. Way to go, Reddit.

                  [–]brickmack 3ポイント4ポイント  (2子コメント)

                  Its not circular logic, its just stating a fact. Homosexuality does not meet any commonly accepted definition of mental illness, because it does not negatively impact a person's cognition, emotional state, or ability to interact with others. It could be considered a mental defect in that its abnormal, but so is red hair and nobody thinks they're sick. Its not a mental illness because it doesn't meet any of the requirements other than being somewhat unusual

                  [–]noobswag99 91ポイント92ポイント  (47子コメント)

                  It is a mental defect however. Genetically, humans are meant to be attracted to the other gender. When a mutation occurs, however, different results can be achieved, like those who are gay and those who have gender identity disorder.

                  [–]fluffingdazman 14ポイント15ポイント  (18子コメント)

                  I heard that homosexuality is prevalent in the animal kingdom

                  [–]TalesFromThe5thGrade 22ポイント23ポイント  (12子コメント)

                  Some animals are also born with 3 legs, doesn't make it normal, and definitely not natural. (not hatin on gays tho)

                  [–]yeahthx 14ポイント15ポイント  (4子コメント)

                  The rate of homosexuality within most animal species is the same as the rate within humans, and it's actually very high. Homosexuality is far from being "unnatural" in the statistical sense. It occurs in all higher species, even when members of the opposite sex are present and presumably available for mating.

                  There are lots of interesting scientific theories on the importance of homosexuality in biological life.

                  [–]MEGATRONHASFALLEN 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  Plus, there are theories that homosexuality was 'designed' to limit population and to have extra bodies to take care of the children and elderly in the 'pack'.

                  [–]Korberos 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  definitely not natural

                  It happens naturally in nature. It is definitely natural. It's not helpful for the purpose of procreation, sure... but natural is a perfect word for it.

                  [–]caretta_caretta 8ポイント9ポイント  (3子コメント)

                  It is perfectly "natural." That is the way they are born, random mutations happen all the time and the deleterious ones are just as natural as the beneficial ones. "Normal" is a loaded word. Sure, being gay may not be the "norm" but there is nothing inherently better or worse about it.

                  [–]GrizTod 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

                  Exactly. It's part of natural selection. A three legged animal is unlikely to survive and reproduce.

                  [–]caretta_caretta 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

                  That is true, but being gay is comparable to being born with three legs only in that they are both inherent to the organism involved. A gay person may be less likely to reproduce as an individual, but as others have pointed out, the current hypothesis is that a non-reproducing individual will not only slow resource consumption but also help care for others in the community, which benefits the population as a whole and can help pass down their genes through their family members, who are more likely to survive due to their help. Since evolution works on populations, it is still a positive thing even if the individual does not reproduce themselves.

                  コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                    [–]silence9 4ポイント5ポイント  (4子コメント)

                    Yeah, however if you read about how those animals or species normally behave it's pretty clear that it's not so much that they will only have sex or be in a homosexual relationship but would be in any relationship and that one just happened to suit them best.

                    It's more or less the same with humans.

                    [–]glrnn 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

                    How do you see that as being the same with humans?

                    [–]silence9 -1ポイント0ポイント  (2子コメント)

                    When you are born you are essentially a ball of needs you will latch onto any positive attention you can get. This holds true throughout life and doesn't specifically have anything to do with sex. It's not so much that someone is homosexual, it's just that same sex figures have always seemed to be a more positive experience than the other. Sex(the act) is more about displaying affection and displaying emotion, you just enjoy displaying that affection with the same sex because that is the sex you most desire to be in a relationship with.

                    [–]ninethea 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

                    nah i seem to have a "more positive experience" with males than i do with females but i like women

                    [–]ItSaidMakeAUsername 15ポイント16ポイント  (3子コメント)

                    Evolutionary psychology suggests a "gay uncle" hypothesis.

                    While the gay uncle cannot pass on his genes, there is still a chance that his siblings would have parts of the same genes that made him gay. Since the uncle will have no children, he can help the family group protect and take care of theirs, lessening the load on the entire family, and helping his siblings children, which can then pass on those genes.

                    [–]Pangolin007 -1ポイント0ポイント  (2子コメント)

                    So is gayness a gene? (I too am all for gay rights just curious)

                    コメントをもっと表示する (9 返事)

                      [–]DinglesRip 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      I think you're missing the point of his question.

                      [–]derekaa 2ポイント3ポイント  (3子コメント)

                      Absolutely no evidence to back it up whatsoever, but a relative told me that she thinks it's an evolutionary trait to prevent overpopulation. Interesting to think about at least.

                      [–]ItSaidMakeAUsername 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      Copying and pasting my other comment.

                      Evolutionary psychology offers a "gay uncle" hypothesis.

                      While the gay uncle cannot pass on his genes, there is still a chance that his siblings would have parts of the same genes that made him gay. Since the uncle will have no children, he can help the family group protect and take care of theirs, lessening the load on the entire family, and helping his siblings children, which can then pass on those genes.

                      [–]Trichomes17 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

                      I read a while back that female relatives of gay men tend to be more fertile than average women. If true, the female relatives of gay men would be more likely to have many kids, which would counter the gay men not having kids.

                      Info for the Interested: http://www.livescience.com/2623-gays-dont-extinct.html

                      コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                        [–]Lowelll 76ポイント77ポイント  (54子コメント)

                        For it to be an illness it has to be a negative thing. Having red hair is rather uncommon as well, but it has no negative effect on the person, so it's not considered an illness.

                        [–]Honey-Badger -2ポイント-1ポイント  (3子コメント)

                        Having red hair is an inherited genetic trait, completely different to sexual preference. Technically you could say being gay is an illness as our only real purpose as animals is to procreate, gay sex wont result in procreation.

                        [–]fresasandcrema 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

                        Doesn't it have a negative affect on the continuance of the human race?

                        [–]SemMark5 -5ポイント-4ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        but AIDS

                        [–]FlySwat -5ポイント-4ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        Lacking a soul seems pretty negative to me.

                        コメントをもっと表示する (4 返事)

                          [–]hexmess 8ポイント9ポイント  (1子コメント)

                          Because humans believe there is more to our existence beyond eat, sleep, procreate. By your logic, doing anything beyond those three things is "mental illness".

                          [–]Xannin 7ポイント8ポイント  (2子コメント)

                          In a meeting so I can't type much, but look up the gay uncle theory.

                          [–]UpfrontFinn 32ポイント33ポイント  (12子コメント)

                          Because mental illness is any of various disorders in which a person's thoughts, emotions, or behaviour are so abnormal as to cause suffering to himself, herself, or other people.

                          Being gay isn't abnormal(homosexuality is present in every species in the animal kingdom so it's normal behaviour) nor does it cause suffering to anyone.

                          [–]teriyaki_donut 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

                          homosexuality is present in every species in the animal kingdom

                          I don't think this is true

                          コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

                            [–]H1N11 -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

                            Its mutated genes bro

                            [–]anonymousfetus 117ポイント118ポイント  (40子コメント)

                            A mental illness has to be atypical and have a negative effect on the person. Considering how being gay isn't considered that bad now, there's no reason for it to be an illness. It's basically like being left-handed.

                            Not to mention the fact that homosexuality is quite common in the animal kingdom.

                            [–]MnemonicFitness 19ポイント20ポイント  (10子コメント)

                            Not to mention the fact that homosexuality is quite common in the animal kingdom.

                            Killing is also common. Whether something is common in the animal kingdom tells us nothing about whether something is good or bad.

                            A mental illness has to be atypical and have a negative effect on the person.

                            Under that definition, if I hear voices in my head and they do not affect my life negatively - then I do not have a mental illness.

                            [–]KingBooScaresYou 10ポイント11ポイント  (2子コメント)

                            I did a long dissertation on how useful psychiatric diagnosis actually is, and how reliable the DSM and ICD are.

                            Mental illness is for the most part completely subjective. In some cultures if you hear voices that dont impact negatively on your life, you could be hearing the word of God and you'd be celebrated. Whereas in the West, you'd be diagnosed with schizophrenia.

                            Essentially the only reason it was declassified was because of pressure groups.

                            [–]MnemonicFitness 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

                            Do you think the DSM and ICD are then arbitrary in terms of their classifications?

                            [–]KingBooScaresYou 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

                            Absolutely,

                            Its so subjective, and whats more is that the diagnosis sticks. I don't suffer from any severe mental illness, but the thing is I could very easily go to a psychiatrist, say I'm hearing voices amongst other things and be categorically diagnosed with schizophrenia or something despite actually being totally sane. Theres no definite way to prove whats actually going on. Ontop of this, if I was to stop showing symptoms, I wouldn't be cured of my disorder, and the psychiatrists wouldn't claim they made a mistake, no, i'd be in remission, as the schizophrenia tag would be stuck with me forever, despite actually never having suffered from it.

                            Of course its a made up hypothetical situation, but it serves to highlight how easy misdiagnosis is, and when you transfer this to the real world it really hits home how easy it is for psych's to smack a diagnosis on someone. Aside from this, theres so many revisions of the DSM and ICD, the symptoms of certain disorders change. So back in 1980 with an earlier edition, someone may have fulfilled the diagnosis of schizophrenia, whereas now since the actual classifications are different they may not be diagnosed with the same condition (or a condition) at all. (Pardon the overuse of schizophrenia, its been a while and I can't remember the exact examples that I used.)

                            Then obviously homosexuality is the greatest example of how mental illness is entirely viewed in the context of the location and era its found. Back in the day people died believing they were mentally ill, a disease afflicting their mind meaning they find their same sex attractive. Then suddenly, because of a pressure group, a mental illness is now just, not a mental illness. Then thats the end of it. Whats to say that 100 years down the line, schizophrenia won't be viewed in the same way? Personality disorders, maybe they will end up being just another form of 'normal'.

                            [–]Kiita-Ninetails -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

                            Technically everyone hears voices in their head, namely their own. I believe they are called intrusive thoughts.

                            コメントをもっと表示する (4 返事)

                              [–]FartCo 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

                              But I mean, we're made to reproduce, surely someone who's gay and doesn't reproduce is negative?

                              [–]kon22 -2ポイント-1ポイント  (5子コメント)

                              Isn't analogous to daltonism? Sure, it's not bad but it's not normal.

                              This kinda bothers me. Like when people talk about people with down syndrome or such "special". I believe that not accepting disabilities or conditions and trying to talk about them as if they're "good" or "normal" things is simply wrong and not helpful.

                              [–]menu_theme 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

                              I don't think anyone thinks that kind of "special" is a desirable trait. Nobody wishes they had Down's syndrome. I don't think anybody truly doesn't accept that it's a disability. The fact that "special" can also be used as an insult supports this.

                              Everyone knows it's a disability. A person with Down's syndrome is going to have a harder time living a "normal" life. But they use terms like "special" to soften the blow for the afflicted, or themselves, or whatever. Life is already going to be more of a struggle, why not lift their spirits a little? Focus on being positive instead of negative. It doesn't mean that they won't get the extra care or precautions deserved for the condition.

                              You're also using an example, in which something is clearly a disability, with something that you just admitted isn't bad, just not normal. They're not really comparable.

                              コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                                [–]lifeofsymmetry -3ポイント-2ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                But it isnt! It just isnt! There are gay penguins. That's about it. That is the only species that does lifelong gayness.

                                コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                                  [–]theexplosivecandle -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                  Technically it is, but it doesn't affect a person's ability to function and contribute to society, so it doesn't really matter.

                                  [–]andreib14 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                  We've reached a point in our society where a family doesn't need to have X kids to help with work so now attraction is based on preference instead of necessity. Some men/women prefer their own sex, 300 years ago they wouldn't have acted on it because they knew that in order to live they needed kids, now they are able to live their lives with no kids hence all the gay people.

                                  Another, more social cause IMO is that because the first world is so comfortable we have more time to find things that bother us and the big differences between the sexes came to light. Some people decided that dealing with a man/womans shit was too much and so they stick to the sex they are familiar with.

                                  [–]razezero1 -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                  I honestly have no qualms about gay people, someone I love and respect a great deal is gay, but technically homosexuality should be classified as a mental illness, it just doesn't need treatment because it's not harmful.

                                  [–]EIEIOOOO -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                  It's more disordered thinking. Same sex attractions are disordered because sex between same genders does not produce offspring. That's what sex is for. People also use it for pleasure, but that is an emotional choice.

                                  [–]user3201 -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                  A lot of people DO consider it a mental illness. Do you mean why it's not in the DSM?

                                  Also, it might not be a mental illness - it could be a perfectly sane response to a physical defect, ie. being sexually attracted to the wrong gender.

                                  [–]Honey-Badger 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                  Perhaps mental illness is the wrong phrase to use as a lot of people are ignoring your question and focusing on the fact that illness cause people pain/discomfort.

                                  What i believe you are asking is why isnt homosexuality seen as a disorder as it goes against our way of procreation which is something that all our ancestors had.

                                  [–]Fictional_Fish -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                  It should be. It is your brain not working as intended. The only reason it's not is because of stigmatization of mental illness. We consider "mentally ill" to be an insult. So instead of destigmatizing mental illness, we break off the disorders that we feel don't deserve to be insulted and stop calling them what they are.

                                  [–]underscore_mc 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                  Yo I'm gay and I totally understand your point here. From an evolutionary perspective, something isn't right here. Interesting

                                  [–]chinatownsnow 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                  I am too -- and I really hate how when you try to talk to other gays about the "Why" -- they shrivel into a corner and ask if you're a homophobe.

                                  [–]DROCITY -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                  I've always said this...

                                  [–]cacky_bird_legs -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                  Because the idea of "mental illness" is completely subjective. It's not like we're talking about actual diseases that can be diagnosed through objective means here.

                                  [–]Hepheastus -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                  There are good reasons for gays to exist. First is the gay uncle theory which says that if you live in a small group that struggles for survival you wont have any trouble producing children but you will have trouble raising them. So it would be helpful to have members of the group that don't reproduce but still help raise the children by providing food and protection ect. This works out for the gay uncle too because the children he helps raise are related to him so they share his genes and they get passed on.

                                  Second is the sneaky fucker theory which is that if you are gay you are not a competition for mates and others will tolerate you having close relationships with their mates. Then as the name would imply you fuck them when no one is looking. (this actually only applies to bisexuality but you get the idea). We see this happen in other animals too, the giant cuttlefish is the only one that I can name off the top of my head.

                                  In both cases its beneficial to have some gay members in the group but not everyone. Evolution happens at the level of populations not individuals.

                                  [–]chinatownsnow 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                  Open non-religious gay guy here.

                                  It absolutely is. "Illness" just has a negative connotation that suggests you are incapable.

                                  So in that sense, no homosexuality is not an "illness"; however, a penis is meant for the purpose of sexual reproduction. It is meant to go into a vagina, and leave the sperm there with the intension of creating a another human being. That is scientific fact, so yes it is technically a mental illness since it is a condition that alter behavior. We can function perfectly in society, as can other people with Tourettes or ADD, but it is not STATISTICALLY normal to be gay (I didn't say SOCIALLY normal).

                                  Homosexuality is scientifically based, and because of this I also believe that in the future we will probably be able to tell if a child is homosexual before it is even born. The same how we will probably be able to predict brain patterns and tell who would be a sociopath, more intelligent, or even if this child had other mental diseases such as down syndrome or autism. It may even be possible some day in the distant future to "cure" it.

                                  I've talked to others in the gay community about this, and they oftentimes refuse to even acknowledge homosexuality is scientifically based. It's a can of worms, and because of it -- it has become taboo to ask "why are people homosexual?"

                                  Thank you for bringing this up.

                                  [–]akaioi 22ポイント23ポイント  (7子コメント)

                                  It used to be, but they edited the DSM (short for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders). There's a saying I heard once which is kind of creepy in its simplicity . . .

                                  The majority is always sane

                                  [–]CraftyDrac 5ポイント6ポイント  (6子コメント)

                                  DSM is a factual handbook kept up to date with current discoveries/science

                                  [–]akaioi 1ポイント2ポイント  (5子コメント)

                                  It's also a cultural artifact, whether the good doctors admit it or not...

                                  [–]CraftyDrac 0ポイント1ポイント  (4子コメント)

                                  You say this based on?

                                  [–]akaioi 2ポイント3ポイント  (3子コメント)

                                  Look up "DSM as cultural artifact". There is a lot of scholarly chatter on the subject. Here's a primer-level discussion, don't have time to dig deep: http://www.psypress.co.uk/common/supplementary/184169360X/ch22_15.pdf

                                  [–]TwixSnickers 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                  a reply about the majority in Nazi Germany comes to mind...

                                  [–]akaioi 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                  I'll see yer Nazis and raise you some cannibal tribesmen. Are they insane?

                                  コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                                    [–]jimmymcperson 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                    Not necessarily being gay but as for transgender, its just easier to accept it rather than attempt to treat it. Why try and get a massive amount of people to change their way of thinking when we can get people to accept it. Nobody wants to be a bigot, so naturally acceptance is easier to bring about.

                                    [–]Token_Texan 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                    A mental illness tends to be a problem in your head that hurts yourself or other people not a benign consenting relationship between two adults.

                                    [–]VenomousJackalope 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                    It was in the DSM for a very long time, was only removed a few decades ago.

                                    [–]aliengraveyard 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                    It's not. A preference for people the same gender as you isn't different from a preference you have to a certain type of food.

                                    [–]Isord 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                    Because it does not significantly impact people's ability to function in society.

                                    [–]daytodave 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                    The definition of mental disorder is "mental or behavioral pattern that causes either suffering or a poor ability to function in ordinary life." Gayitude doesn't necessarily cause either of those.

                                    If you can say why specifically you think it should be considered a mental illness, you might get a more satisfying answer.

                                    [–]jsimco876 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                    Because freedom to want different things isn't an illness. Just like I want my kid to be whoever they want to be..gay or not. Does that make me have a mental illness?

                                    [–]tehftw 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                    If we were to consider being gay a mental illness, then what about every other fetish?

                                    [–]Helplessromantic 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                    Because mental illness is completely arbitrary, what we say is a mental illness is a mental illness.

                                    Once women being horny was considered a mental illness, now it's not, once being gay was considered a mental illness, now it's not.

                                    Generally it has to be harmful or some sort of detriment to be considered mental illness anymore.

                                    [–]Dert_ -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                    The same reason that being straight isn't a mental illness.

                                    [–]sammykleege 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                    Don't know if anyone will see this at this point. But A mental illness can be defined as someone who is mentally capable of harming themselves or others through physicalness or words. As being a gay doesn't do either of those things, it cant really be considered a mental illness.

                                    And before anyone one says pedophilia or beastilality, both of those are done through rape, as in one side of the interaction is being harmed because they didn't or aren't able to give consent. Those are mental illnesses.

                                    [–]Matrozi 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                    If your vision of normality is that a couple should be made in a way that they can have children, i think your view on life is very very very sad

                                    [–]wuboo 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                    You have to take a look at what are the requirements for what makes something a mental illness. Mental illness is a disorder that "causes suffering or a poor ability to function in ordinary life". Since gay people function quite well and suffering is usually caused by outside factors/people, it's not considered a mental illness.

                                    [–]whatanicekitty 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                    How is being a homophobe not considered a mental illness?

                                    [–]MelancholicLiquorice 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                    Because we're not ill. Simple.

                                    [–]jaijaikali 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                    It has evolutionary benefits, for one.

                                    [–]mellowcr4ke 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                    According to the DSM there are 4 major elements that need to be present to classify something as a mental disorder. In most instances more than one of these elements have to occur at the same time.

                                    • Danger for others or the individual him/herself: Obviously, being gay is not dangerous for the individual or for those around him

                                    • Limitations or disabilities: Being gay is not objectively a limitation or disability since they're still fully functional human beings regardless of their sexual preferences

                                    • Personal harm and suffering: Doesn't apply to homosexuality aside from the gay person having to deal with outside societal forces like religious fundamentalists and bigots

                                    • Statistical or social abnormality: This is the only part of the definition that actually applies, which in itself is not enough to make something a mental illness, and it's becoming less and less of an abnormality as it is more accepted in society because more people than ever before are feeling confident enough to "come out of the closet"

                                    So it's not considered a mental illness because there's simply no reason for it to be so. (interestingly it took most psychologists until the 70s to finally realize this)

                                    [–]coinaco 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                    The definition of mental illness is "a mental or behavioral pattern that causes either suffering or a poor ability to function in ordinary life."

                                    Being gay causes neither suffering nor inhibit function in ordinary life. Therefore, it's not a disorder nor illness.

                                    [–]jordanxbox1 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                    Mental illness refers to a wide range of mental health conditions — disorders that affect your mood, thinking and behavior. Examples of mental illness include depression, anxiety disorders, schizophrenia, eating disorders and addictive behaviors.

                                    Many people have mental health concerns from time to time. But a mental health concern becomes a mental illness when ongoing signs and symptoms cause frequent stress and affect your ability to function.

                                    A mental illness can make you miserable and can cause problems in your daily life, such as at work or in relationships. In most cases, symptoms can be managed with a combination of medications and counseling (psychotherapy).

                                    How does being gay affect your ability to function?

                                    [–]xjalta34 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                    A much larger percentage of people than you might imagine have had gay experiences. An even larger percentage have had thoughts or dreams in that vein. It's not abnormal behavior, just socially and culturally taboo to different degrees around the world.

                                    [–]DLiurro 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                    Why do you think it should be?

                                    [–]EverythingGlitters9 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                    For the same reason a lactose intolerant person isn't considered disabled. Being attracted to the same gender doesn't potentially harm someone or those around them. Mental illnesses such as bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, etc can be detrimental to a person's ability to function in the world and can potentially be dangerous to them and others. Gay people aren't harmful to themselves or others so there's no need to treat and consider it as we do other mental illness.

                                    コメントをもっと表示する (40 返事)