Banned from the daily mail :(

ah... well I guess it is still London... half thought you were going to post some barge/Canal boat with two floors or something
 
spoffle said:
No, that's a lack of acknowledgement. That isn't the same as an acknowledgement that it isn't a mental illness.
Click to expand...

In terms of outcomes it is. "We've studied this and have found no reason or evidence to suggest it is a mental illness" is practically synonymous with "It is not a mental illness", or is at least equal to it until better evidence comes along.

Either way the original point I was making remains, stating that transgendered people are suffering from a 'mental illness' cannot simply be written off as 'just an opinion' as if it has equal weight against the thousands of hours of research into the subject and consensus within the field which disagrees with that conclusion (whichever way you try to spin it).

Disagreeing with scientific consensus alone isn't ban-worthy. If someone wants to state that man didn't evolve from apes, they're free to be ignorant and shouldn't be banned by a national paper's forums for holding that belief. Likewise, I'm not so left-leaning that I think saying things that are factually correct but that might hurt someone's feelings should be always censored. However saying something that does insult a group of people AND is generally disagreed with by the people that study it does irk me.
 
mental illness is subjective to some extent

people naturally attracted to the same sex used to be classified as being mentally ill, they're not these days mostly as society is accepting of people like that

people naturally attracted to kids on the other hand, well that isn't likely to ever be acceptable so the mental illness tag is still appropriate

likewise there is controversy over transsexuals - whether it is classified as a disorder is more political than anything else 'scientific consensus' is meaningless in that context - if there is actually consensus on it (which AFAIK there isn't) then all it means is that psychiatrists have chosen to now classify it differently.
 
[FnG]magnolia;28126872 said:
Whenever we enjoy the pleasure of a new groen thread I always want him to explain again why man didn't go to the moon and why all women are despicable pieces of human trash.

Those were probably his high water mark in terms of threads posted.
Click to expand...

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18662434 - that one?

It was pretty funny how quickly a thread about marriage turned into a thread about how feminism is just a concept based on lies and men were apparantly much more oppressed than woman throughout history.

-insert 'That escalated quickly' meme-
 
Last edited:
dowie said:
likewise there is controversy over transsexuals - whether it is classified as a disorder is more political than anything else 'scientific consensus' is meaningless in that context - if there is actually consensus on it (which AFAIK there isn't) then all it means is that psychiatrists have chosen to now classify it differently.
Click to expand...

There is no controversy. It is not a mental health illness. The classifications are not politically defined they are all medically defined. There is a consensus on that. You quite clearly don't know what you are on about. :p
 
Crpwned said:
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18662434 - that one?

It was pretty funny how quickly a thread about marriage turned into a thread about how feminism is just a concept based on lies and men were apparantly much more oppressed than woman throughout history.

-insert 'That escalated quickly' meme-
Click to expand...

Yep.

groen said:
Men have always done their share of work around the house. It is only women with their victim mentality who can turn sitting around watching tv (aka motherhood) a full time job.

From a mans perspective, he would be out all day working to provide for the house so he expected some food on the table when he got home, it was seen as the least the women could do for the man. Now that is seen as rampant sexism by some, why? because women started calling motherhood a full time job. Women wanted to work, now they are complaining about that as well. Biologically they are potential mothers, that is the purpose of women, for the continuation of the human race and so on. Anyway that argument is silly because in this day and age men are expected to be the sole bread winner and cook and clean and do their share of the chores, as well as any maintenance or heavy work around the house. So men are still more oppressed than women even post feminism. Men were the more oppressed sex in history and continue to be the more oppressed sex post modern feminism.
Click to expand...

The thing is that the DM hates women almost as much as the OP does (after muslims but just before gays and blacks) so he must have done something remarkable to get banned.
 
Xordium said:
There is no controversy. It is not a mental health illness. The classifications are not politically defined they are all medically defined. There is a consensus on that. You quite clearly don't know what you are on about. :p
Click to expand...

What do you mean by 'medically defined' as opposed to 'politically defined'?

It seems like it is classifed as a disorder still in the US for example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_identity_disorder

Gender identity disorder is classified as a medical disorder by the ICD-10 CM[7] and DSM-5 (called gender dysphoria).[8] Many transgender people and researchers support declassification of GID because they say the diagnosis pathologizes gender variance, reinforces the binary model of gender,[9] and can result in stigmatization of transgender individuals.[8] The official classification of gender dysphoria as a disorder in the DSM-5 may help resolve some of these issues, because the term gender dysphoria applies only to the discontent experienced by some persons resulting from gender identity issues.[8]
Click to expand...

The argument that the deletion of homosexuality as a mental disorder from the DSM-III and the creation of the GID diagnosis was a sleight of hand by psychiatrists, who changed the focus of the diagnosis from the deviant desire for the same sex to the subversive identity (or the belief/desire for membership of another sex/gender), is discussed among sources.[55][56] By contrast, Kenneth Zucker and Robert Spitzer argue that GID was included in the DSM-III (7 years after homosexuality was removed from the DSM-II) because it "met the generally accepted criteria used by the framers of DSM-III for inclusion."[57] Some researchers, including Dr. Robert Spitzer and Dr. Paul J. Fink, contend that the behaviors and experiences seen in transsexualism are abnormal and constitute a dysfunction.[58]

Individuals with GID may or may not regard their own cross-gender feelings and behaviors as a disorder. Advantages and disadvantages exist to classifying GID as a disorder.[10] Because GID is classified as a disorder in the DSM-IV-TR, many insurance companies are willing to cover some of the expenses of sex reassignment therapy. Without the classification of GID as a medical disorder, sex reassignment therapy may be viewed as cosmetic treatment, rather than medically necessary treatment, and may not be covered.[59] In the United States, transgender people are less likely than others to have health insurance, and often face hostility and insensitivity from healthcare providers.[60]
Click to expand...

So it seems it is actually classified as a disorder by some? Perhaps that isn't the case in the UK but it seems to be in the US. Now that choice over classification would seem to be partly political rather than representing any gulf in scientific consensus between the UK and US? (for clarification I don't mean in terms of party politics, perhaps political is a bad choice of phrase)

Now granted you're the expert here but to me it seems like it is fairly 'political'... homosexuality is no longer classified as a disorder because society accepts it, paedophilia is a disorder?

I'm happy to accept that I might have got this all wrong, but why is homosexuality no longer a disorder whereas pedophilia is (I'm not trying to make any further comparisons between the two groups or be insulting to gay people in asking this question) - both are deviations from the norm but it seems that the question of a disorder has some social/political aspect regarding the acceptability in society as a whole of that deviant behaviour. If we were all still religious nuts then I'd wager homosexuality would still be a disorder.

For example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia#Development_and_sexual_orientation

Pedophilia emerges before or during puberty, and is stable over time.[44] It is self-discovered, not chosen.[5] For these reasons, pedophilia has been described as a disorder of sexual preference, phenomenologically similar to a heterosexual or homosexual sexual orientation.[44] These observations, however, do not exclude pedophilia from the group of mental disorders because pedophilic acts cause harm, and pedophiles can sometimes be helped by mental health professionals to refrain from acting on their impulses which cause harm to children.
Click to expand...

From my simplistic pov it seems that nonces are just naturally attracted to kids just as normal people are naturally attracted to the opposite sex and gay people to the same sex.... The classification is because their actions cause harm - now if we were a deeply religious society then we might deem homosexual acts to cause harm, in fact we could cite some health issues and STD risks associated with it as well as going against God's wishes - perhaps homosexuality would then still be a disorder - not because our understanding of medical science was any different but simply because what it deemed harmful in wider society is different. And that is what I mean by 'political'. Not trying to get into a tit for tat bun fight over this as I'll happily admit I'm the lay person as far as this is concerned, but I am genuinely interested and your post re: transsexuals telling me it isn't a disorder seems to go against the article above at least as far as the US is concerned.
 
Last edited:
The critical point that is highlighted in the DSM V - the disease process is not gender dysphoria as such but the anxiety and stress caused by the process. As that anxiety/stress is not present in all cases we correctly determine the the stress is the actual problem. Contrast that to say depression where the problems are always present and therefore we can see depression as part of the disease process. Plenty of young girls get stressed about their wardrobe we don't medicalise their expenditure in Top Shop but we do get concerned and medicalise the manifestations of their disenfranchisement eg not eating etc.

A great deal of the bad thinking you are referring to comes back to bad arguments and poor science. This is best encapsulated by the falsification of work by John Money at John Hopkins (worth a read if you want to know why some people came to think what they did) and the stupid nature/nurture debate.
 
anything I don't mind said:
I have 20000 upvotes in the positive since 04/8/2013 from 671 comments.

31,641
Negative Ratings: 11,597
Overall Rating: 20,044

Total number of comments: 671

I thought it was going well. Must have hit too many silent warnings over the years and they finally had enough :(
Click to expand...

226,769
Negative Ratings: 44,596
Overall Rating: 182,173

Total number of comments: 3,523

I'm +182k green arrows
 
Trolling the daily mail comments sections is lunchtime fun, lost count of the amount of fake Ip and usernames in that place of single minded evilness.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom