When did homosexuality stop (officially) being regarded as a mental disorder? (poll, Marines)

[stiffnecked]

Originally Posted by hammertime33

What do you mean by "aversion to the idea of homosexuality"? If you're talking about a natural aversion to the thought of having homosexual sex, then sure, I bet most people have that in the same way I, as a homosexual, have a natural aversion to the thought of having heterosexual sex.

If you're talking about some sort of "aversion" towards people who happen to be homosexual, that's not natural. That's a learned bigotry.

Homosexuality is an unnatural act. It serves no biological purpose. It does nothing to promote, preserve or propagate the human race. The homosexual act is therefore an abberation. So an aversion towards homosexuals isn't learned bigotry.

[filihok]

Originally Posted by stiffnecked

Homosexuality is an unnatural act. It serves no biological purpose. It does nothing to promote, preserve or propagate the human race. The homosexual act is therefore an abberation. So an aversion towards homosexuals isn't learned bigotry.

Posting on CD is an unnatural act that serves no biological purpose.

[bchris02]

Aversion towards gay sex or same sex intimacy is natural for most people. Hatred towards homosexuals is generally learned though. There is a difference between a natural objection to something and hatred towards them. I didn't even know what gay was until 3rd grade.

[filihok]

Originally Posted by bchris02

Aversion towards gay sex or same sex intimacy is natural for most people. Hatred towards homosexuals is generally learned though. There is a difference between a natural objection to something and hatred towards them. I didn't even know what gay was until 3rd grade.

You bring up an interesting point.

Isn't aversion towards opposite sex intimacy also natural?

How many kids see opposite sex couples kiss and think that it is "icky". And what is the typical response to that? "Mommies and daddies kiss because..." so children are socialized to accept same sex intimacy.

[diva360]

Originally Posted by OzzyRules

First of all, I have already tried posting this topic in Psychology, and I was told that it belongs here.

I believe that all human beings have a natural aversion to the idea of homosexuality. It is the same feeling that any normal person would have towards anyone with a mental disorder. It is natural to feel empathy and even pity towards them.

But suddenly it has been labelled as politically incorrect to feel this way. Now it is even politically correct to call it hateful if anyone expresses that feeling.

Ten years ago this was the norm, however. So I don't believe that all the self-described "gay supporters" are being honest when they say that they don't feel this aversion as well.

How did this change happen so quickly and why?

Um, in 1973, homosexuality was removed from the Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) II by the largest and most reputable professional organization of psychiatrists, the APA, so that's pretty easy to answer. That was almost 40 years ago. As for your claim that "all human beings have a natural aversion to the idea of homosexuality," I would need to see some concrete evidence to back that up. I am a heterosexual woman, but I have no aversion to homosexuality, so the fact that I feel that way pretty much refutes your claim about "all human beings." You are mistaking deductive reasoning for inductive; you can't logically universalize your feelings without taking into account all those who might disagree. Your personal beliefs do not substitute for evidence. I'll grant that it might very well seem to you that all the people you know seem to "have a natural aversion to homosexuality," but it does not follow from that that all people everywhere do.

[Clark Park]

Homosexuality is natural. It has been recorded throughout history and in every type of society, culture, and country. Homosexual behavior has been studied in hundreds of different species of animals.

It is not a requirement nor the duty of every single man and woman in the world to engage in heterosexual intercourse and pro-create.

That is why the American Anthropological Association has come out on the side of LGBT rights. Ditto for the American Sociological Association.

It's so sad to see people desperately trying to justify or legitimize their prejudice and intolerance. So sad. Pathetic, really.

[Fiyero]

Originally Posted by stiffnecked

Homosexuality is an unnatural act. It serves no biological purpose. It does nothing to promote, preserve or propagate the human race. The homosexual act is therefore an abberation. So an aversion towards homosexuals isn't learned bigotry.

We've already proven your statements are patently false. Why do you keep spreading lies when science tells us you're wrong? Homosexuality is in every species on Earth. It's a necessary mechanism for the survival of numerous species.

[diva360]

Originally Posted by tvdxer

If you are asking when the APA stopped regarding homosexuality as a mental disorder, it was in 1973, as a past poster has said.

What's more critical is the view of homosexuality among the public rather than specialists. I think the ardent support today for same-sex marriage is due to the successful re-framing of it by the homosexualist camp as an issue of equality rather than morality. Homosexuality used to be almost synonymous with "pedophilia" in the public imagination, and pedophilia even today is abhorred. Beginning in the 1980s, many TV shows began to include homosexual characters; there was also the AIDS epidemic, which inspired pity in many Americans (but reinforced the abhorrence among many others). The number of TV shows with homosexual characters increased over the 1990s, perhaps culminating with Ellen DeGeneres's coming out on prime-time TV. As a result (obviously, probably not this alone caused it), there was a domino effect of homosexuals coming out of the closet. The image of homosexuality held by the general public changed from the anonymous monster preying on young boys of the 1950's to the still anonymous flamboyant drag queen marching in the gay pride parade of the 1980's to otherwise "normal", decent people - work colleagues, friends, cousins - who just happened to be attracted to the same sex in the 2000's. Homosexuals were a horrendous abstraction in the 1950's, but by the 1990's and 2000's, people could put a face to the word "gay" (because "gay" sounds so much better than "homosexual").

The homosexual crowd did not seem to REALLY clamor loudly for marriage rights (in the U.S.) until the early 2000's. It was then that the idea of same-sex "marriage" seemed a possibility to the normal person rather than far-flung nonsense. People - especially women, who tend to be more emotional and less rational than men - thought that it wasn't fair that two men or two women "in love" with one another - members of the pairs often coming from their family, colleagues, friends - could not have the rights of marriage. Maybe part of this was that the whole idea of "marriage" had underwent a transition from a permanent contract to bind together families, create economic well-being, and ensure that the offspring was raised by both a father and a mother to the same, but this time based on the mutual erotic "love" of a man and woman, to just a relationship based on "love", not necessarily permanent, nor strictly linked to child-bearing, and economically detrimental (at least initially) to both partners.

What is your argument here? I agree that the APA manual changed in 1973; no one can really dispute that--it's a fact. I find the third sentence in the second paragraph of your posting confusing: are you saying that homosexuality is actually equivalent with pedophilia? If you are not saying that, then why even bring it up and why shouldn't gay rights be an issue of equality? As a heterosexual woman, I've been advocating for gay rights, including full marriage equality, for a long time. You might say, and I quote, that women "tend to be more emotional and less rational than men," and I'm assuming you mean that women tend to have our hearts rather than our brains tugged in the advancement of full human rights for gay people, but what do you really mean by that? I'm really not sure of your argument here; I'm hoping you will clarify. I'm especially confused by what you mean by love; you said that "marriage" had underwent (I think you mean undergone) a transition, but after that I couldn't figure out what you were trying to say because you said "but this time." Are you trying to say that this time things will be different? If that's what you mean, then what evidence of that do you have? I'm really curious and I will await your response.

[jeffersondavis]

It's a mental and moral disorder. Humans were created to procreate.

[jeffersondavis]

Originally Posted by Fiyero

. It's a necessary mechanism for the survival of numerous species.

That statement doesn't make a lick of sense.