Prop 8?

@Lightwizard,

Where did I said or imply that the riot that mark the start of the movement have any direct connection to the APA de-listing or happen in the same time frame?

It would be nice if you could read my postings instead of reading things into them that I did not say. The movment did however indeed used the same pattern of uncivil behavior to get the APA to roll over as they started in dealing with the New York City police department.

So trying to backlist people and ending their ability to earn a living is not punishment? Trying to drive small businessmen and trade people out of business is not an effect to both punish people and frighten others in not supporting or expressing their opinions in the public square?

The gay right movement seem not to be at all concern about their free speak rights instead they are doing their very best to limit others citizens right to free speak by using the fear of losing their livehoods for themselves and their families.

Shame on you guys.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Sorry no need to turn to anything but history to know that there had been a lack of free scientific research in this field for a few generations now.

Says the man that didn't even know that being gay was listed as a sociopathic personality disorder. You don't know a damn thing about what you are talking about and it shows. Your claim that we have not studied the psychology of homosexuals in recent history is a lie.

Please stop lying in this thread.

BillRM wrote:

There is no question at all in my mind if a rock solid scientific paper containing any evidence that homosexuals couples should not be raising children for example, was public today that you and TKO and a few million others would be demanding the researchers heads.

Why would I want their head? I'd want to examine their method. That's how the scientific community works. Being that their has been research by groups out side of the APA, like the AAP(you're not paying attention, or you're being a coward about this), on the raising of children in gay households etc. You seem to think you've got the ammo scientifically, then bring it. The ammo for delisting gays has already been shared and reviewed. Why should your ideas be accepted with less?

I call. Show them or fold.

If you've got the research to prove that gays were in fact sociopaths and should have remained on the list, bring it. Let us examine the methods. You don't seem to like the conclusion of the scientific sources that have been presented to you, but you think it's okay to ignore them. If you don't agree with those findings, what was wrong with their process? You hate the conclusion because it doesn't support your belief, but you lack the ability to call into question it's content so you instead launch into your outstandingly dumb gay conspiracy theories.

T
K
O

1 Reply

@Diest TKO,

C'mon, Diest! Reading a biased article or two about a topic is just as good as diligently researching it.

Right?

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@BillRM,

It's your mangled grammar that gets you into trouble -- if you think you are clearly expressing yourself, you're on some kind of drug.

The approximately 30 gay activists who showed up at one of the APA meetings was no a riot -- it was a public demonstration. You're really sensitive that an activist movement is able to often get its way. Oh, pout, pout.

What person has been blacklisted, ending their ability to earn a living? You're blowing smoke, and you've broken your mirror. What small businessman or trade people have been driven out of business. Examples or shut up.

Where have any citizens had their right to free speech limited, lost their livelihoods for themselves and their families. Where are the examples, or shut up.

I suggest moving to another chair -- that one has a stick built into the seat.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

He's reading blogs and forums, no actual scientific study, and then repeats it like a parrot. Does polly want a carrot to go with the stick?

It's a gross example of "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing." Except RBM is really a danger to himself. He's going to have some smart gay hacker find out his IP address, then his address and come over a beat the s**t out of him. The APA still has paranoia listed as a mental disorder -- I think BRM need professional help.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Yes indeed as the APA own website was the source of a great deal of my information on the APA de-listing along with such base sources as a PBS radio interview with the daughter of the then incoming president of the APA.

Yes such sources can not indeed be view to carry any weight at all.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Yes indeed as the APA own website was the source of a great deal of my information on the APA de-listing along with such base sources as a PBS radio interview with the daughter of the then incoming president of the APA.

Yes such sources can not indeed be view to carry any weight at all.

Great. Can you provide a link to the info? I'd like to see what you have been reading. I doubt you will provide the link to this info.

That PBS radio program, can you link to it? Though I hardly think it matters, as the opinion of the daughter of the then-incoming president of the APA has extremely little relevance.

Unlike yourself, I have many family members, including my fiancee, who are psychiatrists or psychologists. Many of whom have been members of the APA for 30 or more years. I have been asking around, and they universally condemn your account of the de-listing of homosexuality and the general consensus is that you are a bigoted person who is searching for evidence to support your case, no matter how tenuous, and not some impartial observer as you would portray yourself as.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

This means your family is made of gay sleeper agents Cyclo. Didn't you know that?

The fact that the Hooker research had been done some 20 years prior to the delisting, is something that Billy thinks is ignorable.

T
K
O

0 Replies

@Lightwizard,

So showing up at a private conversion that was not open to the public and then interfering with the operation of that convention is all in the sphere of free speech?

As far as the attempts to do harm to the supporters of prop 8 any one of a hundred news stories found by using google news will confirm that.

Hell the movement own websites will proudly confirm it also.

You wish one name, is that your request of a person who was harm instead of the proven fact that the movement is trying to harm supporters of prop 8 and or frighten them at least from expressing their opinions. Is that the reasearch you wish me to do?

Knowing the movemnt websites I am fairly sure they will be bragging about any harm they had achieved so if I do not eat for a day or so to keep from thowning up on my keyboard I guess I could find such a name or a list of names for you.

God what a hateful place I will need to go however to do that!

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Well the information on the APA website was a few years ago so you would need to used the wayback machine at archieve.com to try to find it.

The interview with the daughter of the incoming president at the time was also a few years in ther past on PBS and I hear it over the radio.

It might or might not be possible to find an mp3 of that interveiw but it would be a job ot do.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Well the information on the APA website was a few years ago so you would need to used the wayback machine at archieve.com to try to find it.

Why? The APA de-listed this information from their website? Why would they do that.

I don't believe you are being truthful.

Quote:

The interview with the daughter of the incoming president at the time was also a few years in ther past on PBS and I hear it over the radio.

It might or might not be possible to find an mp3 of that interveiw but it would be a job ot do.

Translated: 'another piece of evidence to support my position which I cannot produce upon demand.'

Surely you realize how weak your argument is, when you can point to no supporting evidence whatsoever? That it devolves into an assertion?

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

Billy came in talking a big game...

T
K
O

0 Replies

@BillRM,

I Googled your claim of a hundred (was that an even hundred?) where there were attempts or any actual harm done to supporters of Proposition 8 and there was nada. Nothing. But it did relinquish this:

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Gay-Marriage-Ban-Supporters-Split.html

The factions who backed Prop 8 are apparantly more dangerous to each other than to the gay movement.

What exactly is a "private conversion" -- is that where one psychiatrist is trying to convert another psychiatrist? You're babbling again.

There was not hit where any journalist wrote that the gay activist on Prop 8 "were trying to harm supporters if Prop 8" Nada. Zero. It's your paranoid imagination. Are their psychiatric facilities nearby which can help you? Paranoia is still on the APA's list as a mental disorder.

Sure, come up with a list before you "throw up on your keyboard." You really need to change your diet and stop drinking.

You're just a sick man -- I think you need an exorcism.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

I am still working on the radio interview with the APA president daughter.

The internet is one hell of a powerful tool to do research and you should had waited just a little longer to post comments about my not being able to give links!

And of course the harm that the blacklisting and boycotts had done to people I will give that a go shortly.

Not bad at all for free research is it!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.psychiatricnews.org/pnews/98-07-17/dsm.html

If there was an official kickoff for APA's newly energized gay
psychiatrists, it was the 1970 annual meeting in San Francisco,
Sabshin suggested, where Gay Liberation Front activists along with
political protesters in support of other social and political causes
disrupted the meeting. "It was guerilla theater" at that meeting and
the one held in Washington, D.C., the next year, he said.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment; two years of guerilla theater at the yearly APA meetings!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In 1972, for the first time, the annual meeting featured exhibits and
discussions spotlighting positive aspects of the lives of gay
individuals. Also during that year well-known psychiatrists such as
Richard Green, M.D., Judd Marmor, M.D., and John Spiegel, M.D., began
openly challenging psychiatrists' attitudes toward and treatment of
homosexual patients, Sabshin observed. Marmor, a psychoanalyst who
would soon be elected APA president, played a particularly
significant role in trying to bridge the chasm that existed between
his psychoanalytic colleagues and psychiatrists who were convinced
that homosexuality was not an illness
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment it is the Judd Marmor who according to his daughter came out of the closet by bringing his 20 something boyfriend to his eighty birthday party!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.
In a key vote in December 1973, the Board of Trustees overwhelmingly
endorsed Spitzer's recommendation. Opponents of the decision
attempted to overturn it with a referendum of the APA membership in
early 1974-just as Sabshin was beginning his 23-year tenure as APA
medical director. The Board's decision to delete homosexuality from
the diagnostic manual was supported by 58 percent of the membership.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is how you decide a scientific issue by a vote of 58 to 42 percent?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the same time the debates over sexual orientation and
psychopathology were occurring, a small group of gay psychiatrists
was holding informal meetings to explore forming an organization that
would heighten their visibility and that of gay patients. This event,
unthinkable two or three years earlier, explained Robert Cabaj, M.D.,
to the overflow audience, culminated in 1978 in the establishment of
the organization that eventually became the Association of Gay and
Lesbian Psychiatrists (AGLP), which now has more than 600 members.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
600 hundreds gay APA members working with an incoming gay president and Gay Liberation Front activists to change the listing. Still does not sound like it had anything to do with science now does it?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

I am still working on the radio interview with the APA president daughter.

The internet is one hell of a powerful tool to do research and you should had waited just a little longer to post comments about my not being able to give links!

And of course the harm that the blacklisting and boycotts had done to people I will give that a go shortly.

Not bad at all for free research is it!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.psychiatricnews.org/pnews/98-07-17/dsm.html

If there was an official kickoff for APA's newly energized gay
psychiatrists, it was the 1970 annual meeting in San Francisco,
Sabshin suggested, where Gay Liberation Front activists along with
political protesters in support of other social and political causes
disrupted the meeting. "It was guerilla theater" at that meeting and
the one held in Washington, D.C., the next year, he said.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment; two years of guerilla theater at the yearly APA meetings!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In 1972, for the first time, the annual meeting featured exhibits and
discussions spotlighting positive aspects of the lives of gay
individuals. Also during that year well-known psychiatrists such as
Richard Green, M.D., Judd Marmor, M.D., and John Spiegel, M.D., began
openly challenging psychiatrists' attitudes toward and treatment of
homosexual patients, Sabshin observed. Marmor, a psychoanalyst who
would soon be elected APA president, played a particularly
significant role in trying to bridge the chasm that existed between
his psychoanalytic colleagues and psychiatrists who were convinced
that homosexuality was not an illness
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment it is the Judd Marmor who according to his daughter came out of the closet by bringing his 20 something boyfriend to his eighty birthday party!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.
In a key vote in December 1973, the Board of Trustees overwhelmingly
endorsed Spitzer's recommendation. Opponents of the decision
attempted to overturn it with a referendum of the APA membership in
early 1974-just as Sabshin was beginning his 23-year tenure as APA
medical director. The Board's decision to delete homosexuality from
the diagnostic manual was supported by 58 percent of the membership.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is how you decide a scientific issue by a vote of 58 to 42 percent?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the same time the debates over sexual orientation and
psychopathology were occurring, a small group of gay psychiatrists
was holding informal meetings to explore forming an organization that
would heighten their visibility and that of gay patients. This event,
unthinkable two or three years earlier, explained Robert Cabaj, M.D.,
to the overflow audience, culminated in 1978 in the establishment of
the organization that eventually became the Association of Gay and
Lesbian Psychiatrists (AGLP), which now has more than 600 members.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
600 hundreds gay APA members working with an incoming gay president and Gay Liberation Front activists to change the listing. Still does not sound like it had anything to do with science now does it?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bill, can you read?

The AGLP currently had more than 600 members at the time of the writing of the article; not that 600 gay APA members existed at the time.

The thing about this article, and about this whole issue which you don't understand very well, is the difference between Psychoanalytic thought and other schools of psychology. Yes, it has everything to do with science, as much as any psychology topic does. In this case, the question was one of dominance; of the former dominance of a group who treated every abnormality as a 'disorder' regardless of the effect said abnormality had on the subject's life. This group has been generally discredited - that is to say, instead of being the driving force of psychology in America, they are but one of a large variety of voices, many different theoretical outlooks which can lead to different diagnoses as well as treatments.

This is the problem with your amateurish understanding of the issue in question; you don't know enough about Psychology or the way the APA works to have a cogent opinion. All you know is your bigotry and homophobia. You have not started up from a neutral point, and looked at the available information to make a decision; you were already a bigot and a homophobe, like many here in America, and cast about looking for information with which to demonize 'the gays.'

Weak arguments such as this are not persuasive in the slightest, to anybody. They are a confirmation of your bigotry to all readers, not an argument built up on solid principles.

The fact remains that the APA de-listed homosexuality from the DSM for a very good reason: when challenged, the proponents of keeping it in could provide no persuasive evidence that Homosexuality harmed the clients in any way. Here's part of that article which you didn't see fit to share with us:

Quote:

While many APA members welcomed the new openness and opportunities to reassess their thinking, the stubborn polarization and factionalism that dogged this issue did not suddenly retreat into a quiet corner.

Sabshin credited the chair of APA's Committee on Nomenclature in the early 1970s, Robert Spitzer, M.D., with playing a pivotal role in propelling the evolution of APA's position on homosexuality. That committee was charged with revising the initial version of DSM, and Spitzer-armed with research showing there were no valid data to link homosexuality and mental illness-advocated forcefully for the strategy of deleting homosexuality from the disorders list and replacing it with a new one called "sexual orientation disturbance."

In a key vote in December 1973, the Board of Trustees overwhelmingly endorsed Spitzer's recommendation. Opponents of the decision attempted to overturn it with a referendum of the APA membership in early 1974-just as Sabshin was beginning his 23-year tenure as APA medical director. The Board's decision to delete homosexuality from the diagnostic manual was supported by 58 percent of the membership.

The bigots withing the APA tried to get the APA as a whole to overturn the decisions of the revision board, and failed. Big time. There was no evidence that the board was incorrect, just opinions - like your own - that homosexuality was wrong. That was not persuasive to the group as a whole and tolerance won the day.

Another section -

Quote:

Through the rest of that decade, while issues affecting gay and lesbian psychiatrists and patients continued to achieve greater visibility in clinical and scientific forums, the voices of openly gay and lesbian psychiatrists were still rarely heard in APA policy discussions. That changed in 1982 when the APA Assembly granted a formal vote to gay and lesbian psychiatrists as a minority/underrepresented group, a status similar to that already achieved by other minority groups.

In the mid 1980s APA formed a task force on homosexuality issues, and by that time, Cabaj emphasized, it was able to focus not on the psychopathology battle but on homophobia, discrimination, and stereotyping. The task force was eventually elevated to a permanent component, the Committee on Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Issues. One of its earliest chairs was San Francisco psychiatrist James Krajeski, M.D., who this month became editor of Psychiatric News.

One of that committee's earliest endeavors was to remedy once again a defect that gay psychiatrists and many others perceived in the way in which the latest version of the DSM labeled some homosexuals. With the introduction of DSM-III in 1980 the diagnosis of sexual orientation disturbance had been changed to ego-dystonic homosexuality, which applied to people persistently distressed by their sexual orientation and desperate to change it. With another revision under way in 1986, committee members focused their efforts on successfully convincing the DSM task force to remove any such designation that linked sexual orientation with psychopathology.

It wasn't just one decision, or one group's opinion, which led to the revision of the DSM; it was a decade-long process, in which the opponents had ample opportunity to present scientific evidence that Gays belonged in the DSM as a group with a disorder. Do you even realize how the DSM works? How it can be used against somebody to hurt their careers and lives? Listing a mental state as a disorder is a quite negative thing, and there should be no question whether or not the state in question is a detraction on someone's life. Homosexuality is not a detraction or a problem in people's lives; I know many happy gay folks who have been so for a long time.

The only real problem is in dealing with the bullshit thrown up by bigots such as yourself; people who secretly fear gays but won't admit it out loud. Just admit it. You'll be happier if you are honest about your feelings, instead of this never-ending dance of crappy justifications, most of which are merely a waste of time to refute.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

Why? The APA de-listed this information from their website? Why would they do that.

It is very common for organizations to quietly remove historical information that they are not proud to put forward, Governments and NGOs both. The information can usually but not always be found if one knows where to look, and is persistent enough, though usually the best option is to look for observations made by others at the time.

Lets start with wiki

Quote:

American Psychiatric Association, removed homosexuality from its official list of mental disorders. This was more a result of political pressure from gay activists, than to any discovery or advance in science

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

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
Why? The APA de-listed this information from their website? Why would they do that.

It is very common for organizations to quietly remove historical information that they are not proud to put forward, Governments and NGOs both. The information can usually but not always be found if one knows where to look, and is persistent enough, though usually the best option is to look for observations made by others at the time.

Lets start with wiki

Quote:
American Psychiatric Association, removed homosexuality from its official list of mental disorders. This was more a result of political pressure from gay activists, than to any discovery or advance in science

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

Sure. But there was no science underlying the listing of Homosexuality as a disorder in the first place, and that is what led to the success in de-listing it. It was listed because of the prejudices of those who created the DSM, and the long-standing societal homophobia which we still see today, Hawkeye.

So it's correct to say it wasn't an advance in science, or some new study which came out; but an advance in humanity and tolerance.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

The AGLP currently had more than 600 members at the time of the writing of the article; not that 600 gay APA members existed at the time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who care 300 or 600 or whatever it was a large gay group hidden in the APA memebership at the time working with the gay incoming president and the uncivil gay protecting groups or are you going to be telling me that all 600 join the APA after 1974?

Whatever you can say about the delisiting it have zero to do with sceince then or now.

1 Reply

Here is a nice piece about what went down, and where this nutty movement as personified by the anti prop 8 a2k'ers in this thread want to take us:

Quote:

Toward a psychiatric gulag
New American, The, Jan 9, 2006
Thirty-two years ago, amid threats and intimidation from militant homosexual pressure groups, the American Psychiatric Association delisted homosexuality as a "diagnosable behavioral disorder." At about the same time, the spurious term "homophobia" began to circulate within the ranks of the left, eventually migrating into mainstream public discourse. That expression, we are told, refers to an irrational fear of, or hatred for, homosexuals. The purpose of coining that term was to lay the predicate for pathologizing, and eventually criminalizing, a negative view of homosexuality, as well as other politically incorrect attitudes.

The December 11 Seattle Times offered a valuable update on that process, which has been underway for more than a generation. "Mental-health practitioners say they regularly confront extreme forms of racism, homophobia and other prejudice in the course of therapy, and some patients are disabled by these beliefs," reports the paper. "As doctors increasingly weigh the effects of race and culture on mental illness, some are asking whether pathological bias ought to be an official psychiatric diagnosis. Advocates have circulated draft guidelines and have begun to conduct systematic studies. While the proposal is gaining traction, it is still in the early stages of being considered by the professionals who decide on new diagnoses."

Those "guidelines," which are being developed by a California psychiatrist named Edward Dunbar, would expand the ability of the state and its agents to exercise arbitrary power over practically anyone deemed to be incapacitated owing to "extreme" prejudice--which could be practically anyone.

"Perpetrators of hate crimes could become candidates for treatment," the Times explains, "and physicians would become arbiters of how to distinguish 'ordinary prejudice' from pathological bias." If the Bush administration's proposal to impose universal mental healthcare screening comes to fruition, it's likely that everybody, not just those accused of "hate crimes," would be subject to scrutiny for "pathological bias"--not just in the form of racism or "homophobia," but perhaps "paranoia" and "anti-government" attitudes as well.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0JZS/is_1_22/ai_n24980648?tag=content;col1

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

The AGLP currently had more than 600 members at the time of the writing of the article; not that 600 gay APA members existed at the time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who care 300 or 600 or whatever it was a large gay group hidden in the APA memebership at the time working with the gay incoming president and the uncivil gay protecting groups or are you going to be telling me that all 600 join the APA after 1974?

Whatever you can say about the delisiting it have zero to do with sceince then or now.

It had everything to do with the science: namely, the lack of studies showing psychological harm or damage due to homosexuality. Once again, did you even bother to read the article?

It's quite obvious that you have no real understanding of this topic, and if you can't display that you are willing to put more effort into understanding the topic, I'm simply going to cease discussing it with you. There are others who take your position and at least put forth the effort to construct a meaningful argument to back it up; you seem to think that a thinly-sourced opinion of the APA, combined with your assertions and inner homophobia, make a convincing argument about either the past history of Homosexuality in America, or what we should be currently doing. It does not.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know