Accueil » In English » The extension of the gender theory in the new DSM 5, the classification of psychiatric diseases.
Antiféminisme Aimeles

The extension of the gender theory in the new DSM 5, the classification of psychiatric diseases.

Publié le 14 juin 2013 par Léonidas Durandal à 0 h 00 min

Importance of the DSM 5  The DSM is the classifying of American psychiatric Association, used worldwide by psychiatric, governments, pharmaceutical companies or NGOs to define their medical treatments and social policies on mental disorders.

Evolution of the DSM 5

Version 5 of the DSM has followed a long evolution over several decades which has seen the declassification of the homosexuality from the psychiatric diseases under pressure from influential networks. It is therefore not only a scientific tool, but an illustration of the power relationships that exist between patients and society.

Today, homosexuals no longer have sexual troubles, contrariwise pedophiles are still classified as sick. However, the DSM follows a disturbing trend. When, for political issues, the classification is not accepted, this one is less and less based on behaviors that might be objectively disrupting the natural or the social functionning of an individual, but on personal suffering. To illustrate the deviance of this kind of thinking, imagine that in the worst case scenario, a serial killer who wouldn’t have any personal suffering and who would kill people whose society doesn’t want no more, wouldn’t be defined as a patient (this fantasy is included in the Dexter series, or in other television series very known when the serial killer is a good guy). This deviant’s reasoning, in May 2013, is continuing by the intensification in the DSM 5 of gender theory for children. Thus, the DSM  no longer defines the child as a little boy or a little girl who should follow an harmonious development in relation to his own natural sex, but as an asexual being who would have the ability to choose its gender.

 

 

The sections about disorders related to the definition of sexual identity in the DSM 5 :
Paraphilia:
Voyeurism, Exhibitionism, Frotteurism, Sexual Masochism, Sexual Sadism, Pedophilia, Fetishism, Transvestism, Other Specified or unspecified Paraphilic Disorders.

Gender dysphoria: recognized, other specific instability, undetermined.

Sexual Disorders :
Delayed Ejaculation Erectile Disorder, Female Orgasmic Disorder, Female Sexual Interest/Arousal Disorder, Genito-Pelvic Pain/Penetration Disorder, Male Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder, Premature (Early) Ejaculation, Substance/Medication-Induced Sexual Dysfunction, Other Specified Sexual Dysfunction

You will notice that between the DSM 4 and 5, the notion of « gender trouble » has been replaced by the term « instability » in order not to stigmatize those affected (2). Similarly the term “paraphilia” (disorder in accepted sexual practices), has finally replaced the term « deviance » considered too pejorative for « concerned persons » (which are perhaps no more “sick”).

 

A political classification that no longer belongs to the disease and less and less to the behavior but, increasingly, to the craving.

“Sexual disorders” are defined only from observation of physical consequences. « Sexuality », « gender » and « sex » form impervious categories relative to each other. THE DSM 5, based more and more on observable behaviors, evacuates more and more the reasons or the mechanisms for such behavior. Let us try to strip away this observation that exceeds my field of study and skills but that really refers to a society that wants to avoid to any questioning about the human being, claiming to understand him objectively, and for this, that tends to develop these kind of categories. This just to remind that the behavior becomes the basis of the analysis, and that this behavior is less and less involved in social functioning of the individual, but in a personal functioning that could be defined in relation to itself, which let open the door of the tolerance to many behaviors, negative indirectly for the patient and the society, but which are not directly identified as such, for example because of social power relations, as stated a little earlier. DSM 5 is a perfect illustration of a science that attempts to define itself without morality and therefore without religion, and that is starting to fail under our noses. Defining itself by itself, it lost his footing gradually, legitimizing a bunch  of behaviors that it considered previously deviant but which are only called now « instability » or « disorders » and others « paraphilia », terms that soon be drown in an undifferentiated soup. Here, as elsewhere, the science is getting poorer under the combined effect of distortion of language related to the holy profane ideology. Except for the sections concerned by the gender theory that are politically protected, this process leads to an infinite multiplication of behaviors deemed « undesirable », to the undifferentiation growing up to the  individualization of the benchmarks and the destruction of the boundary between illness and sanity( 4), each one finding that there are too many diseases, and others, not enough. Personally, I’m afraid that this is a problem that goes far beyond « >

Lire la suite

Pour recevoir l'infocourriel mensuel

Dernière étape : Cliquez sur le courrier qui va vous être envoyé pour valider votre inscription

Laisser un commentaire

Votre adresse de messagerie ne sera pas publiée. Les champs obligatoires sont indiqués avec *

Ce site utilise Akismet pour réduire les indésirables. En savoir plus sur comment les données de vos commentaires sont utilisées.

Pour recevoir l'infocourriel mensuel

Dernière étape : Cliquez sur le courrier qui va vous être envoyé pour valider votre inscription