Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2 8 9 10 11 12
Results 221 to 231 of 231

Thread: Gay/Transgender

  1. #221
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    352
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    That's a correct interpretation. What's not correct is that transgenderism is a carcinogen (in fact or in my interpretation of transgenderism and dysphoria) nor is it correct that I ever said that it is.

    Again, you claimed that I said something that I did not say. Please retract that claim or show me where I actually said it.
    Your claim:
    "a carcinogen can be the cause of a cancer"
    "being transgendered can be the cause of a mental disorder"

    What is to retract?

    ---------- Post added at 06:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:35 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    mental disorder any clinically significant behavioral or psychological syndrome characterized by distressing symptoms, significant impairment of functioning, or significantly increased risk of death, pain, or other disability.

    http://medical-dictionary.thefreedic...ental+disorder
    So again, when I said being transgendered could be a disorder I was speaking with regards to DSM-V.
    But, with this definition, why is it necessarily so that being transgendered can not meet this criteria?
    I been shown no reason why not?

  2. #222
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    9,718
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Your claim:
    "a carcinogen can be the cause of a cancer"
    "being transgendered can be the cause of a mental disorder"

    What is to retract?
    Your claim that I said that transgenderism is a carcinogen. Neither of the quotes you pasted say that.

    Really, I was hoping you'd have the decency to retract an offensive claim that you attributed to me. But I guess you don't.

  3. #223
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    352
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    Your claim that I said that transgenderism is a carcinogen. Neither of the quotes you pasted say that.

    I was kind of hoping that you would have the decency to retract your false claim that I said something that I clearly did not say. But I guess you don't.
    And now you resort to insults rather than rebut my post which was:
    "Your claim:
    "a carcinogen can be the cause of a cancer"
    "being transgendered can be the cause of a mental disorder"

    What is to retract?"

    Verbatim, no you didn't say it, but your logic leaves absolutely no room to not meet the same connection. It is still the result of your example whether you mean it to be or not....

    and resorting to an adhom instead of a rebuttal is quite telling .....

  4. #224
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    9,718
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    And now you resort to insults rather than rebut my post which was
    I didn't offer a rebuttal because I wasn't going to respond to your post until you either support that I said what you claimed I said or retracted it. Thank you for showing the showing the decency to retract your claim that I said it. Now I will respond to your post.

    :
    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    "Your claim:
    "a carcinogen can be the cause of a cancer"
    "being transgendered can be the cause of a mental disorder"

    What is to retract?"

    Verbatim, no you didn't say it, but your logic leaves absolutely no room to not meet the same connection.
    Actually, that's completely wrong. Just because you can compare two things in an analogy does not mean that they are the same in any way outside of the analogy and therefore you cannot just interchange them and say that transgenderism is a "carcinogen" to mental health.

    The analogy compares them in ONLY TWO WAYS. They are both:

    1. Something that can increase the likelihood of getting a certain disease
    2. Something that is different than the disease itself and therefore cannot be considered the same as the disease in name or definition.

    That's it. Comparing them in any other way falls outside of my analogy and therefore you cannot reasonably attribute such a conclusion to me or my analogy.

    To say that transgenderism is a "carcinogen" strongly implies that they are similar in many other ways (applying the same word indicates that it is effectively the same as the applied word). Such a conclusion is not supported by the use of my analogy. So no, your statement is not at all a necessary conclusion arrived at by the logic of my analogy.

    So there's your rebuttal.

    Not only did I not say it (as you finally conceded), but the statement you attributed to me cannot reasonably be derived from my analogy.


    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    and resorting to an adhom instead of a rebuttal is quite telling .....
    I did not resort to an adhom (I did not argue that your argument is incorrect due to any personal characteristics of you).



    And now I will respond to the other point from your last post.


    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    But, with this definition, why is it necessarily so that being transgendered can not meet this criteria?
    I been shown no reason why not?
    It cannot be considered a disorder because by all evidence transgenderism is not a clinically significant behavioral or psychological syndrome characterized by distressing symptoms, significant impairment of functioning, or significantly increased risk of death, pain, or other disability.

    Either something meets that criteria and IS a disorder or it does not meet the criteria and IS NOT a disorder. Transgenderism falls in the latter category.
    Last edited by mican333; January 10th, 2018 at 07:11 AM.

  5. #225
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,181
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    What "DSM often will state" was not in that article. The Dr was critiquing DSM-V methodology. There are only two mentions of time in that article with regards to grief. This is the first:
    ""It is simply outrageous that DSM 5 will diagnosis mental disorder in the normally bereaved as early as two weeks following their loss- thus encouraging the massive misdiagnosis of grief as Major Depressive Disorder."

    This hardly says anything like, as you say "appears that the symptoms must have been exhibited for a minimum of two weeks".
    The second reference is:
    "After 40 years and lots of clinical experience, I can't distinguish at two weeks between the symptoms of normal grief and the symptoms of mild depression- and I challenge anyone else to do so."

    Again, nothing resembling any kind of criteria for when grief can be a disorder based on two weeks a time frame issue.

    And the full paragraph:
    " After 40 years and lots of clinical experience, I can't distinguish at two weeks between the symptoms of normal grief and the symptoms of mild depression- and I challenge anyone else to do so. This is an inherently unreliable distinction. And I know damn well that primary care doctors can't do it in a 7 minute visit. This should have been the most crucial point in DSM 5 decision making because primary care docs prescribe 80% of all antidepressants and will be most likely to misuse the DSM 5 in mislabeling grievers."

    definitely shows the DR is worried about less trained Dr's prescribing most of the medications.
    Dr Frances ABSOLUTELY does not agree with DSM-V's (as you say) "general set of diagnostics, only the conditional time period.". The article is quite clear and he has been very outspoken about these issues in DSM-V for some time....
    Please support your claim. Show me another critique of the DSM that Dr. Francis makes regarding the diagnostics for grief.
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

  6. #226
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    352
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    I didn't offer a rebuttal because I wasn't going to respond to your post until you either support that I said what you claimed I said or retracted it. Thank you for showing the showing the decency to retract your claim that I said it. Now I will respond to your post.
    Well I'm glad you feel better, but I still see no significant difference in end result this case......

    ---------- Post added at 05:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:04 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    To say that transgenderism is a "carcinogen" strongly implies that they are similar in many other ways (applying the same word indicates that it is effectively the same as the applied word). Such a conclusion is not supported by the use of my analogy. So no, your statement is not at all a necessary conclusion arrived at by the logic of my analogy.

    So there's your rebuttal.

    Not only did I not say it (as you finally conceded), but the statement you attributed to me cannot reasonably be derived from my analogy.
    What your analogy says is a carcinogen is to cancer as transgendered is to mental health, though I see now you didn't make that connection when you said it.

    But as you say in #1, being transgendered can "increase the likelihood" (originally "cause") of a mental disorder. And in this case, the difference between cause of and the actual illness matters little, unless you were the treating Dr.

    Basically, at first I was attacking DSM-V. This conversation about the transgendered was just the vehicle to appose DSM-V.
    However, after you let DSM go and started using a "clinical" definition, there is still no reason a transgendered person can not meet that criteria either.

    Either way, my personal opinion is along the lines of, Psychiatry is just beginning to learn about the human mind, and I think personalities are much more complex than is easily described with language. It matters little to me what is currently considered a disorder as DSM appears flawed to me. What does matter to me, for instance, is when DSM is used to medicate children as young as 2 yrs old for disorders. Now, in some extreme cases this is probably justified, but the current number of children on these types of med's isn't justifiable.

    At this point I think productivity in the conversation is slowing so I will leave the last word to you.

    ---------- Post added at 05:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:29 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    Please support your claim. Show me another critique of the DSM that Dr. Francis makes regarding the diagnostics for grief.
    My claim was Dr. Frances does not agree with the methodology of DSM-V. By your last two posts it seems that you haven't read the article in question, if not, it is a short and rather interesting read.
    However, the title of the article supports his stance against DSM-V's handling of grief specifically:
    https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...drug-companies
    "Last Plea to DSM 5: Save Grief From the Drug Companies"

    Now, if this is his "Last Plea", obviously, there are others.

    Again, progress is slowing so, I leave the last word to you also...
    Last edited by Belthazor; January 10th, 2018 at 06:42 PM.

  7. #227
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    9,718
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Well I'm glad you feel better, but I still see no significant difference in end result this case......
    But them I'm pretty sure almost everyone else thinks that there is a significant difference between something that can contribute to a disorder and the disorder itself. If you fail to notice the significance, it doesn't mean that it's not significant.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    What your analogy says is a carcinogen is to cancer as transgendered is to mental health, though I see now you didn't make that connection when you said it.
    Well, I didn't expect you to mistakenly read a lot more into my analogy than was there.

    Again, when you analogize two things in a particular way, you are not comparing them in other ways and therefore it is not accurate to say they are the same in any other way. To say that transgenderism is like a carcinogen in general is to misinterpret my analogy.


    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    But as you say in #1, being transgendered can "increase the likelihood" (originally "cause") of a mental disorder. And in this case, the difference between cause of and the actual illness matters little, unless you were the treating Dr.
    So something that might cause an increase in a disease amongst the population, even if in most instances it doesn't lead to the disease, is effectively the same as the disease?

    That sound ridiculous on its face so if you are going to repeat that absurd-sounding argument, you will need to support it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Basically, at first I was attacking DSM-V. This conversation about the transgendered was just the vehicle to appose DSM-V.
    However, after you let DSM go and started using a "clinical" definition, there is still no reason a transgendered person can not meet that criteria either.
    Well, there's no reason that a male can not meet that criteria either. I mean a male can suffer from from the disorder schizophrenia and therefore meet the criteria. But just as that does not mean that being male can be considered a disorder, transgenderism cannot be considered a disorder just because some transgendered people meet the criteria.


    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Either way, my personal opinion is along the lines of, Psychiatry is just beginning to learn about the human mind, and I think personalities are much more complex than is easily described with language. It matters little to me what is currently considered a disorder as DSM appears flawed to me. What does matter to me, for instance, is when DSM is used to medicate children as young as 2 yrs old for disorders. Now, in some extreme cases this is probably justified, but the current number of children on these types of med's isn't justifiable.
    But then that's off-topic to our discussion since we dropped that issue. The fact is that you have not shown that transgenderism meets the clinical definition of a disorder and therefore it cannot be considered a disorder.


    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    At this point I think productivity in the conversation is slowing so I will leave the last word to you.
    Okay. Transgenderism does not meet the criteria of a disorder and therefore it is not a disorder.
    Last edited by mican333; January 11th, 2018 at 08:54 AM.

  8. #228
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    2
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    A few comments:
    Many fear what is different, which can lead to rejection
    Second, if humans were weaker evolution-wise, gays would disappear by extinction due to lack of reproduction. This is not a disease, it is a lifestyle phenotype
    Finally, considering how common it is, suggests that the mechanism making us heterosexual is quite fragile and has either numerous vulnerable spots either a very common trigger

  9. #229
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    352
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by JeanDupont View Post
    Many fear what is different, which can lead to rejection
    Very true of course but I don't see the relevance on this particular conversation.

    ---------- Post added at 04:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:57 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by JeanDupont View Post
    Second, if humans were weaker evolution-wise, gays would disappear by extinction due to lack of reproduction. This is not a disease, it is a lifestyle phenotype
    Could you expand on this thought? I don't understand "weaker evolution-wise".

    ---------- Post added at 05:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:58 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by JeanDupont View Post
    Finally, considering how common it is, suggests that the mechanism making us heterosexual is quite fragile and has either numerous vulnerable spots either a very common trigger
    The "mechanism making us heterosexual"???
    If life didn't have some "innate will" to reproduce, said life would not be around to talk, or talk about. How much more "natural" can life be than reproducing....



    Human's have changed the game. We are becoming "home-evolutus". We are directing our own evolution more and more, and every year the changes come faster...

  10. #230
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,181
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    My claim was Dr. Frances does not agree with the methodology of DSM-V. By your last two posts it seems that you haven't read the article in question, if not, it is a short and rather interesting read.
    However, the title of the article supports his stance against DSM-V's handling of grief specifically:
    https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...drug-companies
    "Last Plea to DSM 5: Save Grief From the Drug Companies"

    Now, if this is his "Last Plea", obviously, there are others.

    Again, progress is slowing so, I leave the last word to you also...
    First, I read the link. I quoted from the link. Please share the quote where Dr Frances says he disagrees with the methodology used in the DSM. You have failed to show he has made other pleas for other issues. All his title suggests is that he has made this one plea multiple times.

    He disagrees with a single diagnostic for a specific disorder. He does not disbelieve in the disorder. He believes that the time period used to diagnose it is too short. That is what Dr. Francis' plea is about. Stop redirecting. Either support your claim or acknowledge that you've made a mistake. This article does not support your claim. Period.
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

  11. #231
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    352
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Gay/Transgender

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    First, I read the link. I quoted from the link. Please share the quote where Dr Frances says he disagrees with the methodology used in the DSM. You have failed to show he has made other pleas for other issues.
    Well in post #225 all you asked for was support the Dr's critique of grief specifically in DSM-V. But no worries:

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...-worst-changes
    "Brief background. DSM 5 got off to a bad start and was never able to establish sure footing. Its leaders initially articulated a premature and unrealizable goal- to produce a paradigm shift in psychiatry. Excessive ambition combined with disorganized execution led inevitably to many ill conceived and risky proposals."
    "These were vigorously opposed. More than fifty mental health professional associations petitioned for an outside review of DSM 5 to provide an independent judgment of its supporting evidence and to evaluate the balance between its risks and benefits. Professional journals, the press, and the public also weighed in- expressing widespread astonishment about decisions that sometimes seemed not only to lack scientific support but also to defy common sense."

    https://www.socialworkhelper.com/201...allen-frances/
    "Dr. Frances stated one of the major issues with the DSM series is that its primary authors are research academics who are making suggestions and recommendations based on controlled research studies conducted in University clinics which are not helpful in everyday practice. By expanding the DSM 5 to cover challenges of everyday living, it will mislabel medical illness as a psychiatric disorder."

    https://dxrevisionwatch.com/2010/01/...ision-process/
    "…The research community has a central role and a great responsibility in taking advantage of this precious opportunity to carefully review and identify the problems in the DSM-V drafts and to suggest solutions…"

    ---------- Post added at 05:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:02 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    He believes that the time period used to diagnose it is too short. That is what Dr. Francis' plea is about. Stop redirecting. Either support your claim or acknowledge that you've made a mistake. This article does not support your claim. Period.
    Dr Frances' mention of time frame was basically grief can not be diagnosed as pathological in two weeks (from time of the event), and the doctors that are prescribing the most drugs have the least training and limited time with the patient (I believe he mentions 7 minutes).
    I made no mistake on this point.

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...-worst-changes
    "This is the saddest moment in my 45 year career of studying, practicing, and teaching psychiatry. The Board of Trustees of the American Psychiatric Association has given its final approval to a deeply flawed DSM 5 containing many changes that seem clearly unsafe and scientifically unsound."

    CLEARLY Dr Frances is not on board with DSM-V.

  12. Likes MindTrap028 liked this post
 

 
Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2 8 9 10 11 12

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •