GID and other diagnoses removed from the DSM

Bad move. Depathologizing it is pandering to overly sensitive political correct lobbies. Now insurers have even less of a justification to give TG people healthcare they need.

 

It's the right move in an ideal world, but that's not the world we live in. This will probably effect a net decrease in availability of care to trans* folks.

 

Why am I seeing "trans" being followed with a *?

 

* is the Kleene operation, originally a mathematical term that meant "all combinations of items in a set." Which leads into its use in most computers as a "wildcard" character. So basically, the * is meant to encompass transwomen, transmen, and anyone else with "trans-" as a prefix.

 

The article I read yesterday said they just changed the name. I think it is gender dysphoria now.

---------- Post added 3rd Dec 2012 at 11:11 PM ----------

You don't hear it much outside Mainframe and midrange world. * is informally called a splat, because it looks like a squished bug. Anytime I see a * I read it as splat. So I read trans* as transsplat. Sounds like the name of a Nordic shipping company.

 

Unfortunately there are still many more problems with the DSM-5.

Take for example a look at the (supposedly) current draft version of the text for Transvestic Disorder: (taken from Julie Seranos blog)

Transvestic Disorder

A. Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent and intense sexual arousal from cross‑dressing, as manifested by fantasies, urges, or behaviors.

B. The fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors cause marked distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.

Specify if:

With Fetishism (Sexually Aroused by Fabrics, Materials, or Garments)

With Autogynephilia (Sexually Aroused by Thought or Image of Self as Female)

With Autoandrophilia (Sexually Aroused by Thought or Image of Self as Male)

Specify if:

In a Controlled Environment

In Remission (No Distress, Impairment, or Recurring Behavior for Five Years and in an Uncontrolled Environment)

From my point of view, this text begs quite a few questions.

Firstly, "marked distress or impairment" due to crossdressing or fantasies of crossdressing in itself qualifies as a disorder? Isn't this just pathologizing non-conformance to certain social norms?

Secondly, neither the autogynephilia nor the autoandrophilia seems to be very well accepted theories, except that they are forwarded by the likes of people like Ray Blanchard, the controversial author of the Transvestic Disorder entry in the DSM-V.

Ray Blanchard is previously quoted saying:

"There are two fundamentally different types of male-to-female transsexualism, and they are equally valid. The homosexual type are erotically aroused by other (biological) males, and the autogynephilic type are erotically aroused by the thought or image of themselves as women.".

So MTF transsexuals are either homosexuals or are turned on by being women? The theory of sexual arousal as the basis for transsexualism is in itself defamatory and strange, but apparantly no-one are erotically aroused by the thought or image of themselves as men?

The earlier draft versions seemed extremely sexist towards male-to-female trans people, as it was not possible to diagnose women with the disorder.

I guess this flaw was to obvious, so now the little known qualifier "autoandrophilia" has been added too the mix two. What a relief....(not really) - everyone can now have transvestic disorder no matter gender or sexual orientation.

Finally, the "In remission" clause to me suggests, that even with "No Distress, Impairment, or Recurring Behavior" for up to Five Years you still have this "disorder"?

 

Ray Blanchard is, quite frankly, an idiot.

If you stifle your sense of good science and read half the shit he said, it's blown full of holes and makes absolutely no sense. For one, he doesn't seem to acknowledge transmen exist. Also, apparently, feeling sexy as a woman is evidence of pathology for transwomen.

And "homosexual" vs "non-homosexual" transsexuals. What is this I don't even

 

It hasn't been removed at all, they just changed the name. Being transsexual is not a mental condition, and classifying it under the DSM in any way is degrading to transsexual individuals and fuels discrimination. It is a physical condition which requires physical medical intervention. People need to stop thinking that trans folks are crazy and start to realize that the way they view themselves and the world is just as valid as anyone else.

When I think of the history of the classification of transsexual people I see one thing: cause for discrimination. First people thought "oh the 'man' says 'he' is a woman, so 'he' must be crazy, lets use reparative therapy to help 'him' become a more functional man." Then it was finally determined that reparative therapy is ineffective and cruel, so today people see a trans person and think "oh that 'man' has a mental condition that makes 'him' think 'he' is a woman, what a tragedy that 'he' must live with such a terrible mental infirmity."

The way people should look at things is this: "Oh that poor girl was born with a penis, let's fix that for her so she can have a normal life." Bam, no stigma associated with mental disorder, and there is still a medical necessity for the use of hormones, therapy, and surgery. So many people simply refuse to validate the subjective experience of being "a woman trapped in a man's body". They hate it, they despise the thought of it, they recoil and gnash and claw at the mention of it. Screw the DSM, screw the american healthcare system, and FKH8.

 

Haha! Okay, let me enter his mind. Ahhh! Found it!
He wants us to accept that if you a real man, you are straight...straight straight...as in Hollywood version of straight.
If you wear ladies clothing, you are one sicko! Yup, it is right here in his left lobe.
So, he seems to think any MAN with perfectly good genitals who wants to lop them off for a vagina surgery is looney!
As for women wanting a penis, and to make themselves appear as if they are a man, it doesn't work...they just confused ladies who need a good man to straighten that out.

So, in conclusion...while trying to find an exit to his mind I got lost into a pathway where neurons were detached. I plugged into a few to find out what was up. Turns out he really wants to wear a pink negligée, but don't want to admit it.

The End!

---------- Post added 5th Dec 2012 at 04:56 PM ----------

But if Queers FKH8ers, won't that turn them all gay??

 

Wait what does it mean to those with Asperger's Syndrome then? Confused...

 

I recently researched a paper on transsexuals having their marriages voided by courts because they were counting them as their former sex and calling it same sex marriage (many issue here I know, but that is not the point ). In the only case I found that upheld the marriage was a case that cited GID. Having an accepted scientific source like the DSM say that being transgender was not a choice and not something that could be changed was necessary for the court in that case to rule in favor of transgender marriage. I'm not saying that the DSM is the right place for scientifically codifying what is transgender, but in an imperfect world, it is better than nothing from a legal standpoint. The argument that it is a medical condition and not a mental one is unhelpful because there is no physiological basis for a medical diagnosis that would satisfy scientific standards and the law. The DSM is the reason why in New Jersey it is legal for a transgendered person to marry as their assumed sex. I say take what you can get for now...

 

I believe that there is going to be just one blanket term called autistic spectrum disorder, which will include all the previous categories such as Asperger's, Pervasive Developmental Disorder, childhood disintegrative Disorder, and autism itself. I heard that Rett Syndrome was under consideration to be made into it's own category separate from autism, but I haven't heard any information about that recently.

 

WOW!
In marriage what God joins together in marriage let no man put asunder...
and yet here is a man on a bench in a robe trying to undo a knot God joined in holy matrimony.
So then they want transmen to go to court and be married to other MEN??
Isn't that GAY sex they will be having??

Thus, us transgender guys are the key to proving the invalidity of separation of gay and straight marriages. Which way is gay?