Gays Claim That â€˜Paraphiliasâ€™ Are Different Than â€˜Sexual Orientationsâ€™ Sex activists are outraged by TVCâ€™s publication of â€˜30 Sexual Orientationsâ€™ Paper.http://www.alainsnewsletter.com/read/196/gay-politics/why-all-the-hoopla-over-pedophilia/ Louis P Sheldon
The LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) movement is throwing a tantrum over the publication of Traditional Values Coalitionâ€™s â€œWhat Is A Sexual Orientation?â€ paper that describes 30 different sexual orientations. These sexual orientations are listed in the American Psychiatric Associationâ€™s Diagnostic & Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR).
The Traditional Values Coalition report has been used to fight against passage of so-called â€œhate crimeâ€ legislation (H.R. 1913 and S. 909) that will add â€œgender,â€ â€œgender identity,â€ and â€œsexual orientationâ€ as protected minority groups under federal law.
During hate crimes committee action and floor statements, Republicans frequently referred to TVCâ€™s sexual orientation report. They correctly noted that because Democrats have refused to define â€œgender,â€ â€œgender identity,â€ or â€œsexual orientation,â€ legislation like H.R. 1913 and S. 909 will also protect the 30 mostly bizarre sexual orientations listed in our report. House Judiciary Committee Republicans offered an amendment to exclude pedophilia from the undefined â€œsexual orientationâ€ reference in the bill. Democrats ridiculed the amendment and voted it down.
LGBT fanatics, however, are now claiming that the â€œparaphiliasâ€ listed in our report are actually different than a personâ€™s sexual orientation. This is an absurd argument.
LGBT activists â€“ including Rep. Tammy Baldwin during H.R. 1913 debate -- refused to define â€œsexual orientationâ€ because they want it to be an expandable term. Theyâ€™ll add new â€œsexual orientationsâ€ to it as they see fit. Yet, they claim that these paraphilias are not sexual orientations. If they wonâ€™t define the term, how can they now assert that a personâ€™s sexual desires for children or dead people are not sexual orientations?
If a person is sexually oriented toward a certain person, object, or animal, that is clearly a sexual orientation.
A Little Historical Perspective Is Needed
During the 1970s, the American Psychiatric Association was under attack by gay activists who demanded that homosexuality be removed as a mental disorder from the DSM.
The DSM at that time listed homosexuality as a â€œsexual deviationâ€ â€“ along with other bizarre sexual orientations. The term â€œparaphiliaâ€ replaced the term sexual deviation in the DSM-III-R. (Nathaniel Mcconaghy, â€œUnresolved Issues In Scientific Sexology,â€ Archives of Sexual Behavior, Issue 4, 1999.)
In fact, the second edition of the DSM, published in 1968 said this in section 302: â€œSexual Deviations: This category is for individuals whose sexual interests are directed primarily toward objects other than people of the opposite sex, toward sexual acts â€¦ performed under bizarre circumstances. â€¦ Even though many find these practices distasteful, they remain unable to substitute normal sexual behavior for them. This diagnosis is not appropriate for individuals who perform deviant sexual acts because normal sex objects are not available to them.â€ Homosexuality was the first sexual deviation listed in section 302! (Dr. George Rekers, Growing Up Straight, 1982)
Gay activists, however, pressured the APA into removing homosexuality as a sexual deviation from the DSM. Homosexuality was not removed because of scientific discoveries, but for political reasons.
As psychiatrist Jeffrey Satinover has written in Homosexuality And The Politics Of Truth, the APA removed homosexuality in two steps: â€œAt first it only removed from its list of disorders homosexuality that was â€˜ego-syntonic,â€™ comfortable and acceptable to the individual, leaving only â€˜ego-dystonicâ€™ â€“ unwanted â€“ homosexuality as a disorder; later it removed â€˜ego-dystonicâ€™ homosexuality as well.â€ (p. 65)
The DSM also used the term â€œSexual Orientation Disturbanceâ€ to describe those homosexuals who felt uncomfortable with their same-sex attractions. That term is also gone from the DSM.
Satinover notes that the DSM-IV â€œhas quietly altered its long-standing definitions of all the â€˜paraphiliasâ€™ (sexual perversions). Now, in order for an individual to be considered to have a paraphilia â€“ these include sadomasochism, voyeurism, exhibitionism, and among others, pedophilia â€“ the DSM requires that in addition to having or even acting on his impulses, his â€˜fantasies, sexual urges or behaviors,â€™ must â€˜cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational or other important areas of functioning.â€
In short, the definition of a paraphilia in DSM-IV meant, for example, that a pedophile only needed treatment if he felt discomfort about his sexual desires or was impaired in some way. If he had no emotional problems molesting kids, he didnâ€™t need treatment. Remember that â€œparaphiliaâ€ actually refers to a sexual deviation from the norm of heterosexuality. Gay psychiatrists and gay psychologists have distorted the old definitions in the DSM for their political agendas.
Since then, the DSM-IV-TR has been quietly re-written to correct this major mistake. The DSM-IV-TR (text revision) version states that merely acting upon pedophilia impulses is sufficient for a diagnosis of a mental disorder. (Linda Ames Nicolosi, â€œThe Pedophilia Debate Continues â€“ And DSM Is Changed Again,â€ NARTH, September, 2008)
â€˜DSMâ€™ Under Attack Again
LGBT activists are once again attacking the DSM and are working to remove such categories as Gender Identity Disorder, Transvestic Fetishism, and Sadomasochism from this APA diagnostic book.
In 2003, the American Psychiatric Association was subjected to a discussion from pro-gay psychiatrists who urged that the APA remove pedophilia, exhibitionism, fetishism, transvestism, voyeurism, and sadomasochism from the DSM! As psychiatrist Charles Moser stated: â€œAny sexual interest can be healthy and life-enhancing.â€
The DSM-IV-TM still refers to these sexual orientations as paraphilias that need treatment â€“ but only if the person is disturbed over these sexual desires and behaviors. According to the DSM: â€œThe Paraphilias are characterized by recurrent, intense sexual urges, fantasies, or behaviors that involve unusual objects, activities, or situations and cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.â€
Whatâ€™s The Bottom Line?
The fact is that homosexuality and other â€œsexual interestsâ€ (synonymous with sexual orientation) were considered to be â€œsexual deviationsâ€ (now known as paraphilias) in early non-politicized editions of the DSM.
Gay activists pressured the APA into removing homosexuality from its list of sexual deviations and now LGBT activists are seeking to politicize the DSM once again by forcing the removal of other bizarre sexual orientations â€“ including pedophilia, exhibitionism, fetishism, transvestism, voyeurism, and sadomasochism.
LGBT activists are playing word games and using dishonest arguments to claim that paraphilias are not sexual orientations. Simple logic reveals that if a person is sexually aroused by an animal, body part, dead person, or other objects, this is his â€œsexual orientation.â€ He has a sexual interest in something other than a heterosexual partner. Normally functioning heterosexuality was the standard by which psychiatry and psychology once judged whether a person was a sexual deviate. We must return to that common-sense standard.
We must not permit the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender movement to set the standard for what is normal or abnormal. This is akin to permitting the inmates of a psychiatric lockdown facility run the mental health care system.