Why does everybody deny the fact that homosexuality and transsexualism are a form of mental illness?

Why does everybody deny the fact that homosexuality and transsexualism are a form of mental illness?

Other urls found in this thread:

hofmann.org/papers/martin_2.html
science.howstuffworks.com/lsd6.htm
erowid.org/psychoactives/guides/handbook_lsd25.shtml
twitter.com/AnonBabble

They are retarded themselves

>be britfag
>feel the same way

Speaking the truth here. Personally I don't hate gays or trannies but do believe they deserve similar treatment to people with psychosis ie

because its been around for thousands of years and people got used to it.

because not everyone is a retarded russian

cause of SJfuckingWs

We are doomed

Because they think it’s fashionable.

Because we're not dirty slavniggers or sandniggers and realize that if someone's gay it doesn't matter for shit.

Trans get treated for it though don't they? I don't see how classifying it as a mental illness would change anything.

Not everyone says that. But the people who do hold such neurotic opinions on sexuality hold similarly neurotic opinions about politics, education, and medicine.

> if someone's gay it doesn't matter for shit.
Do you also think that if someone is otherwise mentally ill (schizophrenia, depression, psychosis, adhd) it doesn't matter for shit?

Except being gay isn't in itself detrimental to oneself, unlike the things you listed. The only times it's really detrimental when people around you have difficulty accepting it for personal reasons.

ooooooooh ur a cuck u could of told me that sooner

Things mentioned above are not always detrimental to oneself.
If one is gay they are less likely to reproduce. In a place like the US birth to death ratio is already fucked (near same amount of births as deaths), so the gays keep fucking it up more by not reproducing. Sure gay or trans people can reproduce but it is not as likely compared to a straight person.

Gee, throwing buzzwords around without apparently realizing what it even means, grade A effort buddyboy. Or if you do actually think I'm a cuck please elaborate.

In what instance are actual mental illnesses not detrimental in some way?

Soo... that's your argument? What about straight people who don't want kids either? Are they mentally ill too?
I mean the amount of gay people out there is so small anyway that even if they did turn straight it would have negligible effect on birth rates. Even then, nobody is obligated to pump out kids.

I'll be honest, that's the weirdest reasoning I've heard for classifying homosexuals and transsexuals as mentally ill.

t. soyboy

Wat

I think that homosexuality is, in it's own right, caused by a low testosterone/high estrogen in men and high testosterone/low estrogen in women. Transexuality is a mental illness but I think that homosexuality is like a form of birth defect or abnormality. Just my opinion Sup Forumsros, biofags please don't roast me

Are homos really mentally ill? I guess in some sense. I am sure it’s caused by issues with father, same with trannies, but gays don’t hurt anyone.

Gay people have jobs, kids and are functioning members of society. Trannies not so much.

>slavniggers
>shows glorious tough slavic man

Nah, it’s a father issue. Mean, cold, distant or absent fathers cause homosexuality and trannies.

Homosexuality is higher amongst black men than other races, the link there is absent fathers. But, blacks have higher testosterone levels.

I really don't think it's caused by low testo/high estro in men, I mean... there's just way too many of the really really manly kind of gay people I seriously doubt would be lacking in testo. It's just some sort of birth defect/abnormality that isn't fully understood yet as far as I know. (Of course, low testo could be a part of it, who knows, but I highly doubt it's the main reason.)

Father issues may be a part of it for some people, but plenty of homosexuals out there with completely normal father-son relationships so go figure.

But yeah, gay people in general are functioning members of society, espescially nowadays since they're accepted.

>In what instance are actual mental illnesses not detrimental in some way?

If a person has depression, they could simply want to stay in bed and do nothing. They don't harm themselves or anyone, they might even be a productive member of society (work)

>What about straight people who don't want kids either

They still have sex and might have an accidental child. Abortion, I think it should be banned or very expensive if the person is over 25.

>Are they mentally ill too
They don't act the natural way (normal=desire to preserve their own species) so you could say yes, yes they are.

>I mean the amount of gay people out there is so small anyway that even if they did turn straight it would have negligible effect on birth rates.

Yes sure the effect is minimal on paper but one individual (accidental birth) can have a huge effect on society.

>Finn
>Slavic
It's time for a choice

Gays have always been though. They can now live outside the closet instead of marrying women. They have never had the issues trannies have.

people are fucking stupid, they think depression is a real mental illness while being gay/trans or whatever which changes your whole life is normal and a part of humanity. they should be exterminated immediately.

>If a person has depression, they could simply want to stay in bed and do nothing. They don't harm themselves or anyone, they might even be a productive member of society (work)

Prolonged inactivity is unhealthy, so is withdrawing from society into your own room.

As for the rest, basically what you conceive to be an abbreviation from the norm should be classified as a mental illness? I mean, that sure is the picture I'm getting here. If that's the case what would be the point of the classification? Would people who don't want to have kids receieve treatment (Even forced if they don't want it)? Be denied jobs where normal mental health is required? I mean, what would be the end goal of classifying it as a mental illness?

There has always been homosexuals. Most of times its been considered completely natural. Who really gives a fuck what they do? There is always people who want to start witch hunts and troll threads.

kys

Well, yeah but now they are less likely to fall into depression and the likes for becoming social rejects if they were exposed. In general they're also safer nowadays. As for trannies, I've got no personal experience so eh, can't really say anything.

this

Faggots aren't mentally ill.

Trans people are on the other hand and should be treated as if they had schizophrenia.

"got used to it" more like the media nagged like an old hag about how it is okey

It was surprisingly common throughout history until christianity (and similar religions) reared its(their) head(s)

ITT: Posters choose which shade of gay they want to be.

I'M TRIGGERED

One single collective has absolute control over western civilization's MEDIA. One of their objectives has been steadfast in modern history... The destruction of western society morals.

The majority of humans only wish to follow authority. They do not seek individual thought.

Attention is garnered by sensationalism and coverted into ad revenue.


Tldr - Zion loves money and hates humanity

Homosexuals are way smarter than russians.

If being an homosexual means "mental illness" what can be being a russian?

And, in fact, Russia is a third world country.

Technically Russia is second world according to the original definition.

But yeah, fuck the Russians, most of them anyway, bunch of niggers in white skin. t. finn assburger

Something that keeps on happening in humanity, no matter if its ok at some time and not ok at some other time, only means its part of humanity. Its only opinions after that point if its ok or not. World isnt going to shit because of gays, even tho some third world country wants to be protective over real freedom. I feel so sorry for Russian people, always lived in shit and always will.

Ask Volodin, pidor.

>rolonged inactivity is unhealthy, so is withdrawing from society into your own room.

yes but it doesn't mean they are doing serious harm to anyone (but themselves, few less years living)

>As for the rest, basically what you conceive to be an abbreviation from the norm should be classified as a mental illness? I mean, that sure is the picture I'm getting here. If that's the case what would be the point of the classification?

Point is for mankind to prosper and expand.

>Would people who don't want to have kids receieve treatment (Even forced if they don't want it)?

Not forced, but encouraged. I don't think anyone should receive treatment against their will but simply be encouraged to get it. The problem is this kind of treatment is taboo now and nobody can can study it because of it.

>Be denied jobs where normal mental health is required?

You can't lump every mental illness in the same category.

> I mean, what would be the end goal of classifying it as a mental illness?

It could be treated as one and people who needed the treatment could be encouraged to get it. end goal of this all is for mankind to prosper like said earlier.

L U R K
M O A R

I agree and don't agree.... Being hay is real but being trans is a mental disorder

So effectively nothing would change except for the label? If people want to get help for homosexuality/transsexuality they can, they just need to find someone who can be bothered to try. Seeing as most attempts at "curing" homosexuality hasn't really worked out most doctors believe there's little point in trying. And since there's really no detrimental effects to being homosexual there's very little point in trying to cure it.

Do not you care? Women are not enough for everyone.

>It could be treated as one and people who needed the treatment could be encouraged to get it. end goal of this all is for mankind to prosper like said earlier.

not the dude you replied to, but i agree with you.
in my experience homosex is usually caused by traumatic stuff during childhood, absence of parent/s and even overbearing ones (esp. mothers)
if only people were level headed when it comes to such topics, and were willing to discuss them like civilized humans, we could get somewhere through mutual understanding and dialogue...
but, alas, certain groups have huge (and veiled) interests in spreading such states as normal and even encouraged...
that is sickening.

Who the hell cares.

Like I said the treatment is TABOO, That's why there is no cure or treatment for it. If it was classified as a mental illness and was not taboo anymore doctors could try to find a treatment. And as for homosexuality being detrimental, like I said earlier it causes harm to society.

>Discussing like civilized humans
>The state you're in that only minorly affects your own personal life is probably caused by childhood parental trauma and is quite sickening, it's also promoted by secret jew overlords

Roight then, classy civil discussion.

Because nobody else is based as Russia.

>implying gays don't contribute to the prosperity of mankind

How did you draw this conclusion?

Agree very much with you sir. Most people these days won't even try to discuss this (and other matters), they just simply say their opinion without giving any real reasoning for their beliefs.

Really? Harm to society because gay people aren't pumping out kids? I think a far more realistic and viable approach would be encouraging straight people to make the damn kids themselves. It's not like you need everyone to get together and breed to turn that stagnant birthrate into a growing one. (Not to mention the stagnation of birthrates is simply a product of 1st world countries wealth and stability where you don't need to make six kids because at least half of them are probably going to die.)

Dick dick dick. Scary. You should all be afraid of Richard.

They do contribute, they can still work, invent and do other productive things, but one thing they rarely do is reproduce, which stops their productiveness once they get old and expire.

But donating semen is a thing that you could do. Why do they have to be with someone they don't want to be with?

well most russian salaries are 5 to 10 times smaller than minimum wage in west

Yes I do believe that encouraging straight people to make kids is a good approach but they can only make so many and that wasn't really the point of this bread. I believe that the homos and trannies could contribute too in the same way. Don't you? Why would it be okay for the lgbt crowd to not make kids?

>Why do they have to be with someone they don't want to be with?
They could get conversion treatment and be attracted to the opposite sex. If you are really curious why this treatment should be done, read this bread it should have all the answers. If you have more questions please ask, I'll gladly answer.

So, essentially you want everyone possible making kids? That... really doesn't seem like a good idea. Overpopulation's already quite a big threat in general, having more and more people reproduce would only serve to escalate things and be quite counterproductive towards the prosperity of mankind. Espescially since we can't even really colonize other planets our resources are severely limited. For the moment a slightly above stagnant birth rate would be ideal. Slow growth is good, a boom is most likely not.

Don't get me wrong, having kids is important I agree but lessening the suffering in the current state of the world is far more important. You think pumping out kids = progress when in reality there are much greater hurdles than a low birth rate. Not too mention I really don't think homosexuality is something that's really worthtreating for the majority of people.

(Also link me this conversion therapy; I hate being a faggot and if there's a pill that will make me like pussy I want it. )

Different fag, but conversion therapy so far as I've understood it is just someone telling you that you really ought to not be homosexual and should be straight instead. Usually flavored with religion.

But it's a free country. (Probably) so knock yourself out if ya wanna give it a go.

Well shit I'm not that desperate to just lie to myself until I believe it. That sounds like garbage that only works on the weak.

Yeah basically. The success rate on it is phenomenally low.

There really isn't any working conversion therapy now due to it being taboo but LSD was studied to have some sort of effect.

hofmann.org/papers/martin_2.html
science.howstuffworks.com/lsd6.htm
erowid.org/psychoactives/guides/handbook_lsd25.shtml

I agree in some level. India has suffered really from overpopulation and the boom because it's a third world country. But in some places (1st world countries) a boom could boost the economy. Let's look at Finland for example, It's a 1st world country with a lot of resources (living space, farming space, good foundation). Currently it has a population of 5 million people and there are more deaths than births yearly. Finland was essentially a shit hole before WW2, but after it, the baby boomers made Finland a top tier country. Nearly everybody in Finland has a higher education which has resulted in people having problem getting jobs. More population would lead to the people having to take shit tier jobs and evolve the economy.
This applies to many other 1st world countries too. But it's not like curing lgbt disease (which was my point) would result in a population boom, simply it would prevent from having that obstacle in the future and allow for some more isolated cases of prosperity in society.