Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Heron TSG]

I can't find any information on it, so I'm calling shenanigans.

Spoiler: Horribly compressed picture agrees. (click to show/hide)

Maybe that term was one made up by the author of that textbook series, and not one widely accepted?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

You're searching for the wrong thing.

[Heron TSG]

So I was. Reading link #1 on that search result, D isn't really the problem, at least not so much as U. The behavior is perfectly justifiable.

Certain abnormal behaviors aren't seen as possible, believable, or supportable - which means a mental health problem may be present.

It's possible, it's believable, and it's supportable.

[G-Flex]

Certain abnormal behaviors aren't seen as possible, believable, or supportable - which means a mental health problem may be present.

It's possible, it's believable, and it's supportable.

"X means Y may be present" does not imply "Not-X means Y is not present".

At any rate, this whole UMAD thing (I still find that hilarious) seems like a rather informal set of guidelines rather than any kind of formal criteria or standard.

[Vector]

. . .

We're talking about psychology.  It isn't that big on formal standards.

[G-Flex]

You're right, although some are more formal than others, and I mostly said it so people don't act like it's a formal standard.

Even in an informal discussion like this, "signs that a health problem may be present" aren't really good criteria to use when discussing whether or not something is a mental health problem.

[Heron TSG]

Certain abnormal behaviors aren't seen as possible, believable, or supportable - which means a mental health problem may be present.

It's possible, it's believable, and it's supportable.

"X means Y may be present" does not imply "Not-X means Y is not present".

I'm not entirely sure what you mean, and I'm still hazy on this kind of psychology. I'll sit and watch.

Spoiler: Like so. (click to show/hide)

[G-Flex]

What I said wasn't specific to psychology; it's simple logic. Even if X implies a possibility of Y, that doesn't mean that without X, there is no possibility of Y.

Example: Someone being defensive about their drinking habits is a sign that they may be an alcoholic. However, someone not being defensive about their drinking habits isn't proof that they aren't an alcoholic. "X implies a possibility of Y" does not imply that X is necessarily the case if Y is true.

[Vector]

A sufficient, but not necessary, condition.

[G-Flex]

Close, but no. There's a reason I said "X implies the possibility of Y". X being a sufficient condition would mean that X implies Y.

For example: If being defensive about drinking habits were a sufficient condition of alcoholism, that would mean that being defensive implies the person is, in fact, an alcoholic, but that's not necessarily true.

So it's neither a sufficient nor necessary condition, just a correlation between two things.

[Heron TSG]

What I said wasn't specific to psychology; it's simple logic. Even if X implies a possibility of Y, that doesn't mean that without X, there is no possibility of Y.

Example: Someone being defensive about their drinking habits is a sign that they may be an alcoholic. However, someone not being defensive about their drinking habits isn't proof that they aren't an alcoholic. "X implies a possibility of Y" does not imply that X is necessarily the case if Y is true.

I understood the part about logic, but I have nothing to really back up any arguments I make that wouldn't just be spouting what a couple sources tell me. As for my logic on that part, to indicate a mental disorder, that site said the condition must be unjustifiable behavior. Killing random people is unjustifiable, and thus most likely a mental disorder. A genetic male wishing he were born a woman is justifiable in that said genetic male identifies with females.

But there I go, flailing about with words.

[Vector]

 

P: definitely X, Y, Z
Q: possibly mental disorder
~Q: not possibly mental disorder

... I hope you see where I'm going with this.  The statement is "possibly mental disorder," not "mental disorder" in the given rubric.  No matter what we do in psychology, we will never really know "yes, absolutely mental disorder" because social constructs.

[Heron TSG]

I was just going by the site's "Four criteria are used to determine psychological disorders" statement. I am not a psychologist and will never become a psychologist.

Now excuse me while I stop using my keyboard and learn something from this conversation.

EDIT: Apparently me northern accent bleeds through me fingers, and makes a mess right illegible.

[Truean]

On Transsexualism as a Disorder (Mental v. Physical):

I think it the fact that I truly wish to have the body of a woman [ahem] in every respect through whatever saddened despair or hardship or attempt to avoid the problem speaks volumes. The fact that transsexual individuals often would rather kill themselves than continue on as they are screams volumes. I can see the case for calling it a disorder, something is wrong with me....

If it is a disorder, the question becomes "mental or physical." At first, I was somewhat insulted at the idea that my condition is listed in the same book describing schizophrenia. I'm not insane.... But then I realized what was really in play, a stigma against mental illness. Maybe it is a mental illness and rather than be offended about that, it might be better if people weren't so adverse to mental health.... Further, I could see it being at least partially a mood disorder along the lines of depression, just a very specific depression with a very narrow cause.

Perhaps it is alternatively or additionally a physical disorder. While there's nothing wrong with being male, there's something wrong with me having the body of one. It is making me miserable beyond my ability to express and surgery is the only viable remedy.... Given that, I could see it as a physical ailment in whole or in part, but hopefully classification of it as this wouldn't just be catering to the bias against mental illness.... I don't know what to think. On the one hand it might not be a mental disorder; on the other if it is what am I objecting to: that it is included as a mental disorder? Or am I being a bit of a jerk to those with mental illnesses...? 

Transsexualism as culture:
Apparently, some cultures have more than 2 sexes. I'd list some example cites but between this being the internet and rule 34, what you search for will not turn up pleasant results. [major blush and sadness at this]. While this might help "cross dressers," "Drag queens," etc, it wouldn't fully help me. My body, not just my wardrobe, needs to change. That said, being able to take on an accepted feminine role in society would really help me, just not completely. I don't think culture or even total social acceptance absent surgery could fully help me. [sigh] This makes the concept of sex unimaginably awkward for me.... In summation, it would greatly help me if society would chill out and accept me, but even then, I would still need surgery.

[G-Flex]

If it is a disorder, the question becomes "mental or physical." At first, I was somewhat insulted at the idea that my condition is listed in the same book describing schizophrenia. I'm not insane.... But then I realized what was really in play, a stigma against mental illness. Maybe it is a mental illness and rather than be offended about that, it might be better if people weren't so adverse to mental health.... Further, I could see it being at least partially a mood disorder along the lines of depression, just a very specific depression with a very narrow cause.

Yeah, there are some lingering stigmas about psychiatric illness/disorder that seriously impact people's ability to consider issues like this. This is no surprise, considering that through most of human history (or at least Western history), the prevailing thought was that the mentally ill were useless, possessed, bewitched, or damn near inhuman.

On the other hand, these days that paradoxically coexists with the highly-pharmaceutical "Hey doc / Hey patient / I'm feeling bad / Take these pills" super-casual approach to treating serious psychological problems. It's as if we, as a society, are capable of demonizing/dismissing the mentally ill, as well as treat our own mental problems as if they're super-simple medicable ailments, and I think both of these trends exist for similar reasons (aside from simple history and pharmaceutical lobbying): We, as a culture, are often afraid of approaching these issues head-on and really think about and analyze them. Whether we're just going to our primary care physician (or a psychiatrist) and picking up some anti-depressants or anti-anxiety medications after talking to them for ten minutes flat, or dismissing the problems of the seriously mentally ill as not even worth human(e) consideration, we don't want to actually sit down and consider what's really going on in ours or other people's minds, or what brings them/us to the state where treatment would be necessary.

Perhaps it is alternatively or additionally a physical disorder. While there's nothing wrong with being male, there's something wrong with me having the body of one. It is making me miserable beyond my ability to express and surgery is the only viable remedy.... Given that, I could see it as a physical ailment in whole or in part, but hopefully classification of it as this wouldn't just be catering to the bias against mental illness.... I don't know what to think. On the one hand it might not be a mental disorder; on the other if it is what am I objecting to: that it is included as a mental disorder? Or am I being a bit of a jerk to those with mental illnesses...? 

Out of curiosity, how long have you felt this way about your body, and in what way do you feel that way? Do you feel like there's a situation going on as was described earlier, where you intuitively feel like the parts your brain has mapped out for you simply don't correspond to what's attached, or is it something else? I don't really expect an answer here; I'm aware that may be a little more personal than you want to talk about.

Transsexualism as culture:
Apparently, some cultures have more than 2 sexes. I'd list some example cites but between this being the internet and rule 34, what you search for will not turn up pleasant results. [major blush and sadness at this]. While this might help "cross dressers," "Drag queens," etc, it wouldn't fully help me. My body, not just my wardrobe, needs to change.

That sounds like you're talking about multiple genders, not multiple sexes. Academically, the distinction here is that sex is biological and gender is more the associated behaviors and social roles.

In summation, it would greatly help me if society would chill out and accept me, but even then, I would still need surgery.

I really wish we lived in some kind of hypothetical future-world where sexual reassignment were, well, better. Compared to the ideal (the ideal being that the end result is exactly what someone born as that sex would be like), the current state of affairs is woefully lacking, but I don't honestly know how that could improve in the near future, given that it's slightly difficult to, you know, give people new body parts. The best we can do now, really, is reposition, contort, cut up, and convolute ones that we already have into new configurations that sort of approximate what the real thing is supposed to be like. But hey, it's progress, and if it helps people to stop having to go through that kind of inner turmoil every day, and significantly improves their quality of life for that reason, then I'm all for it.