I try

I try to keep an open mind to other people's opinions, lifestyle, beliefs, etc. But sometimes I fail. As I did today. I'm sad to see that we who choose to live this lifestyle are still considered "sexual deviants with a mental illness". Normally I would blow off such things, but today wasn't that day. OK mini rant/vent over.

Bandicoot

Yes, I saw a few TV shows recently that depicted BDSM as some kind of evil deviance unsuited for civilised living At least it's being included in the mainstream now, which raises acceptance over time.

It's a slow start, but at least it's a start. There will always be those out there who object to it for different reasons. I am always amused that those who object to it for religious reasons usually don't follow the bible themselves (what to eat, how to worship, etc). Oh well, that's what we humans do, no use letting it get to you.

Is there a question?

Primalex said:

Is there a question?

Click to expand...

No, it's a rant, and he said it was a rant. Not all talk has to be question based.

Bandicoot007 said:

I try to keep an open mind to other people's opinions, lifestyle, beliefs, etc. But sometimes I fail. As I did today. I'm sad to see that we who choose to live this lifestyle are still considered "sexual deviants with a mental illness". Normally I would blow off such things, but today wasn't that day. OK mini rant/vent over.

Bandicoot

Click to expand...

Bandicoot....I say fuck 'em! If your lifestyle feels right for you and you hurt no others (unless they want it!) go for it!

There is a book...well more than one but this one is called The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) it is the American Psychiatric Association's standard reference for psychiatry which includes over 450 different definitions of mental disorders. It is updated with new definitions of mental disorders every year.

I bet you anything you like, the asshole/s who upset you will probably have multiple mental disorders as described in the DSM and should be the last to cast a stone!

Meh, I don't care all that much. I'm kinky and I think there are plenty of people that are fucked up and mentally ill practicing their kinks. I don't subscribe to the idea of a lifestyle that is centered around my kinkiness.

The thing is about mental disorders is... they are everywhere. I mean, everything can be considered a disorder. Why? Because everyone is different. If you try to put a norm to human behaviour you will find that everyone is acting differently. And that means that everyone are disordered in this or that way.

The thing different between your unique piculiarity and mental disorder is that mental ilness will cripple your life or life of your close ones in some way. It will make it worse than it could have been, in some way or form.

But BDSM, does it make life bad to the practitioners? No. For those who criticise BDSM I often hear two arguments:
1) BDSM is physically crippling, it's not healthy as it makes you feel pain. As contra-argument to that, You could easily compare it to fastfood. Most of BDSM activities are MORE healthy than regular visits to KFC or McDonalds. So what now, let's start saying that people who do not eat healy have mental disorder! And by that logic you will be right, because they are hurting themselves much more!
2) BDSM is emotionally crippling. It makes you less sociable as you like to hurt people or get hurt and that's BAD. Well to start with, both partners will clearly get very positive emotions out of it, but people will not hear that argument. BDSM practitioners are often more stable and less agressive, but you will not convince anyone about it. There's really no good way of explaining this to some jerks. All you can say it that any hate-based worldview, BDSM-haters included - is much more emotionally unsettling and harmful than BDSM practices. If I feel sad and cry, is it a bad thing? If I feel scared is it a bad thing? NO! Because then we should ban all drama books and movies, all horror books and movies, we should censor half of history classes because they often cause negative emotions.

/rant ovr

Nezhul said:

The thing is about mental disorders is... they are everywhere. I mean, everything can be considered a disorder. Why? Because everyone is different. If you try to put a norm to human behaviour you will find that everyone is acting differently. And that means that everyone are disordered in this or that way.

The thing different between your unique piculiarity and mental disorder is that mental ilness will cripple your life or life of your close ones in some way. It will make it worse than it could have been, in some way or form.

But BDSM, does it make life bad to the practitioners? No. For those who criticise BDSM I often hear two arguments:
1) BDSM is physically crippling, it's not healthy as it makes you feel pain. As contra-argument to that, You could easily compare it to fastfood. Most of BDSM activities are MORE healthy than regular visits to KFC or McDonalds. So what now, let's start saying that people who do not eat healy have mental disorder! And by that logic you will be right, because they are hurting themselves much more!
2) BDSM is emotionally crippling. It makes you less sociable as you like to hurt people or get hurt and that's BAD. Well to start with, both partners will clearly get very positive emotions out of it, but people will not hear that argument. BDSM practitioners are often more stable and less agressive, but you will not convince anyone about it. There's really no good way of explaining this to some jerks. All you can say it that any hate-based worldview, BDSM-haters included - is much more emotionally unsettling and harmful than BDSM practices. If I feel sad and cry, is it a bad thing? If I feel scared is it a bad thing? NO! Because then we should ban all drama books and movies, all horror books and movies, we should censor half of history classes because they often cause negative emotions.

/rant ovr

Click to expand...

Great points. And to expand on the first argument, what about people who enjoy eating really hot peppers? You can YouTube it, there are people who are eating extreme peppers that are making their tongues bleed. Very few people would call this a mental disorder though, because eating hot peppers is something that society just kind of rolls their eyes at and tolerates (if they are not an endorser). That goes back to getting BDSM more into mainstream acceptance. It gets distorted and watered down that way, but eventually it becomes more palatable to the populace at large. Once the general populace becomes inured to something, it becomes completely acceptable (as evinced by death row in the US).

Collar_N_Cuffs said:

Yes, I saw a few TV shows recently that depicted BDSM as some kind of evil deviance unsuited for civilised living At least it's being included in the mainstream now, which raises acceptance over time.

It's a slow start, but at least it's a start. There will always be those out there who object to it for different reasons. I am always amused that those who object to it for religious reasons usually don't follow the bible themselves (what to eat, how to worship, etc). Oh well, that's what we humans do, no use letting it get to you.

Click to expand...

The problem with this sort of thinking is that you're letting Hollywierd make your decisions for you. And you have no idea what they'll decide about YOU or your lifestyle.

Take guns. Regardless of how you personally feel about them, for Hollywood they are tools of evil and fear and terror. Anyone watch Saving Private Ryan? The opening scene is pretty horrific. Bombs and guns and gore as they make a mock film in the movie. The rest of the movie isn't much better. Because they decided guns are evil and terrorizing.

In Call of Duty (or is it Doodie?) and similar RPG games, guns are only used to kill and hurt in order to gain points over your opponents. You don't even know who you're playing against, just that you have to kill them to win. That perception has trickled down to mainstream society and now guns are bad bad bad for everyone except the police. Because they are only used to kill others.

Again, regardless of how you PERSONALLY feel about them, HOLLYWOOD has decided that they are bad and they portray them as such. And society now agrees with them.

They can do the same for BDSM or any other societal trend. At will. And there will always be someone out there who will agree with it. To YOUR detriment.

Because you're letting them decide if what you do, or like, or desire is ok or not. I personally would not like someone I don't know tell me that what I do in my bedroom with a consenting partner is a crime. One that requires that I register for life as a sex offender. The idea of letting Hollywood make that choice for me is disgusting.

What Hollywood does is NOT real life. It has NEVER BEEN real life. We should NEVER let them meddle in real life.

Collar_N_Cuffs said:

No, it's a rant, and he said it was a rant. Not all talk has to be question based.

Click to expand...

It should be something you can discuss.

"Meh, I feel bad, the world is mean..yada...yada" is nothing you can discuss.


Okay, let's discuss the topic:

I'm sad to see that we who choose to live this lifestyle are still considered "sexual deviants with a mental illness"

Click to expand...

Why the fuck do you think you are not a sexual deviant with a mental illness? Why do you think you are correct and they are wrong?

rawsilk said:

There is a book...well more than one but this one is called The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) it is the American Psychiatric Association's standard reference for psychiatry which includes over 450 different definitions of mental disorders. It is updated with new definitions of mental disorders every year.

Click to expand...

Roughly every decade, actually. First release 1952, about seven updates since then depending on what you count as an update.

I bet you anything you like, the asshole/s who upset you will probably have multiple mental disorders as described in the DSM and should be the last to cast a stone!

Click to expand...

Ahem.

There are quite a few people on this board who have some sort of disorder as defined in DSM. It does not mean we have no right to have opinions about things. I can certainly appreciate wanting to defend BDSM against ignorant criticism but doing that by stigmatising others isn't helpful.

Most of BDSM activities are MORE healthy than regular visits to KFC or McDonalds. So what now, let's start saying that people who do not eat healy have mental disorder!

Click to expand...

which is actually possible. Or do you think bulimia is not a mental disorder?

Whether something is a problem and needs to be outlawed is determined by the effects on other people. Drunk driving - bad. Drunk sleeping on the couch - good. It's fairly difficult to hurt other people with your eating habits.

BDSM practitioners are often more stable and less agressive,

Click to expand...

Says who?

Already the submissives with bipolar disorder on Lit likely outnumber the sum of all mental disorders of all vanilla women here.

HisArpy said:

The problem with this sort of thinking is that you're letting Hollywierd make your decisions for you. And you have no idea what they'll decide about YOU or your lifestyle.

Take guns. Regardless of how you personally feel about them, for Hollywood they are tools of evil and fear and terror. Anyone watch Saving Private Ryan? The opening scene is pretty horrific. Bombs and guns and gore as they make a mock film in the movie. The rest of the movie isn't much better. Because they decided guns are evil and terrorizing.

In Call of Duty (or is it Doodie?) and similar RPG games, guns are only used to kill and hurt in order to gain points over your opponents. You don't even know who you're playing against, just that you have to kill them to win. That perception has trickled down to mainstream society and now guns are bad bad bad for everyone except the police. Because they are only used to kill others.

Again, regardless of how you PERSONALLY feel about them, HOLLYWOOD has decided that they are bad and they portray them as such. And society now agrees with them.

They can do the same for BDSM or any other societal trend. At will. And there will always be someone out there who will agree with it. To YOUR detriment.

Because you're letting them decide if what you do, or like, or desire is ok or not. I personally would not like someone I don't know tell me that what I do in my bedroom with a consenting partner is a crime. One that requires that I register for life as a sex offender. The idea of letting Hollywood make that choice for me is disgusting.

What Hollywood does is NOT real life. It has NEVER BEEN real life. We should NEVER let them meddle in real life.

Click to expand...

I get your point, but it doesn't always happen that whatever Hollywood likes or dislikes translates into a law. But it does introduce a lot of new concepts into language, culture, etc. I still say that just by bringing it out of the dark corners removes some of the fear and loathing for the general public.

Bramblethorn said:

Roughly every decade, actually. First release 1952, about seven updates since then depending on what you count as an update.

Click to expand...

Your information is outdated......actually.

Quote cut and pasted from Wikipedia

Future revisions and updates (2013 and beyond)
Beginning with the fifth edition, it is intended that diagnostic guidelines revisions will be added more frequently to keep up with research in the field.[44] It is notable that The DSM-5 is identified with Arabic rather than Roman numerals. Beginning with DSM-5, the American Psychiatric Association will use decimals to identify incremental updates (e.g., DSM-5.1, DSM-5.2) and whole numbers for new editions (e.g., DSM-5, DSM-6),[45] similar to the scheme used for software versioning.

44 "About DSM-5: Frequently Asked Questions". DSM-5 Development. American Psychiatric Association. Archived from the original on 24 May 2015. Retrieved 24 May 2015. "[T]he research base of mental disorders is evolving at different rates for different disorders, diagnostic guidelines will not be tied to a static publication date but rather to scientific advances."

Bramblethorn said:

Ahem.

There are quite a few people on this board who have some sort of disorder as defined in DSM. It does not mean we have no right to have opinions about things. I can certainly appreciate wanting to defend BDSM against ignorant criticism but doing that by stigmatising others isn't helpful.

Click to expand...

Bramblethorn, everyone has a right to their own opinions, never did I say otherwise. Please give me the names of any person/s or group/s I stigmatized in my efforts to comfort and support Bandicoot!

rawsilk said:

Your information is outdated......actually.

Quote cut and pasted from Wikipedia

Future revisions and updates (2013 and beyond)
Beginning with the fifth edition, it is intended that diagnostic guidelines revisions will be added more frequently to keep up with research in the field.[44] It is notable that The DSM-5 is identified with Arabic rather than Roman numerals. Beginning with DSM-5, the American Psychiatric Association will use decimals to identify incremental updates (e.g., DSM-5.1, DSM-5.2) and whole numbers for new editions (e.g., DSM-5, DSM-6),[45] similar to the scheme used for software versioning.

Click to expand...

How are you getting "annually" from that?

DSM-5 came out in May 2013; as far as I can see, there's no DSM-5.1 yet, nor even any discussion of what it might contain let alone an anticipated publication date. They may be stepping up the revision frequency slightly, but I'm still not seeing anything resembling the annual revisions you mentioned.

Bramblethorn, everyone has a right to their own opinions, never did I say otherwise. Please give me the names of any person/s or group/s I stigmatized in my efforts to comfort and support Bandicoot!

Click to expand...

You stated that "the asshole/s who upset you will probably have multiple mental disorders as described in the DSM and should be the last to cast a stone". I took that as you saying that people with DSM-described "mental disorders" have less right than others to express critical opinions of BDSM.

If I've misunderstood that, I'd be happy to hear what you did mean by it.

Collar_N_Cuffs said:

Yes, I saw a few TV shows recently that depicted BDSM as some kind of evil deviance unsuited for civilised living At least it's being included in the mainstream now, which raises acceptance over time.

Click to expand...

There are occasional positive portrayals in the mainstream. CSI had a pro-domme who showed up in a few episodes, and she was presented in a pretty good light. (At least, the episodes I saw; I understand they may have fucked it up later on, after I stopped watching.)

In one of the early episodes of Castle, Rick Castle mentions his safeword to Beckett, and it's strongly implied later on that she has some BDSM interests.

Bramblethorn said:

There are occasional positive portrayals in the mainstream. CSI had a pro-domme who showed up in a few episodes, and she was presented in a pretty good light. (At least, the episodes I saw; I understand they may have fucked it up later on, after I stopped watching.)

In one of the early episodes of Castle, Rick Castle mentions his safeword to Beckett, and it's strongly implied later on that she has some BDSM interests.

Click to expand...

The Castle character was one I was thinking of, yep!

Bramblethorn said:

How are you getting "annually" from that?

DSM-5 came out in May 2013; as far as I can see, there's no DSM-5.1 yet, nor even any discussion of what it might contain let alone an anticipated publication date. They may be stepping up the revision frequency slightly, but I'm still not seeing anything resembling the annual revisions you mentioned.

Click to expand...

As stated in Wikipedia .....
Future revisions and updates (2013 and beyond)
Beginning with the fifth edition, it is intended that diagnostic guidelines revisions will be added more frequently to keep up with research in the field.


and in the same article it goes on to say .... Quote "Medicalization and financial conflicts of interest"
It has also been alleged that the way the categories of the DSM are structured, as well as the substantial expansion of the number of categories, are representative of an increasing medicalization of human nature, which may be attributed to disease mongering by psychiatrists and pharmaceutical companies, the power and influence of the latter having grown dramatically in recent decades.
.... end quote.

Drug companies are constantly rolling out new drugs to boost their bottom line. Recycling and re-testing an old drug for a 'new' mental condition can take around 12 months. (read Bad Pharma Ben Goldacre). I also had the eye opening experience of working as a Pharmaceutical Detailer for a number of years.

Hence annual updates may well be an overly conservative and under estimate of mine. DSM's contents may well be updated online more often as "new" diseases/drugs come on line.

Bramblethorn said:

You stated that "the asshole/s who upset you will probably have multiple mental disorders as described in the DSM and should be the last to cast a stone". I took that as you saying that people with DSM-described "mental disorders" have less right than others to express critical opinions of BDSM.

If I've misunderstood that, I'd be happy to hear what you did mean by it.

Click to expand...

The DSM has a broad and almost all encompassing list of human behaviors they now class as "mental disorders". Virtually every human being would, by DSM's massive list of mental disorder definitions, be classed as having some degree of mental disorder.

Let me try to bring this down to the most simple terms possible which you may or may not be able to comprehend as you seem to suffer from building extra meaning in where it is not present and then misrepresent what others are not saying!


"When they persisted in questioning him, he straightened up and told them, "Let the person among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." John 8:7 (Biblical quotation)


.....and as far as my comment about asshole/s, the world seems full of them.... nasty, unkind, judgemental and argumentative. No doubt they could find a mental disorder listed in the DSM for people such as those!

I read some very good points, by Nezhul and others, but my take on it is this:

I don't want to be thought of as a sexual deviant with a mental illness either. But as a submissive/kinky male into bondage, I don't want my potential partner thinking of me like that either.

It is a choice some people have to make. Do we want to be kinky and lonely in life, or do we want to have a meaningful loving and fulfilling relationship with a wonderful partner. I am at the point where I am willing to sacrifice my kinks to settle for the latter- choosing vanilla over kink, even though it may not be what really excites me. Because ultimately, I am looking for something higher than just satisfaction of some unusual fetishes- I am looking for love, and sometimes that entails sacrifice.

If someone I am interested in romantically thinks being a submissive male into BDSM makes me a sexual deviant with a mental illness, then I will do what I can to change it, suppress it. Some people will not, and there is nothing wrong with that.

What's the end game? Do people want to be able to introduce themselves at a dinner party like: "Hi, I'm ______ and I enjoy being beaten until I can't walk. Really gets me going." "What's your name?"

As far as I can tell, BDSM isn't much of a mystery to people in general anymore. No matter how mainstream it becomes there's always going to be someone that thinks it's for devil worshippers or something. So other than, "ew, I don't want to be lumped in with people that have mental illness." What is this about?

MeekMe said:

What's the end game? Do people want to be able to introduce themselves at a dinner party like: "Hi, I'm ______ and I enjoy being beaten until I can't walk. Really gets me going." "What's your name?"

As far as I can tell, BDSM isn't much of a mystery to people in general anymore. No matter how mainstream it becomes there's always going to be someone that thinks it's for devil worshippers or something. So other than, "ew, I don't want to be lumped in with people that have mental illness." What is this about?

Click to expand...

What it's about is the right to sexually self identify without being called fucked up. GLBT can self identify and people can no longer discriminate, nor can they even openly criticize in many places. Yet BDSM is socially not accepted (generally), and it still is a mystery, because it's widely misunderstood, misconstrued and maligned. People in this community want to bitch about that. People should bitch about it, and be free to do so without being criticized. Especially here.

PaxNurgle said:

I am at the point where I am willing to sacrifice my kinks to settle for the latter- choosing vanilla over kink, even though it may not be what really excites me. Because ultimately, I am looking for something higher than just satisfaction of some unusual fetishes- I am looking for love, and sometimes that entails sacrifice.

Click to expand...

Can't you have both though? It's obvious that you build your relationship not based on Kink but on love - kink is secondary. But you know how I feel? If a person whom I loves comes up to me and says she has a kink that I do not have myself - would I turn her down? Hell no! Well, maybe only the dangerous ones, like bloodletting of playing with fire. But things that don't get you hurt very much? Not at all. I would be delighted to make my partner happy, and thus I would enjoy playing along with her kink, even if I am not personally into it myself.

You are telling me anyone is different? Are we not willing to go to the ends of the world for our loved ones?

Yes, maybe your wife will not be able to go into hardcore stuff right away or even ever. Maybe she couldn't ever make you hurt to tears, because it takes a certain psychological mindset to do so to another person, esp whom you love.
But Milder stuff? Definitely possible, man. Just approach her and tell her you want to try this and that, because it turns you on so much, and you think she will do so good in that role, and that you get shivers just thinking how sexy she would be when standing above you...
Don't ask her to piss on your face right away or do a strap on! No one would be comfortable with such a leap. Just start with the basics, stop when you find a sweet spot for both of you. I guarantee, over several years it is possible to get anywhere with baby steps.
And her kink? Even if she's not dominant by nature, her kink will be making your whishes fulfilled, if she loves you. Provided this goes both ways. Make her happy and she will not turn you down.

Collar_N_Cuffs said:

What it's about is the right to sexually self identify without being called fucked up. GLBT can self identify and people can no longer discriminate, nor can they even openly criticize in many places. Yet BDSM is socially not accepted (generally), and it still is a mystery, because it's widely misunderstood, misconstrued and maligned. People in this community want to bitch about that. People should bitch about it, and be free to do so without being criticized. Especially here.

Click to expand...

I could say the same thing about mental illness. Unlike kink, my mental state effects my life as a whole and has made things like earning a living incredibly difficult. I can't go to my employer and say, "yeah, sorry, I can't do that today because my brain is malfunctioning." I get to listen to people disparage me to my face by saying, "what's with all this medication? Back in my day we didn't have 'depression' and 'anxiety' I think people just don't want to work!" Meanwhile, the only thing kink effects is who I chose as an intimate partner and how we interact with each other and we can do so without anyone else ever having to know about it.

And being kinky and being LGBTQ is very different. You can choose to reveal your kinks or not. Another thing, talk about it. If you want it to be so mainstream that it's no longer an issue then you have to do the work that goes with it like that awkward dinner table conversation with the family. Media like tv and movies is only part of making it acceptable if that's what you really want.

Until then, the conversation I see is: I am kinky not mentally ill! Mentally ill people are icky, I can't be associated with that!

There are tons of people inside and outside of BDSM that have mental illness (which is really broad) and mental illness, like kink isn't the big bad thing people are making it out to be. So bitch and complain as much as you want. Let's see how the "community" reacts the next time a 50SoG type thing comes out. Last I remember, the "community" wanted nothing to do with it going mainstream and liked keeping their elitist club to themselves.

MeekMe said:

I could say the same thing about mental illness. Unlike kink, my mental state effects my life as a whole and has made things like earning a living incredibly difficult. I can't go to my employer and say, "yeah, sorry, I can't do that today because my brain is malfunctioning." I get to listen to people disparage me to my face by saying, "what's with all this medication? Back in my day we didn't have 'depression' and 'anxiety' I think people just don't want to work!" Meanwhile, the only thing kink effects is who I chose as an intimate partner and how we interact with each other and we can do so without anyone else ever having to know about it.

And being kinky and being LGBTQ is very different. You can choose to reveal your kinks or not. Another thing, talk about it. If you want it to be so mainstream that it's no longer an issue then you have to do the work that goes with it like that awkward dinner table conversation with the family. Media like tv and movies is only part of making it acceptable if that's what you really want.

Until then, the conversation I see is: I am kinky not mentally ill! Mentally ill people are icky, I can't be associated with that!

There are tons of people inside and outside of BDSM that have mental illness (which is really broad) and mental illness, like kink isn't the big bad thing people are making it out to be. So bitch and complain as much as you want. Let's see how the "community" reacts the next time a 50SoG type thing comes out. Last I remember, the "community" wanted nothing to do with it going mainstream and liked keeping their elitist club to themselves.

Click to expand...

Actually, I didn't take anyone's comments as saying "mental illness is icky". What I understood was that having BDSM tendencies to any degree is not tantamount to a mental disorder. Not wanting to be lumped into a group where you don't feel you belong is a pretty basic reaction.

And you are correct, you can keep your kink personal and not let anyone in on it, that's your choice. But if someone wants to come out with their BDSM lifestyle, isn't it their right to do so without derision, fright, hysteria etc etc etc whatever negativity they are encountering? It's easy to say.. just keep it secret, you don't have to tell anyone and you won't have any problems. But that doesn't sit well with everyone, so your own personal choice works for you, but may not be a solution for everyone.

As to the "community", I don't think it was an elitist reaction so much as a .. "Hey, you idiots in Hollywood got it wrong." I don't recall anyone coming here and being rebuffed because they said they got into BDSM because of 50SoG. They did, however, get additional information on how real relationships work as opposed to fantasy. I don't call that elitist.

rawsilk said:

As stated in Wikipedia .....

Click to expand...

I searched the entire article. The word "annual" does not appear.

Future revisions and updates (2013 and beyond)
Beginning with the fifth edition, it is intended that diagnostic guidelines revisions will be added more frequently to keep up with research in the field.

Click to expand...

More frequently than 7 times in 61 years... does not necessarily mean "annually", or even close to it.

Drug companies are constantly rolling out new drugs to boost their bottom line. Recycling and re-testing an old drug for a 'new' mental condition can take around 12 months. (read Bad Pharma Ben Goldacre). I also had the eye opening experience of working as a Pharmaceutical Detailer for a number of years.

Hence annual updates may well be an overly conservative and under estimate of mine. DSM's contents may well be updated online more often as "new" diseases/drugs come on line.

Click to expand...

I repeat myself, but: it's been three years since the last revision. That is rather less than "annual". And now you're saying that it might be more frequent than annual?

*scratches head*

Virtually every human being would, by DSM's massive list of mental disorder definitions, be classed as having some degree of mental disorder.

Click to expand...

Not even close. The 12-month incidence of DSM-IV "disorders" is about one in four. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15939839

Overall, DSM-V is pretty similar to DSM-IV in terms of what does and doesn't count as a "disorder". Most of the changes are tweaks to classification, e.g. DSM-IV listed several subtypes for schizophrenia and autism but DSM-V removes the subtypes. There are some new inclusions and exclusions (e.g. it now requires more evidence before somebody can be diagnosed as schizophrenic) but nothing likely to make a big difference to that one-in-four figure.

I'm not a fan of DSM; there are a lot of things wrong with it. But this idea that it diagnoses everybody as mentally disordered is groundless.

Let me try to bring this down to the most simple terms possible which you may or may not be able to comprehend as you seem to suffer from building extra meaning in where it is not present and then misrepresent what others are not saying!

Click to expand...

You cannot expect others to understand what you write if you don't write clearly. If your idea of "the most simple terms possible" is a 46-word sentence with the punctuation left out, if you write "annual" when you mean "not since 2013"... well, it's probably not your readers' fault if you're misunderstood sometimes.

"When they persisted in questioning him, he straightened up and told them, "Let the person among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." John 8:7 (Biblical quotation)

Click to expand...

I'm familiar with the Bible. The point of that passage is that everybody is a sinner, and hence nobody should stone others for sinning.

But your wording was different: "[somebody with DSM conditions] should be the last to throw a stone". That "should be the last to..." phrasing implies that the person has less right than others; in this context, it says that people with DSM conditions have less right to comment on this issue than the other three-quarters of the population.

Anyway, I'm glad to hear that this wasn't your intended meaning.