by Chris Bodenner
A reader goes against the grain:
A reader translates: "Doctor-driven medical studies are, like, just opinions, man."
Well, vile as I find Santorum, I have to agree with him on this one. The student who says something about the APA and 1974 is probably referring not to the American Psychological Association, but to the American Psychiatric Association. In 1974, the latter removed homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM), its formal list of mental disorders. The arguments within the association that led up to the removal were heated, and quite political.
The board announced that there was a scientific consensus that homosexuality was not an illness, and decided that homosexuality be removed from the DSM. Members who were upset by this move succeeded in forcing a vote of the entire membership. Ronald Bayer, in Homosexuality and American Psychiatry, notes:
Above all, those who continued to view homosexuality as a psychiatric disorder saw in the 37 percent vote against deletion a stunning refutation of the board's claim that its decision represented a scientific consensus.
Reading the Bayer book makes clear that homosexuality's status as a psychiatric disorder was no more scientific than its status as a non-disorder.
More historical background here. Update from a reader:
I've been following your Rickety arguments thread, and I'm always amused by the way people rely on "science" to bolster claims, as if science were solid factual evidence and not a sophisticated method of inquiry and argument. But I am really writing just to remind readers, if you will post the link, that "This American Life" has done a superb job of telling the story of how 81 words were changed in the DSM. What I walked away with after listening to this story years ago was a deep sense that it's harder to stereotype and malign whole groups of people once you get to know them. Familiarity can breed compassion and lead to changes in policy. And as one would expect with TAL, it's a damn good story, and well-told.