Yeh there is debate about it.....I dont know if it will be added. Part of me says yes and part of me disagrees. I dont know where I stand on it to be honest.....this is exactly why im saying its a poor term.....if you have experienced extreme bias against you then homophobia will mean something different than to someone else. By having the word phobia in it, makes it medically mean something that isnt necessarily true.
hung guys with no pics
- Thread starter milforddude
- Start date
Yeh there is debate about it.....I dont know if it will be added. Part of me says yes and part of me disagrees. I dont know where I stand on it to be honest.....this is exactly why im saying its a poor term.....if you have experienced extreme bias against you then homophobia will mean something different than to someone else. By having the word phobia in it, makes it medically mean something that isnt necessarily true.
Lex
Expert Member
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2004
- Posts
- 8,253
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 118
- Points
- 268
- Location
- In Your Darkest Thoughts and Dreams
- Sexuality
- 99% Gay, 1% Straight
- Gender
- Male
its your job lex to invent a medical on/off button for me.....ready get to it :biggrin1:
You prove yourself wrong ..... "E" does not require interference .... it requires EITHER interference *OR* distress. Therefore, interference in normal activities is NOT, as I said, a necessary part of the "phobia."
Go back to grade school and learn the meaning of "conjunction junction ... what's your function" ..... OR is "or" .... AND is "and" .... OR in this case means .... YOU ARE WRONG!
Go back to grade school and learn the meaning of "conjunction junction ... what's your function" ..... OR is "or" .... AND is "and" .... OR in this case means .... YOU ARE WRONG!
Oh man you are so wrong.....this is too easy. Good thing i never had to take medical psychology or do a psychiatry rotation. Anyways, to prove you wrong, for fun here's quoted from the DSM-IV and DSM-IVR is no different. By the way, you should really write to all the authors of the dictionary and tell them the DSM is wrong!!!!!
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) is a guide to the diagnosis of mental disorders in the United States. The following are a list of the criteria for Specific Phobia.
DIAGNOSTIC CRITERIA FOR SPECIFIC PHOBIA
[FONT=arial, Arial, Helvetica]A. Marked and persistent fear that is excessive or unreasonable, cued by the presence or anticipation of a specific object or situation (e.g., flying, heights, animals, receiving an injection, seeing blood).[/FONT]
[FONT=arial, Arial, Helvetica]B. Exposure to the phobic stimulus almost invariably provokes an immediate anxiety response, which may take the form of a situationally bound or situationally predisposed Panic Attack. Note: In children, the anxiety may be expressed by crying, tantrums, freezing, or clinging. [/FONT]
[FONT=arial, Arial, Helvetica]C. The person recognizes that the fear is excessive or unreasonable. Note: In children, this feature may be absent.[/FONT]
[FONT=arial, Arial, Helvetica]D. The phobic situation(s) is avoided or else is endured with intense anxiety or distress.[/FONT]
[FONT=arial, Arial, Helvetica]E. The avoidance, anxious anticipation, or distress in the feared situation(s) interferes significantly with the persons normal routine, occupational (or academic) functioning, or social activities or relationships, or there is marked distress about having the phobia.[/FONT]
[FONT=arial, Arial, Helvetica]F. In individuals under age 18 years, the duration is at least 6 months.[/FONT]
[FONT=arial, Arial, Helvetica]G. The anxiety, Panic Attacks, or phobic avoidance associated with the specific object or situation are not better accounted for by another mental disorder, such as Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (e.g., fear of dirt in someone with an obsession about contamination), Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (e.g., avoidance of stimuli associated with a severe stressor), Separation Anxiety Disorder (e.g., avoidance of school), Social Phobia (e.g., avoidance of social situations because of fear of embarrassment), Panic Disorder with Agoraphobia, or Agoraphobia Without History of Panic Disorder.[/FONT]
So, in all honesty, please make sure you look at the source you are quoting bc I am right in my post and you are wrong
Lex
Expert Member
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2004
- Posts
- 8,253
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 118
- Points
- 268
- Location
- In Your Darkest Thoughts and Dreams
- Sexuality
- 99% Gay, 1% Straight
- Gender
- Male
this isnt even worth discussion. Phobias interfere with one's life.....E proves what i am saying as right. Your grammar is off. If it didnt interfere with one's daily life there would basically be no need to ever treat a phobia. Arguing this point with you is like trying to explain to a 10 year old how antibiotics kill bacteria but not "good" cells.....ugh
Explain this to me. Why is first line of pharmacological treatment for phobias anxiolytics?
Don't argue semantics on this point.....you're wrong. Ask a psychiatrist. Phobias, by definition, interfere with a person's life and they recognize this fear as excessive.
There's some serious "web-md syndrome" on this board
Do you have an MD, DO, PsyD, or PhD in psych? If not then sorry your argument really does not even cut it. I think years and years and years ago when I was doing my psych minor (prior to med school) I learned the definition of phobia in general psych. Go back and read
I'm actually probably one of the most non-aggressive (except in sports) people you'd ever meet. I just cant believe how much misinformation exists on this board and it irritates me beyond belief when people argue consistently incorrectly. Not this thread, this actually gave me a different perspective (thanks Lex)
LPSG threads are full of rhetoric but very scant on logic. The posts amuse, can be thought provoking, or just silly beyond belief; but this thead has opened my eyes to the amount of fascist claptrap spouted here. No one here at LPSG is compelled to do anything other than observe some mutual respect and apply good manners. We can all hold prejudices but iventing rules is ludicrous. Brag all you want to, bubba et al but don't pontificate.
Actually, prior to responding last, I did consult with a friend who is the head of the psychiatry department at one of the top 10 medical schools in the country. *HE* was the one who said that section E of the DSM is an *OR* situation and requires only ONE of TWO conditions to be met, not both. EITHER prong one OR prong two -- NOT both. So, again, you are the person who is wrong and whose grammar is off.
Phobias do NOT have to be "treated" to exist either. You're plucking at thin air to grasp at straws ... for lack of a better platitude.
So, I did as you told me to do and that professional resource disagrees with you. Because that resource is involved in eduation of medical students, I find him to be a far more reliable font of knowledge than you.
As for my degrees, yes, I have an advanced degree from a medical school in addition to my law degree. If that impresses you, fine; to me, it's just something I did.
The definition in general psych is NOT what was being discussed, so it is you who is "off point," not I. Please be consistent and logical in your arguments.
Again, your own posting of section E *PROVES* that you are wrong. So, by thy own words .....
Enough said on this. Goodnight.
Phobias do NOT have to be "treated" to exist either. You're plucking at thin air to grasp at straws ... for lack of a better platitude.
So, I did as you told me to do and that professional resource disagrees with you. Because that resource is involved in eduation of medical students, I find him to be a far more reliable font of knowledge than you.
As for my degrees, yes, I have an advanced degree from a medical school in addition to my law degree. If that impresses you, fine; to me, it's just something I did.
The definition in general psych is NOT what was being discussed, so it is you who is "off point," not I. Please be consistent and logical in your arguments.
Again, your own posting of section E *PROVES* that you are wrong. So, by thy own words .....
Enough said on this. Goodnight.
Logic seems to be missing in some discussions ... along with common sense, comity, and consistency. Also lacking in some cases is a respect for others and the opinions of others. There is also a huge difference between facts and opinions that goes unrecognized at times.
As for holding prejudices .... I'll hold yours anytime! :wink:
RAY
As for holding prejudices .... I'll hold yours anytime! :wink:
RAY
I'm calling you on your BS.....you're wrong. You're splitting hairs where they need not be split. I also doubt you consulted your friend. Just for fun I posted this on a medical forum....asking for the definition and interpretation of "phobia"......still waiting for someone to agree with you. But anyways.....cheers
You jumped at me first.....expect to be retaliated to when you jump at someone.....especially when wrong
Baseball, chill out, dude. You've been wrong too. No one is infallible. You're not all-knowing nor is anyone else on this board, including me. You get yourself too worked up about this shit on what you've said is just a message board on the internet.
Take a deep breath and go bang your wife. You'll feel a lot better, I promise.
Take a deep breath and go bang your wife. You'll feel a lot better, I promise.
You can post away anywhere you choose. Interpretation of what you posted form the DSM and to what I originally referred requires only basic English language skills (along with a consultation with a friend -- whether you believe me or not) to prove that the conjuction *OR* in "E" means that you are wrong. FACT, not opinion. For you to be correct, then AND (or perhaps AND/OR) would be necessary (which it is not in "E") not OR. PLUS, semantics and split hairs are exactly what diagnosing and the DSM are all about. Otherwise, differential assessment is for naught.
As for those agreeing with me, I seem to believe that Lex has and perhaps one other. So, your wait should have ended long ago.
As for those agreeing with me, I seem to believe that Lex has and perhaps one other. So, your wait should have ended long ago.
You know, I was NOT referring to you through innuendo or any other way. I truly wasn't including you in my posting about respect, etc. to Sergeant_Torpedo. I meant it beyond even this silly thread.
Sorry you feel jumped at! Guilty conscience or paranoia?
Sorry you feel jumped at! Guilty conscience or paranoia?
Of course I have been wrong. For various reasons, this post hits home harder than others
Sorry, you're more than wrong. Spoke with someone this morning at the APA as well. I'm right; you're wrong. Once again, that *OR* in "E" may be semantics but it proves you to be incorrect and beyond.
Funny, as did I and they agreed with what i was saying....so i guess that makes you wrong as well
in any case, this debate has gone on way too long as being unproductive and way off the original topic and completely pointless of an argument. i'm stepping aside of this argument.....you can feel that you are correct or whatever, trully does not matter
