Crossdressing to possibly become a mental disease!

The only way I would EVER consider crossdressing a "mental disorder/disease", is if it is fully damaging the person and the people around them.

Let's say someone is having conflicts with their male morals and their crossdressing side. It's fine and all, we all go through it. But, if that person is having severe break-downs and it is debilitating their entire life, then yes, that person should be seeing someone (on their own, not forced). That is when it becomes a disorder (dis-, order)

Or, taking it into another realm, let's say that someone is having sexual fantasies with crossdressing. Fine and dandy, we all go through it. But, if crossdressing is the only thing that makes them sexually climax, then they do need to see someone about it (on their own free will, not forced). That is also when it becomes a disorder (dis-, order).

Laws, rules, and regulations should NOT be pawns for others' disgust and/or opinions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sometimes Steffi

Diagnostic Criteria for 302.3 Transvestic Fetishism

B. The fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.

It's Part B that's the problem. Happy crosdressers -Good. Unhappy crosdressers - have a mental disease (according to DSM IV).

So crossdress and be happy. I do.

---

This is really much to do about nothing. What this says is that if you enjoy your crossdressing, you are not mentally ill.

This part B. comes from the attempt to define "normal" and "abnormal." Generally psychologists don't really care what you do, unless it bothers you enough to cause "significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning."

No one is being compelled to seek treatment for anything. But treatment is made available to those who need it.

While some folks might not like the idea, crossdressing is disturbing to many people who do it. Those folks should not be prevented from seeking help just because others think what getting help is "wrong."

This is essentially the same criteria used for almost every diagnosis. If you want help, it is available, if you don't want help - good for you, enjoy.

Now, getting bent out of shape about some of the treatment options presented by some ethically challenged doctors is pretty reasonable, but diagnostic criteria are not treatment options.

You probably allude to Dr. Ray Blanchard (and colleagues), who is a key responsable for next planned DSM V.

If you want more info about next DSM revision, and Dr. Blanchard's theories, please browse this informed forum at crossdressers-forum.com, where I also incidentally posted this contribution of mine :

http://www.crossdressers-forum.com/f...b13acb10e143da

On my Flickr's forum there are also many information about the subject, but you can access it only by invitation.

As with all specialists in healthcare, the supposed Mental Health Professionals... I use this term very loosly... Are trying to expand their area of influence.
Heck they added 'Headaches' to the list of Mental Disorders!!!
So-o-o anything they come up with will either be accepted or refuted. Crossdressing has been a mental disorder since the early 50's! The fact that it is still in the DSM is remarkable and shows that the editors are afraid that removing it will diminish their power in some way.
So-o-o as has been said before, go toa therapist that is 'T' friendly!
Lisa E

MY GOD!......Excuse me if that offends someone out there. Why can't we just accept each other as we are and live in peacefull coexisting lives? Why do we feel the need to change everyone else to our personal beliefs and attitudes? Liberal, leftist preach acceptance of all, and "let it be", but really are just as dictatorial as the conservative rightist who want to cram their morals and religion down everyone's throat.

Publically, I am a conservative, Christian, Crossdresser who believes in the freedom of all people to be themselves and make their own decisions as to their morality and socialability, so long as it does not contradict the Golden Rule or its ten corilaries. Just leave me to my own and don't be berating me for my attitudes because they are not your own.

We say we welcome diversity...unless its different from ourselves. What a bunch of HIPACRITs the world is made of. Personally, I want out.

maybe the doctors should get thier own therapy

I'm finding this thread super interesting and I'm enjoying reading the posts :) I haven't got anything much to add except to say. I'm a happy cder. I wasn't always this way. I talked to someone (my wife) over about a 6 month period and she helped me to see that it's a very value-added part of my life because now I've pursued and embraced it more openly, I'm a way, way happier and more relaxed person than I've even been before in my entire life. If being a crossdresser makes me "mentally ill" than I want to be sick :D

Publish or perish is the rules in the health game. These guys have no real interest in the subject.

Bah, they can call it whatever they want. Who's gonna notice if they do? America's too busy watching American Idol or whatever it is people watch on tv these days.

Wow, I can't believe this one is still going on.

Here is the short and sweet of modern health care.
At least in the US anyway - It all comes down to MONEY!!

Here is how it works -
Once the "Medical Professionals" Claim something is a "Condition" it is put in the medical books as such.

Once something is listed as a "Medical Condition"
it can NO LONGER - I repeat - NO LONGER -
be "cured" and/or "treated" by ANY over the counter medications.

"Medical Conditions" are classified as, but not limited to:
Ongoing/Persistant Conditions, Diseases and guess what - Mental Illnesses.

These "Medical Conditions" can only be Cured [ha ha, because when was the last time something was actually cured?] or Treated by PRESCRIPTION medication.

Do you see where this is going yet?????

Doctors suddenly call something a CONDITION.
Drug companies get to charge whatever to treat said condition.
Doctors get kickbacks from Drug companies.
Happy doctors start calling more everyday things "conditions"
Drug companies make more overpriced "treatments"
Rinse and repeat as necessary,
And they told two friends and so on and so on.

Look at any magazine or TV commercial these days....
Suddenly anything and everything that has or could ever go wrong with you has some fancy name [thank you marketing dept] and it is now a CONDITION.

BUT don't fear!!!!! Because we already have a drug standing by that will TREAT that CONDITION!!! Just stop by your doctor and ask for it.

Still don't want to believe yet????
There used to be 1 ONE thing wrong with you if you could not sleep at night - Imsomnia
But seeing how over the counter [cheap] drugs can cure that now.
They have come up with at least 20 different conditions [that all have there own prescription [expensive] drugs to treat them] that could now be wrong with you if you don't sleep at night.

I am not a crackpot, the proof is in the advertising.
No Aliens, spacecraft from planet 10 or any surrounding dimensions or persons living, dead, undead or of any astro or spiritual plain were harmed in the making of this post :lol2:

PS: If Doctors and Drug companies had there way --- Sneezing would be a condition and tissues would be only sold by prescription and cost 250.00 a box.

Could not agree more for sure. As is evidenced by the current admin wanting to control the lives and health of all americans!

I have no problem with this. Everybody thinks I'm crazy anyway. This would confirm it. Wahooooo!!!!!

Seriously though. Crossdressing can be argued as being not dissimilar to those who go to Reniesance fairs or Star Trek conventions. I doubt this is going to happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Empress Lainie

I read in a post somewhere else that two doctors are trying to get crossdressing declared as transvestism, a mental disease for the new DSM V.

---

It's not just the current review of DSM - it's already here in ICD.

Sorry for the detail which follows, but it maybe could help to try and go through some of the terminology.

DSM is the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders published by the American Psychiatric Association. The current version is the 4th Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR).

DSM-V is currently in consultation, and is due for publication in 2012.

The International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) is the standard of the World Health Organization. This now in its 10th revision and is usually known as ICD-10.

ICD-10 has been used in England from 2001.

The US currently uses ICD-9-CM, with ICD-10 being scheduled for introduction from 2013. ICD-9-CM is based on the ICD-9 with a Clinical Modification to give more morbidity detail. It was produced by the US National Center for Health Statistics.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
DSM-IV-TR details
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

In DSM-IV one specific section covers Sexual and Gender Identity Disorder.

The sub-set for Gender Indentity Disorder includes 302.85 - GID in adolescents or adults.

There is a subset for Paraphilias, a biomedical term used to describe sexual arousal to objects or situations that are not part of normative stimulation.

This subset includes 302.3 Transvestic Fetishism, which equates to F65.1 in ICD-10 (see below) but does not otherwise does not have a code to equate to the ICD-10 code F64.1 (see below).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sometimes Steffi

Diagnostic Criteria for 302.3 Transvestic Fetishism -

A. Over a period of at least 6 months, in a heterosexual male, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving cross-dressing.

B. The fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.

It's Part B that's the problem. Happy Crossdressers - Good. Unhappy Crossdressers - have a mental disease

---

Just to show what nice people the medical profession thinks we are the subset also includes 302.84 Sexual Sadism and 302.2 Pedophilia.

Being gay was categorized in DSM-III, but was omitted from DSM-IV. It had removed been from DSM-II and replaced by the category Sexual Orientation Disturbance.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ICD-10 details
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

In ICD-10 the Blocks F00 to F99 cover Mental and Behavioural Disorders. This block includes " conditions and behaviour patterns of clinical significance which tend to be persistent and appear to be the expression of the individual's characteristic lifestyle and mode of relating to himself or herself and others ".

- F64 categorises Gender Identity Disorders

F64.0 Transsexualism
" A desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite sex, usually accompanied by a sense of discomfort with, or inappropriateness of, one's anatomic sex, and a wish to have surgery and hormonal treatment to make one's body as congruent as possible with one's preferred sex. "

F64.1 Dual-role Transvestism
" The wearing of clothes of the opposite sex for part of the individual's existence in order to enjoy the temporary experience of membership of the opposite sex, but without any desire for a more permanent sex change or associated surgical reassignment, and without sexual excitement accompanying the cross-dressing. "
Excludes fetishistic transvestism ( F65.1 )

F64.2 is Gender identity disorder of childhood

- F65 categorises Disorders of Sexual Preference

F65.1 Fetishistic Transvestism
" The wearing of clothes of the opposite sex principally to obtain sexual excitement and to create the appearance of a person of the opposite sex. Fetishistic transvestism is distinguished from transsexual transvestism by its clear association with sexual arousal and the strong desire to remove the clothing once orgasm occurs and sexual arousal declines. It can occur as an earlier phase in the development of transsexualism. "

Just to show what nice people the medical profession thinks we are F65 includes F65.5 Sado Masochism and F65.4 Paedophilia.

- F66 categorises Psychological and Behavioural Disorders Associated with Sexual Development and Orientation, but specifically notes that Sexual Orientation by itself is not to be regarded as a disorder.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

So what does this mean?

Although DSM refers to Crossdressing it lays stress on the negative aspects, and note in ICD-10 the use in both F64.1 and F65.1 of Transvestism with no distinction between the use of the same word. Note also the use of the word "lifestyle" in the ICD-10 descriptor.

Sorry, Paula but the UK does officially define GID as a Disorder, not Dysphoria.

In ICD-10 being gay is ok - by itself.

In F64.1 the words "to enjoy the temporary experience" seem to be very judgemental, and lacking in any sort of proper understanding of our feelings, what we are thinking and who we are. Where is any reference to the journey to accepting - and being comfortable with - who we are.

What about that need for us to be the whole person?

Where is the understanding - of us as individuals, or what this classification could do to us? How often do we hear the line from official agencies "if you've done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to fear". How might this apply when the whole idea of what is "wrong" kicks in when you are labelled like this?

So I've got a Mental and/or Behavioural Disorder have I? Like ++++ I have. I'm me.

But on this forum I guess I'm in good company, with people who can really understand what's going on in my head. As for the medical experts, if they keep adding to the list of disorders soon there won't be any "normal" people left !

Susan

PS -
Q. how many psychiatrists does it take to change a light bulb?
A. it depends - does the light bulb really want to be changed....

Quote:

---

Crossdressing to possibly become a mental disease!

---

I agree, those sick perverts travesties should be in an institution :chatterbox: :rolleyes:

The only definition missing seems to be:

Psychiatrist: a low-life con merchant devoid of any basic human decency and committed to making large sums of money from others' misfortune.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PaulaJaneThomas

The only definition missing seems to be:

Psychiatrist: a low-life con merchant devoid of any basic human decency and committed to making large sums of money from others' misfortune.

---

Yeah, I read that on Tom Cruise's dictionary :D

We can't just generalize.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PetiteDuality

We can't just generalize.

---

They seem happy to. The fact is that most of psychiatry is mostly smoke and mirrors. There's no science or evidence behind a lot of what they claim and an increasing number of "psychiatric" conditions have been found to have a physiological basis. Schizophrenia is a good example of this. They're running out of disorders so they're probably creating new ones to stop the gravy train from drying up (they're only in it for the money!!!). Stigmatising people who exhibit behaviour which is within the norm for our species (such as non-hetrosexual sexual orientation or gender identity variance) as having a disorder smacks of the Nazis to me.

Wow, it seems like a lot of people in here are pretty upset about this. Did anyone ever think to look at the flip side of this?

Let say that this classificaition of crossdressing, tv, ts, tg ect... does actually come in to effect i the DSM.

We become a mental "Disorder"

Let's face it here people, we are not "Normal."
Yeah, Yeah, Yeah, Yeah, who is normal these days? Well society does dictate what is and what is normal. Is society ever right? No, not always. Some societies have allowed slaves, and have allowed genocide.

However, society has also made rules, such as it is not right to steal, and to murder.

Homesexuality used to be cosnsidered a desease or a disorder. However the psychiatric proffession has since then deemed it otherwise. Not only that, after LEARNING more about homosexuality, society has also come to be more accepting of homosexuality.

Homosexuality is still not the norm. Only 10% of society is homosexual.

What society has to understand is that just because something is not normal, does not mean it is bad.

The best thing for us to do to help ourselves, is to realize that WE ARE NOT normal. However we can help society understand, that what he do is non-hurtful to other people. That we are still human, and equal.

With that being said, we are classifing the WHOLE medical, and more specifical psychiatric field as money grubbing and judgmental. Are we not being hypocritcal, and judgmental towards them? We are steroetyping all of them into this one single category.

I have seen a counselor about my situation. It was through my university's counseling center. She was actually younger than me by a couple of years (Yes, I am a career college student, and she was on track for her PhD. Before I get my Bachelor's, which is besides the point) If anyone were to say to me that she was in it just for the money, I would have many words to tell you. She was as nice, and understanding, and wanting to help, and did research to help me out.

Classifing TG's is not a bad thing. Classifcation helps people learn and understand. None of us know why we do what we do. Some of do it for various reasons, some of us want to be more than just a CD.
If classifying us, can help the doctors and pyshicatrists to help us out more, then that is great. Perhaps classifying us, and understading what it is that makes us tick and triggers our feelings and behaviors can lead to society to be accepting of our differences.

However, if we want people to accept us, how dare us to generalize the entire proffession, who have been our biggest allies!

Becca,

You're demonstrating the naivety of your youth. Left-handedness is not "normal" in the sense that the majority are not left-handed. Would you classify left-handedness as a disorder? Do you regard left-handed people as abnormal? Alternate sexual orientation and gender identity variance in males are of roughly the same order of magnitude of prevalence as left-handedness. To classify one as normal and another as abnormal is simply hypocritical prejudice.

Being left handed is not "normal"
If anything we are all being naive ourselfs. We seem to think that "Normal" is good and not being "Normal" is bad.
If we all get out of that mindset then I think we can understand that we are not "Normal"
For instance, I'm an above "Normal" male height of being 6'6''. Does this make it a bad thing? No, not at all, just means I am different.

Does some one who scores a 34 on the ACT count as being "Normal"?
No they do not, the are an exception to the rule. Is that a bad person for not being "Normal" No they are not.

You can also call it average if you would like. It is the same thing.

I think people here fail to realize that people are not born equal. There are different degrees of peoples intelligences. We need to realize that we are among the "Not Normal" or "Not average"

Maybe the TG community needs to stop being in Denial that we are not Normal, but it is OK to be "Not Normal" or "Not Average"

It is not hypocritical, it is being accepting of differences.

Another issue is the more general one of labelling people.

Usually those who are labelled have no control over the label and how others may interpret it.

That sounds kind of deep - hope it makes sense!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cindychan

Well its just two doctors saying that. Besides many studies have shown there are physical differences between Cd and non Cds.

---

Two Doctors in charge of defining Gender related and sexual related parts of the new DSM!!!!!

Dr Zucker (who uses psychological torture to try and 'cure' crossdressing kids so they turn out gay instead of becoming T.S.) is in charge of the comittee to define GID and Dr Blanchard (who claims we all either want to lure men into gay sex or we only want to have sex with ourselves based from all accounts by some interviews with some TGs he met in a bar once) is in charge of redefining sexual paraphilias ranging from pedophiles and necrophiles and bestialists to 'transvestic fetishism'.

And apparently so as to set up their favoured quakery of catagories of autoandrophiliacs, homosexual transsexuals and lets not forget totally pretending FtM guys don't exist they are redefining all the catagories, any crossdressing at all ever (by a male-bodied person) will appparently count as mental illness. Oh and Zucker is trying to push his reparative therapy for TG-kids too even though its been declared wrong and harmful for gays by the APA. Apparently this DSM may well come with treatment reccomendations as well as diagnostic criteria!

And while their claims are nonsense their power isn't. This is the DSM, used by G.P.'s, Psychiatrists, Insurance Companies and even Lawmakers to define what counts as what!

This isnt the only disaster in the upcoming DSM, people have quit in outrage over behind the scenes goings on, the authors of previous editions of the DSM have condemned the new anti-transparency secrecy rules and more.

We should be involved in fighting this! Getting Homosexuality out of the DSM was one of the biggest parts of moving Gays to social acceptance and equality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by becca1125n

Let's face it here people, we are not "Normal."

---

Actually we are normal. Normal is not just the middle of average. Homosexuality was removed from the DSM because a lot of Gay Psychiatrists came out and fought hard for it to be changed. Biologists will tell you that homosexuality is found in almost every sexually reproducing animal they have studied! They can even explain how its an evolutionary advantage to have Gay relatives (called Kin-Selection which for example makes Ants for example one of the most successful lifeforms ever!).

As for societies rules... Nope, only a small number of society make the rules, even in representative democracies. And throughout history those rules have been broken, shattered, defied and re-shaped by people with a superior understanding of right and wrong than the societies mores of the time.

I have met and am friends with some great psychologists, however the criticism of the whole field is apt as it is usually not sufficiently evidence-based so it's not a science like biology, which with the rise of FMRI is eatting away the field as neurobiology takes over much as with the telescope Astronomy took over from Astrology.

Lets just call it what it is - people with a religious agenda and a PhD trying to put forth their idea of what's morally correct under the guise of science. Fortuantely, there are many physicians, psychologists, and therapists who can see through this crap and call it what it is - hate and elitism in the guise of research.

These are the people who should be driven forth and stoned to death, IMO.

If they're coming to get me, they're going to have to pry my lingerie outta my cold, dead hands, that's for sure. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by battybattybats

Actually we are normal. Normal is not just the middle of average.

---

Spot on :thumbsup:

Society dictates fasion and style, led by Hollywood. The film industry has a lot of influence on poeple. Most box office hits are fiction, so society is basing their ideas of what is right on a ficticious role model. Now tell me who really needs therapy? WE do not let Hollywood dictate our lives, is why we are different, and society has issues with that.