Magic Johnson's son goes public with boyfriend

[elpablo21]

That boy got some serious swag in them pics

 

[boris]

The only way that homosexuality could therefore be considered a psychiatric disorder would be the criteria of failure

to function heterosexually, which is considered optimal in our society and by many members of our profession.

However, if failure to function optimally in some important area of life as judged by either society or the profession

is sufficient to indicate the presence of a psychiatric disorder.

Similarly, by no

longer listing it as a psychiatric disorder we are not saying that it is "normal" or as valuable as heterosexuality.

 

Homosexuality: Proposed Change in DSM-11, 6

th Printing

(2 of 3)

Thank you , DSM, for confriming that homsexuality is not the optimal way of living.

 

Isn't this from the 70s? 

 

[sir charles]

Quote:

The only way that homosexuality could therefore be considered a psychiatric disorder would be the criteria of failure​

to function heterosexually, which is considered optimal in our society and by many members of our profession.​

However, if failure to function optimally in some important area of life as judged by either society or the profession​

is sufficient to indicate the presence of a psychiatric disorder.

Similarly, by no​

longer listing it as a psychiatric disorder we are not saying that it is "normal" or as valuable as heterosexuality.​

 
Homosexuality: Proposed Change in DSM-11, 6

th Printing
(2 of 3)

Thank you , DSM, for confriming that homsexuality is not the optimal way of living.​

 

Isn't this from the 70s? 

1973

 

[da doc03]

looking like a black big bird 

 

[lobotomybeats]

The only way that homosexuality could therefore be considered a psychiatric disorder would be the criteria of failure
to function heterosexually, which is considered optimal in our society and by many members of our profession.
However, if failure to function optimally in some important area of life as judged by either society or the profession
is sufficient to indicate the presence of a psychiatric disorder.

Similarly, by no
longer listing it as a psychiatric disorder we are not saying that it is "normal" or as valuable as heterosexuality.

Homosexuality: Proposed Change in DSM-11, 6

Thank you , DSM, for confriming that homsexuality is not the optimal way of living.​

Hahaha. Dude's really going to use the OLD DSM to make his point? Feeble attempt, man, feeble. The DSM II was created in 1968 with additional printings running until 1973. Nice try. Please use the DSM III or IVs to prove your point.

 

[rex ryan]

As long as he's a decent person and treats people respectfully then who gives a damn what he does or how he carries himself.

Id much rather be friends with a flamboyant gay dude that's a good trustworthy friend, then a straight dude that's a terrible shady friend.

I've always noticed that most dudes that feel uncomfortable about gay people or say slick stuff usually don't get much vagina.

 

[sir charles]

The only way that homosexuality could therefore be considered a psychiatric disorder would be the criteria of failure
to function heterosexually, which is considered optimal in our society and by many members of our profession.
However, if failure to function optimally in some important area of life as judged by either society or the profession
is sufficient to indicate the presence of a psychiatric disorder.

Similarly, by no
longer listing it as a psychiatric disorder we are not saying that it is "normal" or as valuable as heterosexuality.

Homosexuality: Proposed Change in DSM-11, 6

Thank you , DSM, for confriming that homsexuality is not the optimal way of living.​

Hahaha. Dude's really going to use the OLD DSM to make his point? Feeble attempt, man, feeble. The DSM II was created in 1968 with additional printings running until 1973. Nice try.

Then why isn't it in the DSM IV? And the V is soon to release, and I bet $100 it's not in there either.

 

[lobotomybeats]

Then why isn't it in the DSM IV? And the V is soon to release, and I bet $100 it's not in there either.

Chuck, I think we are making the same point, my man.

 

[rex ryan]

Lmao at using a dsm from the 1970's to try and prove his point. Going off his uninformed unknowledgeable posts in the sports and training section, he'll duck around the responses about his 40 year old dsm findings.

 

[captainsneakerhead23]

View media item 346014View media item 346214
EJ and his homie remind me of Men on Mission

On a serious note, if I was his father I could accept him being gay at the end of the day. Would I be >: pissed? Absolutely! But what can you really do nowadays, it's a part of society. I wouldn't disown him, however them furs and purses would HAVE to go!!

 

[rex ryan]

@whatcanisay, i goofed, i got you mixed up with someone else in the sports section, my bad papi.


i would still put you in the walls of jericho though

 

[sir charles]

Then why isn't it in the DSM IV? And the V is soon to release, and I bet $100 it's not in there either.

Chuck, I think we are making the same point, my man.

At this point I don't even know with all the sarcasm.

Homosexuality is not a mental disorder, that is all.

 

[lobotomybeats]

At this point I don't even know with all the sarcasm.

Homosexuality is not a mental disorder, that is all.

Yup, I agree. We are on the same page. I said "use the DSM III or IV" because I knew he couldn't.

 

[sir charles]

Yup, I agree. We are on the same page. I said "use the DSM III or IV" because I knew he couldn't.

Why would I?

If you are going to use the DSM, you should use the up to date DSM IV. The DSM II does not have the current diagnosis' for current disorders, hence why homosexuality was considered a disorder. As the science grew, and the knowlege was put up to date, homo sexuality is no longer a disorder.

 

[sneakerjunkie]

C'mon, bruh. What if he changes the world for the better? What if he cures cancer, or fixes the economic problems? That's still you're son, man. You don't wanna be like Eminem's mom or Tywin Lannister, just have the world hate you because part of their success is your lack of love for your own flesh and blood. You'll still be mad at them and they'll be over you, just enjoying life and talking bad about you whenever they're on TV.

Chinua Achebe just died a couple weeks ago. You need to read "Things Fall Apart".You can hate your kids for being themselves, but they're just gonna go on living life and eventually you'll have to answer for that in one way or another.

Hold up did you just bring up Tywin Lannister...........a fake T.V show lmao you cant compare that

 

[primetime]

The ones asking for acceptance of homosexuality are the same people attacking others for saying they wouldn't a gay son or daughter. How ridiculous.. There hasn't been any proof posted by the pro-homosexual group in this thread on how homosexuality is not a choice, yet here they are expecting everyone else to take their OPINIONS as facts. And this post was the best -

Saying our species wouldn't propagate due to sexual orientation is one of the most ignorant things I've ever read on this site.

@ "100% fact"

How do you suggest that two men (or two women, for that matter) reproduce naturally if that was the case?

 

[sir charles]

If you are going to use the DSM, you should use the up to date DSM IV. The DSM II does not have the current diagnosis' for current disorders, hence why homosexuality was considered a disorder. As the science grew, and the knowlege was put up to date, homo sexuality is no longer a disorder.

Yes, I know that. What I'm getting to is, why would I use the DSM IV for homosexuality.

Homosexuality was removed from the DSM for political reasons, there is still science out there proving that homosexuality can indeed be a mental disorder, influenced by one's environment.

"Science can prove that"

Hard hitting facts right there, bud.

 

[lobotomybeats]

The old DSM is the only one i can use to  prove my point. The reason homosexuality was removed, was more political than scientific (FACT). That's like a dictator making "murder" legal. Let's all go out and murder some people. its OK!  It's written, and "so and so" says its legal!

Nothing you posted suggests that it was removed purely due to political pressure. Homosexuals were being oppressed by the APA, which was at the time comprised of conservative psychologists. That was the outcry. Hell, you couldn't be gay and be a psychiatrist due to the designations made in the earlier DSMs. Many of the early studies that were used to formulate the diagnosis in the early DSMs were performed on prisoners, mental patients or men who had been discharged from the military. Hardly a strong test sample, right? Google The Young Turks and the Gay PA. While you're at it, look up the works of Dr. Evelyn Hooker for more on this. She conducted her tests on homosexuals who never sought treatment and compared them to heterosexuals of the same IQ and age.

 

[captainsneakerhead23]

View media item 346014
View media item 346214


EJ and his homie remind me of Men on Mission


On a serious note, if I was his father I could accept him being gay at the end of the day. Would I be >: pissed? Absolutely! But what can you really do nowadays, it's a part of society. I wouldn't disown him, however them furs and purses would HAVE to go!!

And that's exactly what I'm getting at. I'm not saying, one should beat their children if they're gay. I'm trying to say that a parent should not encourage it. 

Yeah I agree, by any means I would never encourage my son or daughter down that path of homosexuality. If they choose that lifestyle, I can only be there to support their decisions. My only request, especially in regards to my son, would be to miss me with them furs & purses!! I can't get jiggy with that **** I'm sorry.

 

[lobotomybeats]

Yeah I agree, by any means I would never encourage my son or daughter down that path of homosexuality. If they choose that lifestyle, I can only be there to support their decisions. My only request, especially in regards to my son, would be to miss me with them furs & purses!! I can't get jiggy with that **** I'm sorry.

They don't choose that lifestyle, so in essence, supporting your child should be easier if (s)he happens to be gay.

 

[captainsneakerhead23]

Yeah I agree, by any means I would never encourage my son or daughter down that path of homosexuality. If they choose that lifestyle, I can only be there to support their decisions. My only request, especially in regards to my son, would be to miss me with them furs & purses!! I can't get jiggy with that **** I'm sorry.

They don't choose that lifestyle, so in essence, supporting your child should be easier if (s)he happens to be gay.

I always feel like you have choice in my world. I'm not into the whole scientific facts and genetic makeup BS. That's just me though and I respect those who think otherwise.

 

[lobotomybeats]

There hasn't been any proof posted by the pro-homosexual group in this thread on how homosexuality is not a choice, yet here they are expecting everyone else to take their OPINIONS as facts.

To be fair, no one has asked for any evidence. Had someone asked, I would have been more than happy to provide some of the emerging data suggesting sexual orientation isn't a choice. This is an interesting read regarding the "gay brain" for one.

And this post was the best
How do you suggest that two men (or two women, for that matter) reproduce naturally if that was the case?

There are such things as surrogates for men, and sperm donors for women (I have actually done this myself for a lesbian couple).

 

[lobotomybeats]

Nothing I posted suggests that homosexuality was removed from the DSM, for purely political reasons? 
 
 Do you not know how to read?

There was an outcry because the science that went into those early diagnosis were incredibly flawed. Which they were. Read what I posted and suggested you read. You act as if the the political outcry wasn't just. It was and my post illustrates why. I can read, unlike you I don't pick and choose what to post to cater to my position.

 

[boris]

If you are going to use the DSM, you should use the up to date DSM IV. The DSM II does not have the current diagnosis' for current disorders, hence why homosexuality was considered a disorder. As the science grew, and the knowlege was put up to date, homo sexuality is no longer a disorder.

Yes, I know that. What I'm getting to is, why would I use the DSM IV for homosexuality.

Homosexuality was removed from the DSM for political reasons, there is still science out there proving that homosexuality can indeed be a mental disorder, influenced by one's environment.

Can you do everyone a favor and post up to date scientific research that draws these conclusions? To be clear, I want the actual papers that prove the point that you're trying to make. 

 

[sir charles]

Yes, I know that. What I'm getting to is, why would I use the DSM IV for homosexuality.

Homosexuality was removed from the DSM for political reasons, there is still science out there proving that homosexuality can indeed be a mental disorder, influenced by one's environment.

Nothing I posted suggests that homosexuality was removed from the DSM, for purely political reasons?
 
 Do you not know how to read?

I never thought it was possible to provide your own ether.