I think it is safe to say that most of the people on these boards are open-minded when it comes to the subject of homosexuality. But it still sometimes surprises me how many people–not necessarily on these boards, understand–that are ignorant when it comes to the medical and psychological aspects of the condition.
Anyways, I have already mentioned the Merck Manual once before on the bboards (:correct name?). It is put out by the Merck Company as a medical manual by doctors for doctors. Alot of so-called laymen like it too. I have one and I think it’s great. Here is what it has to say about homosexuality:
I thought that was worth sharing for anyone who didn’t already know that. The manual goes on to say that treatment for this condition is not indicated unless the person requests it. Even if the person requests to change his sexual identity and his motivation is high to do so–success in treatment is rare, the manual says.
The Merck Manual is now on the internet. You can read the article I just quoted here if you want.
The Merck manual is as much a competent medical reference as a picture Bible is a relevant literary tool for ancient historical analysis. The only people I have seen cite it in discussions of any medical relevance were ignorant “christians” who … well, let’s just say they used “abomination unto God”, “unnatural act”, and “homosexual perversion” as buzzwords.
I would not assign any importance to that manual if I were you. Or, for that matter, if I were anyone else:)
I guess I don’t get whether you think the Merck manual is saying a good thing or a bad thing.
I also don’t think “the medical community” agrees on much. Even when the AMA or a more specialized community like the AAP comes out with some statement or policy, not all doctors agree, are on board, or give a fat rip. I can recall reading something where the AAP had issued an official policy on a new vaccine protocol, but several years later only about 50% of pediatricians were “complying” with it.
So good or bad, I’d hardly find any written statement to be attributable to the medical profession as a whole.
I don’t think the manual was taking some stand, only pointing out that some physicians are homophobes just like other people.
I also believe the references to sexual identity were to transgendered people…which is a topic I am ignorant of but I venture to say is quite different from homosexuality. Gays still have a male sexual identity.
Well, if you shoved the Merck manual up your ass in manageable pieces, it might partially cure constipation. As for homosexuality…I’ll leave it to the reader’s imagination, but I personally wouldn’t want to have anal sex if I were constipated;)
