I'm not going to say much about this article on sex addiction. It is titled "No sympathy for the Sex Addict" and includes the following:
A few mental health professionals still argue that sex addiction is not a real disease...Sex addiction is not listed as a disorder in the current edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the bible of psychiatric disorders
Listen, I'm not suggesting that people who exhibit behaviors with easily predictable negative consequences deserve no sympathy/empathy/whatever, but if a mental disorder ain't in the DSM, there are way more than "a few mental health professionals" who don't think it is a real disease. What intrigues me most, again, is the placement of the article: the NYT "Fashion & Style" section. Fashionable & Stylish sex addiction?
I would, just for the heck of it, like to point out that I hate Chuck Palahniuk and find those who really dig him just adorable.
1 comment:
i keep wondering why people refer to the DSM as the "bible" of modern psychiatry. it seems more like a cookbook or a roadatlas or anything but a bible. jesus, nobody eevn gets crucified in the DSM....
Post a Comment