Perhaps my favorite writer Nabokov detested the professions of psychiatry and psychology, “the oneiromancy and mythogeny of psychoanalysis”, “the vulgar, shabby, fundamentally medieval world”, “the Freudian prison of thought”, and “the Freudian nursery-school of thought”, and “expensive confession fests”.
Those professions have had profoundly hideous impacts on lesbians and gays, and women. It’s not often discussed that on the US in the 50’s, the most frequently lobotomized people were women, though most patients were men.
Gays and lesbians were also fodder for lobotomies, as part of “conversion therapy”, which also involved bladder washing, rectal massage, electroconvulsive therapy, surgical castration, hormonal castration, nausea-inducing drugs, psychological torture among many “treatments”. We’re in 2024 and there is a still a medieval “debate” with psychologists and psychiatrists how to most effectively extinguish or excise sexuality in feminine boys and masculine girls.
In 2004 a survey of members of the American Psychological Association decided that torturing vulnerable gays and lesbians is “discredited" but qualified that as … should be interpreted carefully as an initial step, not as a final deliberation.
I think it’s time that psychology and psychiatry be banned globally as a collusive system of fraud based not on science but on “voting” - exactly as WPATH - which has sought for more than 100 years to torture the most mentally vulnerable people with treatments which are claimed to benefit, but elicit precisely the opposite of what what is claimed.
As people consider where did all this “trans” stuff come from, it had a single source, a single continuing point of propagation, and continues to be sanctioned torture for adults and children who need to cope with their existence in the world, not be subject to atrocity.
I foresee a day of reckoning with what psychiatry and psychology has done to women, gays, and lesbians derived from utterly fraudulent science.
Freud was a profound observer and interpreter of human behaviour and his work has influenced all subsequent therapies. He has some culture-bound misguided views on the nature of women and homosexuality, but that is only a fraction of his output and that part is now regarded as obsolete. But don't throw out his other profound insights because of these pockets of theory. He dabbled in dream interpretation but not oneiromancy, to my knowledge.
Sufeitzy, perhaps I am naive enough to want to believe that most medical graduates ( not so sure of the majority of our social science graduate colleagues !), certainly those whose career training and subsequent clinical responsibility is focused on children, are quite appalled with where social activism has taken so many vulnerable children. If that intuition could be confirmed, say, by a voluntary plebiscite/secret ballot, politicians may respond appropriately. First we need that evidence, with which to lobby future ( the ALP is welded to an ideological position, so will take a change of government ) legislators . Hard to believe it would not be a big vote winner in a federal election and so provide a real mandate for long overdue action.
I’m just amazed that in all that I’ve read in perhaps three decades. with three exceptions, it serves exclusively to propagate the fiction without a shred of evidence. Either the science corrects itself and extirpates the nonsense, or politics will do it as a protective impulse, or a legal system.
In 1993, in the “American Scholar” Paul R. McHugh wrote an essay “Psychiatric Misadventures”, where among many issues he decrys the dismissal of psychiatric patients to the streets, and that in the case of transsexualism the doctor totally abdicates their role of protecting the patient. A surgeon complains to him “how do you think it feels to cut into healthy flesh because a psychiatrist cannot figure out what is going on.” He worked to close the gender clinic at John’s Hopkins. He’s no friend of gays - against same sex marriage - but there’s no apparent effort to mutilate them. He likens trans surgery to liposuction for anorexics.
I have two other articles in 32 years of reading, one pointing out that autistic people are extremely gullible, and matched with trans they can be easily persuaded of fictions about themselves (I can find a reference somewhere), highly dangerous in a trans context.
And finally, someone who explored the idea that trans was very similar to body integrity dysmorphia, and person was crushed by the reaction - how dare they even consider anything is remotely similar to trans. The pile-on was staggering.
Three negative comments from psychiatrists in 32 years.
The Soviet system is psychiatry was used to abuse dissidents, claiming mental conditions which didn’t exist.
Paul McHugh, the psychiatrist who worked with Ken Zucker, psychologist at Paul Hopkins, is credited with the saying “ hell hath no fury like a vested interest in masquerading as a moral principle “. These two experienced clinicians were the earlier victims of the narcissistic compassion of the social activists which has metastasized from the social science- born ideology of gender identity/ fluidity, deep into medicine.
I spoke to McHugh a few years ago and he explained how he came to shut down the "sex reassignment" program at Johns Hopkins. There was a review and the finding was that the doctors were reinforcing a delusion and that the treatment did not bring benefit. Not long ago, the hospital reintroduced treatment, now in the guise of "gender-affirming care."
Did we hear from Dr Cass any details on the status of those many ( we heard earlier that some one hundred) class actions have been lodged, and who have been named? Have the class actions extended beyond individual clinicians and the GIDS ? Where ever the “ buck stops” in the U.K. might inform professional bodies here of potential exposure.
Bernard, would you be able to tell us whether Hillary Cass in the recent webinar had any comments on whether the U.K.’s equivalent to our statuary body, AHPRA, has been deemed to wear some responsibility for historical inaction and to be included in litigants’ claims over GIDS closure? I do understand, as you have mentioned, AHPRA looks to be comfortably quarantined against likely exposure while it sits as an agency of our federal government, rather than as an independent investigative body. If and when push comes to shove, litigants might reasonably think they have abrogated their charter, and, if such historic inaction was the result of ministerial control, where does that put the minister and the department? Where does the buck stop ?
Andrew, I guess the UK Care Quality Commission might be the parallel to Ahpra. It didn’t come up during the webinar. It was a bad rating of the Tavistock clinic by the CQC that contributed to the establishment of the Cass review. Ahora looks like part of the problem, not a solution.
Perhaps my favorite writer Nabokov detested the professions of psychiatry and psychology, “the oneiromancy and mythogeny of psychoanalysis”, “the vulgar, shabby, fundamentally medieval world”, “the Freudian prison of thought”, and “the Freudian nursery-school of thought”, and “expensive confession fests”.
Those professions have had profoundly hideous impacts on lesbians and gays, and women. It’s not often discussed that on the US in the 50’s, the most frequently lobotomized people were women, though most patients were men.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5962395/
Gays and lesbians were also fodder for lobotomies, as part of “conversion therapy”, which also involved bladder washing, rectal massage, electroconvulsive therapy, surgical castration, hormonal castration, nausea-inducing drugs, psychological torture among many “treatments”. We’re in 2024 and there is a still a medieval “debate” with psychologists and psychiatrists how to most effectively extinguish or excise sexuality in feminine boys and masculine girls.
In 2004 a survey of members of the American Psychological Association decided that torturing vulnerable gays and lesbians is “discredited" but qualified that as … should be interpreted carefully as an initial step, not as a final deliberation.
I think it’s time that psychology and psychiatry be banned globally as a collusive system of fraud based not on science but on “voting” - exactly as WPATH - which has sought for more than 100 years to torture the most mentally vulnerable people with treatments which are claimed to benefit, but elicit precisely the opposite of what what is claimed.
As people consider where did all this “trans” stuff come from, it had a single source, a single continuing point of propagation, and continues to be sanctioned torture for adults and children who need to cope with their existence in the world, not be subject to atrocity.
I foresee a day of reckoning with what psychiatry and psychology has done to women, gays, and lesbians derived from utterly fraudulent science.
Freud was a profound observer and interpreter of human behaviour and his work has influenced all subsequent therapies. He has some culture-bound misguided views on the nature of women and homosexuality, but that is only a fraction of his output and that part is now regarded as obsolete. But don't throw out his other profound insights because of these pockets of theory. He dabbled in dream interpretation but not oneiromancy, to my knowledge.
Speak, memory! is one of the best ever titles for a memoir.
Sufeitzy, perhaps I am naive enough to want to believe that most medical graduates ( not so sure of the majority of our social science graduate colleagues !), certainly those whose career training and subsequent clinical responsibility is focused on children, are quite appalled with where social activism has taken so many vulnerable children. If that intuition could be confirmed, say, by a voluntary plebiscite/secret ballot, politicians may respond appropriately. First we need that evidence, with which to lobby future ( the ALP is welded to an ideological position, so will take a change of government ) legislators . Hard to believe it would not be a big vote winner in a federal election and so provide a real mandate for long overdue action.
I’m just amazed that in all that I’ve read in perhaps three decades. with three exceptions, it serves exclusively to propagate the fiction without a shred of evidence. Either the science corrects itself and extirpates the nonsense, or politics will do it as a protective impulse, or a legal system.
In 1993, in the “American Scholar” Paul R. McHugh wrote an essay “Psychiatric Misadventures”, where among many issues he decrys the dismissal of psychiatric patients to the streets, and that in the case of transsexualism the doctor totally abdicates their role of protecting the patient. A surgeon complains to him “how do you think it feels to cut into healthy flesh because a psychiatrist cannot figure out what is going on.” He worked to close the gender clinic at John’s Hopkins. He’s no friend of gays - against same sex marriage - but there’s no apparent effort to mutilate them. He likens trans surgery to liposuction for anorexics.
I have two other articles in 32 years of reading, one pointing out that autistic people are extremely gullible, and matched with trans they can be easily persuaded of fictions about themselves (I can find a reference somewhere), highly dangerous in a trans context.
And finally, someone who explored the idea that trans was very similar to body integrity dysmorphia, and person was crushed by the reaction - how dare they even consider anything is remotely similar to trans. The pile-on was staggering.
Three negative comments from psychiatrists in 32 years.
The Soviet system is psychiatry was used to abuse dissidents, claiming mental conditions which didn’t exist.
We’ve reached that point.
Paul McHugh, the psychiatrist who worked with Ken Zucker, psychologist at Paul Hopkins, is credited with the saying “ hell hath no fury like a vested interest in masquerading as a moral principle “. These two experienced clinicians were the earlier victims of the narcissistic compassion of the social activists which has metastasized from the social science- born ideology of gender identity/ fluidity, deep into medicine.
I spoke to McHugh a few years ago and he explained how he came to shut down the "sex reassignment" program at Johns Hopkins. There was a review and the finding was that the doctors were reinforcing a delusion and that the treatment did not bring benefit. Not long ago, the hospital reintroduced treatment, now in the guise of "gender-affirming care."
Did we hear from Dr Cass any details on the status of those many ( we heard earlier that some one hundred) class actions have been lodged, and who have been named? Have the class actions extended beyond individual clinicians and the GIDS ? Where ever the “ buck stops” in the U.K. might inform professional bodies here of potential exposure.
Bernard, would you be able to tell us whether Hillary Cass in the recent webinar had any comments on whether the U.K.’s equivalent to our statuary body, AHPRA, has been deemed to wear some responsibility for historical inaction and to be included in litigants’ claims over GIDS closure? I do understand, as you have mentioned, AHPRA looks to be comfortably quarantined against likely exposure while it sits as an agency of our federal government, rather than as an independent investigative body. If and when push comes to shove, litigants might reasonably think they have abrogated their charter, and, if such historic inaction was the result of ministerial control, where does that put the minister and the department? Where does the buck stop ?
Andrew, I guess the UK Care Quality Commission might be the parallel to Ahpra. It didn’t come up during the webinar. It was a bad rating of the Tavistock clinic by the CQC that contributed to the establishment of the Cass review. Ahora looks like part of the problem, not a solution.