Is sexual self-abuse missing form psychological definitions of abuse?

[Robert_Sock]

I believe sexual self abuse is real and lacking as a diagnosis in psychology. It may sound like it would be directed to pornography and masturbation, but it can also arise from immoral sexual behavior, such as anal intercourse and homosexuality.

Why can’t psychologists see that sexual self abuse exists and is rampant in society? I believe it’s because a psychologist’s view must conform to the swinging of the pendulum of social conformity and change.

 

[Bezant]

I fancy the pendulum over the soapbox.

 

[DarkLight]

Why should this be a diagnosis, though? I see no reason to make it a psychological issue. I have mental health problems - I find this sort of psychologizing of moral issues rather offensive.

 

[Robert_Sock]

Why should this be a diagnosis, though? I see no reason to make it a psychological issue. I have mental health problems - I find this sort of psychologizing of moral issues rather offensive.

I believe I suffered sexual self-abuse but it is not classified as a disorder which prevents treatment. I also believe sexual self-abuse runs rampant in society and needs to be dealt with professionally.

 

[sophion]

I believe I suffered sexual self-abuse but it is not classified as a disorder which prevents treatment. I also believe sexual self-abuse runs rampant in society and needs to be dealt with professionally.

‘abuse’ is often used in Law and criminal definitions.

 

[DarkLight]

I believe I suffered sexual self-abuse but it is not classified as a disorder which prevents treatment. I also believe sexual self-abuse runs rampant in society and needs to be dealt with professionally.

Why, though? I believe this is fundamentally a moral issue, not a psychological one. I worry about the push to admit moral issues to psychological definitions, because it tends to increase the stigma against those of us with genuine mental issues that are not under our control.

 

[fred_conty]

Sexual abuse is taking advantage of someone in a sexual way to satisfy their own desires.
This definition would fit into self abuse.

Homosexual act is taking part in sexual behaviour with someone of their own sex.
This definition would also fit into sexual sins with oneself.

“Blessed are the pure for they shall see God.”

Mary is the most pure of all creatures.
She gave us her miraculous medal and promised that those who wore it and had trust in her would receive GREAT and ABOUNDANT graces if we asked for them.
She is the greatest psycholgist of all times and knows more about what we need and how to help us.
She asked that we pray the rosary.

Just a few thoughts about a mother’s love.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

I believe sexual self abuse is real and lacking as a diagnosis in psychology. It may sound like it would be directed to pornography and masturbation, but it can also arise from immoral sexual behavior, such as anal intercourse and homosexuality.

Why can’t psychologists see that sexual self abuse exists and is rampant in society?

Flipping open my handy DSM I think I’ve found a clue.

“The utility and credibility of the DSM require that it focus on its clinical, research, and educational purposes and be supported by an extensive empirical foundation.”

There ya have it! Engage in some empirically supported research to show that these actions are disorderly and then submit it for consideration for inclusion into the next DSM in the paraphilia section.

 

[DarkLight]

Sexual abuse is taking advantage of someone in a sexual way to satisfy their own desires.
This definition would fit into self abuse.

Trouble is, this isn’t a diagnosis either. Again, in most cases this is a moral problem being confused with a psychological problem. I don’t think your average abuser has a mental health problem.

 

[Michael19682]

It’s not there because:

1. Psychologists don’t want their patients to have entrance into Heaven: They want anything that keeps the “therapeutic relationship” going. By permitting these things and not helping their stuck clients get into healthy realtionships and marry they a) maintain addiction to the therapy process and all its related dependency on the therapist’s ego and b) stop “genetically prone” babies from being born “until we have a cure”.
2. Before going into their field, they didn’t realize that they would be forced into acting against their consciences by radical, soul denying behaviorists.
3. They are bound by law. Masturbation is sin; but not illegal. In the philosophy of public health, done outside of marriage in the privacy of one’s own living space, it harms no person other than the doer and therefore really can’t be illegal.
4. The sick and disabled often have limited choices in regards marriage due to stigma inflicted on them largely by their own caregivers. If that sin brings pleasure without guilt (as it never does) then it’s ok in the shrink’s eyes. If it brings guilt, as it always does, then that guilt is something to be attended to in therapy since it is always about something else, something deeper and more disturbing of which masturbation is the symptom.
5. The longer the therapy continues and the longer a person remains dependent on therapy, the more we can train young therapist and keep them employed.

 

[Regular_Atheist]

It’s not there because:

1. Psychologists don’t want their patients to have entrance into Heaven: They want anything that keeps the “therapeutic relationship” going. By permitting these things and not helping their stuck clients get into healthy realtionships and marry they a) maintain addiction to the therapy process and all its related dependency on the therapist’s ego and b) stop “genetically prone” babies from being born “until we have a cure”.
2. Before going into their field, they didn’t realize that they would be forced into acting against their consciences by radical, soul denying behaviorists.
3. They are bound by law. Masturbation is sin; but not illegal. In the philosophy of public health, done outside of marriage in the privacy of one’s own living space, it harms no person other than the doer and therefore really can’t be illegal.
4. The sick and disabled often have limited choices in regards marriage due to stigma inflicted on them largely by their own caregivers. If that sin brings pleasure without guilt (as it never does) then it’s ok in the shrink’s eyes. If it brings guilt, as it always does, then that guilt is something to be attended to in therapy since it is always about something else, something deeper and more disturbing of which masturbation is the symptom.
5. The longer the therapy continues and the longer a person remains dependent on therapy, the more we can train young therapist and keep them employed.

What? Masturbation generally isn’t considered harmful by most doctors, so I don’t know where you’re getting that from, and I’m an experienced masturbator and I don’t suffer from guilt or any psychological issues. You’d only feel guilt if you’d been taught that it’s wrong, and that it somehow upsets a deity. So would religion be the issue here, rather than the act of masturbation? Also, I rather doubt it’s got anything with to do with psychologists not wanting people to get into Heaven. That was a weird thing to say. :ehh:

The fact is, issues such as masturbation are moral ones not psychological ones. Since the act itself is not harmful, there’s no reason for anyone to receive therapy.

I’m actually slightly convinced that this is a satire of some kind, in which case I apologise. However, I’m sure you are familiar with Poe’s law and why I believed this was a genuine answer.

 

[Robert_Sock]

What? Masturbation generally isn’t considered harmful by most doctors, so I don’t know where you’re getting that from, and I’m an experienced masturbator and I don’t suffer from guilt or any psychological issues. You’d only feel guilt if you’d been taught that it’s wrong, and that it somehow upsets a deity. So would religion be the issue here, rather than the act of masturbation? Also, I rather doubt it’s got anything with to do with psychologists not wanting people to get into Heaven. That was a weird thing to say. :ehh:

The fact is, issues such as masturbation are moral ones not psychological ones. Since the act itself is not harmful, there’s no reason for anyone to receive therapy.

I’m actually slightly convinced that this is a satire of some kind, in which case I apologise. However, I’m sure you are familiar with Poe’s law and why I believed this was a genuine answer.

Masturbation=sexual self abuse!

 

[Giants]

Masturbation=sexual self abuse!

Based on what?

Other than your theology, I mean.

 

[Robert_Sock]

In fact, most therapists will tell you masturbation is *healthy *for you!!!

Your belief would never fly with the APA. It’s a belief you have because of the religion you follow, it’s not a psychological issue (they would tell you).

I mean, if someone does it 100 times a day–yes, that is not healthy. But the problem would not be with act itself, but with other psychological issues.

Part of the abuse is in the mind of the offender. Intercourse can be abusive with the wrong cognitions. For example, fantasies of rape is not uncommon. Of course, APA will defend which ever direction the social pendulum is swinging.

 

[Giants]

Part of the abuse is in the mind of the offender. Intercourse can be abusive with the wrong cognitions. For example, fantasies of rape is not uncommon. Of course, APA will defend which ever direction the social pendulum is swinging.

“Compulsive Masturbation” already appears in the latest DSM in the category of “Sexual Disorders Not Otherwise Specified” along with a bunch of other sexual activities that would be detrimental to one’s well-being if overdone.

Masturbating is not a psychological ill. Neither is doing it often. Doing it so often that you can hold down a job or behave yourself in polite society is a problem that needs to be treated. And the APA recognizes that.

 

[fred_conty]

“Compulsive Masturbation” already appears in the latest DSM in the category of “Sexual Disorders Not Otherwise Specified” along with a bunch of other sexual activities that would be detrimental to one’s well-being if overdone.

Masturbating is not a psychological ill. Neither is doing it often. Doing it so often that you can hold down a job or behave yourself in polite society is a problem that needs to be treated. And the APA recognizes that.

If one phantasizes sexually over women the APA would not determine that to be any psychological problem if it has not been openly expressed in rape.

But what leads to rape?

And who determines what and when it becomes a psychological problem, the APA?

It already has already become a social problem.

I think we could say this discussion is one where the dog is chasing his tail and never catches it.

To me, a psychological problem is an habitual sexual sin. For the biggest sex organ in a man is his mind. And if this leads to raping others or himself, then that is psychological problem since he is out of control and has lost propriety which will affect him adversly in his judgement of himself and others. Which is a psychological problem, a warped abusive understanding of his sexual power.

The problem with the APA is that they will not get into morality of acts. Therefore everything is ok as long as it dosen’t seem to affect a person’s function in the home, job, or society.
But it does. And whether they recognize it as a psychological problem or not, it is for it affects the image of oneself and the image of others, and leads to sexual misconduct.

Hey, just a thought.

 

[Giants]

If one phantasizes sexually over women the APA would not determine that to be any psychological problem if it has not been openly expressed in rape.

But what leads to rape?

Generally speaking, the same thing that leads to all consensual sex. That rapists fantasize over their would-be victims doesn’t make fantisizing sexually over women a psychological problem.

To me, a psychological problem is an habitual sexual sin. For the biggest sex organ in a man is his mind. And if this leads to raping others or himself, then that is psychological problem since he is out of control and has lost propriety which will affect him adversly in his judgement of himself and others. Which is a psychological problem, a warped abusive understanding of his sexual power.

Sure, but a man fantasizing about his wife or girlfriend in the context of a normal, consensual relationship is not a psychological problem in need of being categorized as a disorder.

The problem with the APA is that they will not get into morality of acts. Therefore everything is ok as long as it dosen’t seem to affect a person’s function in the home, job, or society.
But it does. And whether they recognize it as a psychological problem or not, it is for it affects the image of oneself and the image of others, and leads to sexual misconduct.

Hey, just a thought.

Except that it usually doesn’t lead to sexual misconduct, not even by the restrictive standards of Christian theology. And it’s certainly never “caused” by it. Even if the serial rapist was once a compulsive masturbator, we know as a matter of science that he didn’t become a serial rapist because he was a compulsive masturbator. There are deeper psychological issues that lie at the core of all of it.

Also, the APA makes moral judgments all the time (whether they realize it or not). What they don’t do is refer these questions upward to a supernatural Creator and judge certain actions as a bad or good on that basis. They have a wholly independent, objective basis for morality that doesn’t require a God-head to actualize it. When someone’s fantasies, or their sexual habits don’t lead to actual harm to themself or others, they determine the act is not a disorder in need of treatment. Until someone can actually test for the sort of “spiritual harm” that religious folks insist results from these activities, it will consequently ignored.

 

[DarkLight]

If one phantasizes sexually over women the APA would not determine that to be any psychological problem if it has not been openly expressed in rape.

But what leads to rape?

And who determines what and when it becomes a psychological problem, the APA?

It already has already become a social problem.

I think we could say this discussion is one where the dog is chasing his tail and never catches it.

To me, a psychological problem is an habitual sexual sin. For the biggest sex organ in a man is his mind. And if this leads to raping others or himself, then** that is psychological problem since he is out of control and has lost propriety which will affect him adversly in his judgement of himself and others. Which is a psychological problem, a warped abusive understanding of his sexual power. **

The problem with the APA is that they will not get into morality of acts. Therefore everything is ok as long as it dosen’t seem to affect a person’s function in the home, job, or society.
But it does. And whether they recognize it as a psychological problem or not, it is for it affects the image of oneself and the image of others, and leads to sexual misconduct.

Hey, just a thought.

This is my problem with the issue. The rapist, in most cases, chooses to commit rape. That’s the key word - chooses. He is not a victim of his brain; he is a man who chose to do something he should not.

I have mental health problems. I get panic attacks. I do not choose to have them. Nor could I decide to do otherwise.

That’s the difference. That’s why I don’t think this should be a mental health problem. Call it what it is: sin. Calling these things “mental illness” is just a dodge for people to point and say that they couldn’t help themselves.

 

[TimeEntrance]

I believe sexual self abuse is real and lacking as a diagnosis in psychology.

Why can’t psychologists see that sexual self abuse exists…

I think it is under masochism. I think.

 

[Michael19682]

…

Also, the APA makes moral judgments all the time (whether they realize it or not). What they don’t do is refer these questions upward to a supernatural Creator and judge certain actions as a bad or good on that basis. They have a wholly independent, objective basis for morality that doesn’t require a God-head to actualize it. When someone’s fantasies, or their sexual habits don’t lead to actual harm to themself or others, they determine the act is not a disorder in need of treatment.

Until someone can actually test for the sort of “spiritual harm” that religious folks insist results from these activities, it will consequently ignored

.

“Wholly independent”-- what is it independent of? Are they independent? Surely not the one’s who take insurance to fund for their activities; or those who rely on Universities and politically charged IRB’s for their research agendas
“Objective basis for morality”–what do they take as their moral object? The actions of men? How do they measure harm?
They say spirit cannot be measured. Yet it is acknowledged as important by nearly all save these god-heads you speak of. If someone says “I feel ashamed and humiliated when I masturbate”. Why is this ignored? I suppose they would say that the only true measurements are in those who claim they are not affected by their self-harm.

AND BESIDES: WHY do they say spirit cannot be measured?