Being A Katoey Is A Mental Disorder

[Douggie Style]

Classifying it as a mental disorder just reflects the prevailing cultural standards. There are examples of males identifying as women throughout history and across cultures:> India and Fiji come to mind.

Anyways’ it's a part of the culture and a great export industry!

[alexth]

What do you mean "Normal guys don't feel like a woman"-- I have several friends who are normal and they all say they feel like a woman--some feel like a new or different woman everynight of the week!

Define normal

[PeaceBlondie]

Define abnormal, or natural, or unnatural.

And that's how good discussions begin: by agreeing, roughly, on definitions. That's also where bad discussions degenerate, because people aren't even talking about the same things, not using the same definitions for "transgender" or "transsexual" or "khatoey" or "gay" or "macho."

[Samuian]

people who have a problem with this particular topic, have a problem!

[taxexile]

the reason given "because of mental disorder"

i doubt very much if the comment "because of mental disorder" could , in any court , be considered a valid clinical diagnosis , unless it was reached after psychologic testing and evaluation following accepted clinical diagnostic practice.

the specific type of mental disorder is not mentioned , it sounds like the military just didnt want him /her and found a reason. i doubt if clinical testing was done to eveluate his/ her mental state.

regarding the homophobia issue , defining what is "normal" in ones sexual make up is almost impossible.

we all have desires and needs that differ by varying degrees from the "strictly normal" ( e.g. sex only for the purpose of procreation).

the behaviour of homosexual men is considered unatural by a large proportion of heterosexual men , if we were all homosexual then the human race would die out , we are born only to procreate , that is nature , all the rest is meaningless.

does that make those heterosexuals homophobic , i think not.

some heterosexuals discriminate against homosexual men in the workplace and in the street and anywhere they can , does that make them homophobic , my answer would be yes.

homosexuals cannot demand acceptance , but they can demand fair treatment.

i often wonder what is so precious about homosexuals that they need a separate forum here on thai visa , why do they advertise their sexuality so openly.

should flagellants have their own forum? , should compulsive masturbators have their own forum?

i think it is the shouting about something that the majority of people have no wish to hear about that accounts for a large amount of the homophobia that exists.

discretion is the key to acceptance , as it is in so many things in life.

am i homophobic because i use an old fashioned term (homosexual) instead of msm or gay?

am i homophobic because i wish homosexuals should just get on with their lives and stop shouting about their sexuality.

[popshirt]

the reason given "because of mental disorder"

i doubt very much if the comment "because of mental disorder" could , in any court , be considered a valid clinical diagnosis , unless it was reached after psychologic testing and evaluation following accepted clinical diagnostic practice.

the specific type of mental disorder is not mentioned , it sounds like the military just didnt want him /her and found a reason. i doubt if clinical testing was done to eveluate his/ her mental state.

regarding the homophobia issue , defining what is "normal" in ones sexual make up is almost impossible.

we all have desires and needs that differ by varying degrees from the "strictly normal" ( e.g. sex only for the purpose of procreation).

the behaviour of homosexual men is considered unatural by a large proportion of heterosexual men , if we were all homosexual then the human race would die out , we are born only to procreate , that is nature , all the rest is meaningless.

does that make those heterosexuals homophobic , i think not.

some heterosexuals discriminate against homosexual men in the workplace and in the street and anywhere they can , does that make them homophobic , my answer would be yes.

homosexuals cannot demand acceptance , but they can demand fair treatment.

i often wonder what is so precious about homosexuals that they need a separate forum here on thai visa , why do they advertise their sexuality so openly.

should flagellants have their own forum? , should compulsive masturbators have their own forum?

i think it is the shouting about something that the majority of people have no wish to hear about that accounts for a large amount of the homophobia that exists.

discretion is the key to acceptance , as it is in so many things in life.

am i homophobic because i use an old fashioned term (homosexual) instead of msm or gay?

am i homophobic because i wish homosexuals should just get on with their lives and stop shouting about their sexuality.

In my opinion, yes you are.

[ZZZ]

Also need a definition of a man and a woman, is it the body or the mind that determine the gender.

If it's the mind, being a khatoey would be a physical problem not a mental problem as the problem is the body.

If it's the body, being a khateoy would be a mental problem. Not that having a female brain would necessary mean you have a mental problem but in combination with a male body there would definitely be a conflict of interests.

[Tywais]

As PB mentioned regarding abnormal/unnatural, is all relative to culture, education, enviornment (who you are around), and others. In some cultures something that is entirely natural/normal to them may be considered just the opposite in another culture. I consider myself very open minded about the subject and don't see why it has to be pidgeon holed, it's not black and white.

An interesting read from a transgendered Psychology graduate student.

Gender Identity Disorder (GID) Case Study

Leadin page here > http://www.genderpsychology.org/

[Noel]

Define abnormal, or natural, or unnatural.

And that's how good discussions begin: by agreeing, roughly, on definitions. That's also where bad discussions degenerate, because people aren't even talking about the same things, not using the same definitions for "transgender" or "transsexual" or "khatoey" or "gay" or "macho."

Perhaps you, as a Super Moderator with certain views, should therefore supply a list of 'acceptable' definitions. It might well save a few members speaking their minds without fear of being 'Thomas Cooked' (sent on holiday) for sharing their thoughts.

The way this thread has degenerated (if it did, given the title), I am surprised it has not already been despatched to the Gay People in Thailand forum where it appears to belong, or is an honest and open discussion being encouraged...?

[Plus]

As homosexuals account for only about 10% of population, they might be considered abnormal, strictly speaking. It doesn't mean that they should not be accepted, it doesn't mean being homophobic, at least to me. It's just a plain fact - deviation from the norm.

From the army's point of view - it might be a mental disorder if they think that homosexuals will behave differently from straight conscripts and react in upredictable ways to whatever the army life throws at them. Medically speaking, it's not a disorder, of course.

Is there a gender discrimination in the army? No more than in any other occupation. Can you blame them for assuming that katoeys won't behave like "normal" men? Can a katoey become an army general? Can a woman become a general?

That guy/girl decided to put the army straight on his mental illness, good luck to him, maybe they'll finally make some clearcut rules and laws about homosexuals and the army service.

[sting01]

Well, somewhere I thnk this discussion is useless.

Trying to ask some posters that a human being is first a human a human being, that a person have to be defined by the behavior and not the appearence look like tryin to convert to the only true faith (the roman papacy one) a bunch of pascalist missionries ... As Ethan told us 3 times, Mission Imposible (MI 1, MI 2 and MI 3).

Fact, and for what it'sworth, I know Wan (Khun Samart), and if you knew her/him you would not define this person as a transexual or transgender, but more define her/him by the behavior showed.

It need a bold person to be thai kathoey, and going against the power in place. It need also a strong thinking to be able to do it without make the whole court laught.

The problem when we define a group of person, there is systematically people who do not fit.

[Ulysses G.]

And let us pity those posters so ashamed of their feelings that they must disguise their fascination for kathoeys as an obsession with political correctness, and hope they find themselves soon.

"Steven"

In other words, everyone who feels that men pretending to be women is abnormal is really "fascinated and obsessed" with katoeys sexually and covering up their homosexual attraction to lady-boys by claiming to be heterosexual.

What a load of typical, contrived, politically correct horse doo-doo!

[PeaceBlondie]

This discussion is about transgendered, transexuals, gays, katoeys, and so forth, in Thailand. I'm not going to use my position as a moderator to restrict conversation. Neither am I, as an openly gay man in Thailand, going to remain silent about an issue that's important to me.

No, most of us gay men don't shove our gender preferences in the faces of you macho men half as much as most macho men shove it in our faces. In Thailand, the expatriate straight men, do so, much more than Thai men. One big reason I enjoy living in Thailand is that I don't have to be in the closet 99% of the time, like I was in Houston. I don't flaunt it; I'm not camp; I sing bass.

The Thai who is the subject of this topic was removed from the Thai military (or from the conscription) because the Thai military said he had - forget the exact term, but it's in this topic - a mental disorder. It's not a mental disorder to simply have a certain gender preference, and to be willing to admit it in public. I don't know any straight men who are afraid to say, "Oh, I'm straight, hetero, I prefer sex with women."

If it matters, I made my wife pregnant 9 times. For me, maybe that was unnatural.

[chownah]

Let's face it....when the military wants people to fill the lower echelons it wants people who don't think too much and who just go along with whatever they are told. It doesn't want someone who is willing to act on their own personal impulses...it wants people who will express the impulses which their superiors tell them to express. The military doesn't want its lower echelon filled with people who will say "I don't care what other people think...I'm going to do what my heart tells me is the right thing"...my goodness no no no...the military doesn't want that sort of person at all.......so they are tagged as having a mental disorder....solves the problem quickly and neatly!!!

Chownah

[Donz]

The military probaly just wants real men in the army, not girly boys

[opothai]

the reason given "because of mental disorder"

i doubt very much if the comment "because of mental disorder" could , in any court , be considered a valid clinical diagnosis , unless it was reached after psychologic testing and evaluation following accepted clinical diagnostic practice.

the specific type of mental disorder is not mentioned , it sounds like the military just didnt want him /her and found a reason. i doubt if clinical testing was done to eveluate his/ her mental state.

regarding the homophobia issue , defining what is "normal" in ones sexual make up is almost impossible.

we all have desires and needs that differ by varying degrees from the "strictly normal" ( e.g. sex only for the purpose of procreation).

the behaviour of homosexual men is considered unatural by a large proportion of heterosexual men , if we were all homosexual then the human race would die out , we are born only to procreate , that is nature , all the rest is meaningless.

does that make those heterosexuals homophobic , i think not.

some heterosexuals discriminate against homosexual men in the workplace and in the street and anywhere they can , does that make them homophobic , my answer would be yes.

homosexuals cannot demand acceptance , but they can demand fair treatment.

i often wonder what is so precious about homosexuals that they need a separate forum here on thai visa , why do they advertise their sexuality so openly.

should flagellants have their own forum? , should compulsive masturbators have their own forum?

i think it is the shouting about something that the majority of people have no wish to hear about that accounts for a large amount of the homophobia that exists.

discretion is the key to acceptance , as it is in so many things in life.

am i homophobic because i use an old fashioned term (homosexual) instead of msm or gay?

am i homophobic because i wish homosexuals should just get on with their lives and stop shouting about their sexuality.

very well sumed up tax

[edited by IJWT - advocating violence against gays is not on]

katoeys are in numbers in pattaya and bangkok in certain areas, which i can choose to go to or not, in certain places the katoeys serve food and drink and are a good laugh,

personally i would say if you are born a man and you must chop your body about to appear woman like, there is something wrong with your mental state, but that is only my personal opinion.

and before i get flamed i am entitled to an opinion

[britmaveric]

What is normal I say? Not my body - so if one has to change your body to reflect who you are inside then so be it. Remember not everyone is the same thank buddha or how boring this world would be.

[Nongwahyay]

As homosexuals account for only about 10% of population, they might be considered abnormal, strictly speaking. It doesn't mean that they should not be accepted, it doesn't mean being homophobic, at least to me. It's just a plain fact - deviation from the norm.

Jesus....is that percentage really true???? I´m not doubting it..... just shuddering at the thought, if the number is really true. What is the world coming to???? Could it be a result of global warming????

[Plus]

Errr, you caught me here. I think 2% are homosexuals, 10% are bi. Need to find a link.

Ok, here is the first google result:

One stumbling block for demographers is establishing who is "gay". In other words, labels. From the heady days of Kinsey, the "10 per cent is homosexual" label has been toned down lately. Even though The Social Organization of Sex: Sexual Practices in the United States (Laumann, Gagnon, Michael, and Michaels, 1994) study cites that 7.7 percent of men and 7.5 of women have strong same-sex attractions, ony 2.8 percent of men and 1.4 of women consider themselves homosexuals.

http://www.gaydemographics.org/USA/2000_Census_Total.htm

[Ijustwannateach]

This bandying about of words like "natural" and "unnatural" to stigmatise homosexuality is very ill-advised, and also ill-informed.

Nature has plenty of odd ways of reproducing species which are far from the missionary position.

Female bee drones do not reproduce and act as slaves for a SINGLE sister all their lives. Is this "unnatural?" No, because their genetic profile is so close to that of their sister that their genes get passed on.

Similarly, I would imagine that in times of scarcity, having several "helper" brothers/sisters in a family ensures more surviving human children than if all brothers and sisters were reproducing willy-nilly.

Several eminent biologists (for example, E.O. Wilson) have put forward elegant theories such as this which give "natural" explanations for homosexual genes to be reinforced in a population.

Among other species of apes, the apes with fewer homosexual tendencies are more sexually dimorphic and have seasonal "heats"- like the gorillas- and those with greater homosexual tendencies are more sexually isomorphic and do not require a "heat" for sex- like bonobo chimps and us.

"Steven"

[Ijustwannateach]

the reason given "because of mental disorder"

i doubt very much if the comment "because of mental disorder" could , in any court , be considered a valid clinical diagnosis , unless it was reached after psychologic testing and evaluation following accepted clinical diagnostic practice.

the specific type of mental disorder is not mentioned , it sounds like the military just didnt want him /her and found a reason. i doubt if clinical testing was done to eveluate his/ her mental state.

I quite agree with this part of your post. It is a bit of a quandary for both the military and the kathoeys- and ultimately women, as well. If kathoeys are not mentally ill, should they be made to serve? And if they should, then why not women as well? How to exclude kathoeys without having it become a new "loophole" for men who simply don't want to serve? Or defining kathoeys in some kind of separate legal category? Certainly the military is not really qualified by itself to judge mental competence without professional medical assistance.

regarding the homophobia issue , defining what is "normal" in ones sexual make up is almost impossible.

we all have desires and needs that differ by varying degrees from the "strictly normal" ( e.g. sex only for the purpose of procreation).

the behaviour of homosexual men is considered unatural by a large proportion of heterosexual men , if we were all homosexual then the human race would die out , we are born only to procreate , that is nature , all the rest is meaningless.

I have responded to this idea above.

does that make those heterosexuals homophobic , i think not.

some heterosexuals discriminate against homosexual men in the workplace and in the street and anywhere they can , does that make them homophobic , my answer would be yes.

homosexuals cannot demand acceptance , but they can demand fair treatment.

i often wonder what is so precious about homosexuals that they need a separate forum here on thai visa , why do they advertise their sexuality so openly.

should flagellants have their own forum? , should compulsive masturbators have their own forum?

It is because so many people have problems with us that they would rather we hide, that it is so important that we do not.

The first step is getting us to censor ourselves. The second step would be legislation making our activity illegal, and then permanently disposing of us finally. If we didn't make the point that we were still here, still ok with ourselves, and not going away, it would be all to easy to revert to the way things were in the 50s. In the recent move the Departed, one character makes a good point that freedoms are not given, but taken.

We are a huge part of the population, using whatever yardstick you like. Our sexual and social desires *for the most part* closely mirror those of heterosexual couples, and depart from them largely because we don't have the social glue or machinery in place. We are not abusive (as flagellants might be taken to be) or neurotic (as compulsives would be). Your comparison of our sexuality to those with neuroses or fetishes is truly not on. I'm sure you can think of extreme examples to "disprove" this about gays, but I can think of the same kinds of examples about straights- swingers, S&M couples, foot fetishes, etc., etc.

i think it is the shouting about something that the majority of people have no wish to hear about that accounts for a large amount of the homophobia that exists.

discretion is the key to acceptance , as it is in so many things in life.

am i homophobic because i use an old fashioned term (homosexual) instead of msm or gay?

am i homophobic because i wish homosexuals should just get on with their lives and stop shouting about their sexuality.

If you consider the mild behavior of the gay subforum on this forum objectionable and "shouting," then the answer to all your above questions is "yes."

"Steven"

[taxexile]

This bandying about of words like "natural" and "unnatural" to stigmatise homosexuality is very ill-advised, and also ill-informed.

ijwt , using words like natural and unnatural is not stigmatizing homosexuality at all , i cannot accept that sexual acts between members of the same sex are completely normal.

for thrill seeking and experimentation yes , but as a lifestyle choice .... no.

old fashioned , prudish , intolerant .... i dont think so. i consider myself broad minded and i dont discriminate on a persons sexual make up , but i do consider homosexual acts between males quite unnatural indeed.

as a heterosexual male , the thought of taking a friendship with another male beyond the platonic level would be impossible because of the revulsion i would feel at becoming intimate with another male.

is my revulsion at the thought of acts between men natural or unatural , to me it is a natural feeling , that revulsion is natures way of telling me that it is wrong , it is abnormal.

the fact that homosexuals do not feel that revulsion , they feel arousal , obviously means that for homosexuals that kind of behaviour is completely normal , they are following instinct.

but it is a minority instinct , and an instinct that is unnatural for the majority , who have the right surely to consider it and label it as abnormal behaviour.

there is nothing abnormal in friendships between males , but it is the sexual relations that make it abnormal ( to me , and i suspect many others too.)

Nature has plenty of odd ways of reproducing species which are far from the missionary position.

but unless i am mistaken , none of them involve anal sex between same sex partners.

Female bee drones do not reproduce and act as slaves for a SINGLE sister all their lives. Is this "unnatural?" No, because their genetic profile is so close to that of their sister that their genes get passed on.

it is not unatural for bees, but might be considered "out of the loop" for humans

Similarly, I would imagine that in times of scarcity, having several "helper" brothers/sisters in a family ensures more surviving human children than if all brothers and sisters were reproducing willy-nilly.

i believe that having more children in times of scarcity would increase the chances of one of those children surviving to pass on the genes , this is how it works in the animal kingdom.

Several eminent biologists (for example, E.O. Wilson) have put forward elegant theories such as this which give "natural" explanations for homosexual genes to be reinforced in a population.

Among other species of apes, the apes with fewer homosexual tendencies are more sexually dimorphic and have seasonal "heats"- like the gorillas- and those with greater homosexual tendencies are more sexually isomorphic and do not require a "heat" for sex- like bonobo chimps and us.

perhaps you would like to elaborate on these last two points as i know nothing about it.

"Steven"

[taxexile]

If you consider the mild behavior of the gay subforum on this forum objectionable and "shouting," then the answer to all your above questions is "yes."

i dont consider the gay subforum objectionable at all , i just question the need to separate yourselves so much , ( some would say to victimise yourselves ) ,and the shouting was not referring to gay forum members here , but to some gay groups out there that do shout and celebrate their sexuality , (if homosexuality is so normal , so run of the mill , so uninteresting , then why shout about it ) , when maybe less shouting is called for in my opinion.

after all , as i said , there are many sexual "lifestyles" out there , but it only seems to be homosexuals who shout about theirs.

maybe its just an excuse to party , and there is nothing abnormal about that.

[kmart]

A bit of historical perspective; the ancient Roman Army (who were fairly successful in conquering a sizeable Empire; and in military matters, generally) actively encouraged homosexuality in the ranks to "bind" their soldiers together, and so look out for their comrades better.

The loutish "laddish" behaviour of a lot of squaddies and other soldiers I have seen suggests a lot of latent homosexuality.

I bet a ladyboy in any particular squadron would be very "popular". Especially after "lights out".

[sting01]

A bit of historical perspective; the ancient Roman Army (who were fairly successful in conquering a sizeable Empire; and in military matters, generally) actively encouraged homosexuality in the ranks to "bind" their soldiers together, and so look out for their comrades better.

The loutish "laddish" behaviour of a lot of squaddies and other soldiers I have seen suggests a lot of latent homosexuality.

I bet a ladyboy in any particular squadron would be very "popular". Especially after "lights out".

In the same idea :

Pederaste regiments (sic) were elite unique in Sparta. I do not remenber if it was one regiment (unit) or several.

Pederaste regiments (several for sure) were also recored during the Punics wars in the regular cathaginian (spelling) army.

I use the word pederaste (old wording for gay) because it's the closest to the wording used to describe/name those elite units and people in those units.

BUT

and that is all the problem, a transexual male to female do not consider himsel/herself as a male looking to have same sex partner. Nor gay guys are attracted by 'genuine' ladyboys ... Same sex relationship is one thing, but gender disorder is totally different.

[jdinasia]

If you consider the mild behavior of the gay subforum on this forum objectionable and "shouting," then the answer to all your above questions is "yes."

i dont consider the gay subforum objectionable at all , i just question the need to separate yourselves so much , ( some would say to victimise yourselves ) ,and the shouting was not referring to gay forum members here , but to some gay groups out there that do shout and celebrate their sexuality , (if homosexuality is so normal , so run of the mill , so uninteresting , then why shout about it ) , when maybe less shouting is called for in my opinion.

after all , as i said , there are many sexual "lifestyles" out there , but it only seems to be homosexuals who shout about theirs.

maybe its just an excuse to party , and there is nothing abnormal about that.

Almost every minority (and for that matter almost every group) has special events parties rallies parades etc etc

As far as having a seperate gay section of the ThaiVisa forum .... well the folks into cars have it .... the folks with families ..... the ladies have one .... oh and folks with pets? what about those that work? and of the workers ... those that teach ....

It isn't so separate that you can't read and post .... but it is a dedicated area where those that are phobes are not allowed to flame.

So .... any comments about the fact that when a ladyboy has sex-reassignment surgery .... they no longer are classified with the mental disorder? <since the outside now matches the inside?>

[PeaceBlondie]

I'm no expert, but I suspect that most of us moderate gays don't approve of our brothers who shout about it very much (or our gay sisters/lesbians who shout it). They, however, are largely responsible for some of the victories that allow us moderates to calmly say, "Yes, I am gay" when the topic comes up.

I hope you moderate macho men roundly denounce the gay-bashing themes when they're mentioned in the pub and in the locker room, yes? Such as saying, right there and then to the guy's face, "Look, man, I'm as much of a bloke as you are, but we don't have to prove it by bashing in sissie's faces!"

This time and place is a good opportunity for Westerners in Thailand to take a cultural lesson on tolerance from our Thai neighbors. Most of them don't fully approve the gay behavior of Thais and farang, but they tend to ignore it.

And if there were twice as many straight people with whom we could have a matter-of-fact conversation about our lovers - and we didn't have to sneak around so much - there'd be less need for gay forums.

Simply by the numbers or the percentages, private gay behavior is not common, or the majority. But neither is it so extraordinary. It's not all anal intercourse, either (especially for the lesbians), nor do we have some exclusive franchise on that activity (straights do it, too).

Each of us is entitled to their personal opinion as to what's repulsive. I knew a gay man who thought straight sex was so repulsive that it made him vomit!

[roguegirl]

I was wondering... If they chopped it off, can it be stuffed and fix with a battery?

[taxexile]

any comments about the fact that when a ladyboy has sex-reassignment surgery .... they no longer are classified with the mental disorder?

before one can classify someone as having a mental disorder , there has to be a definition of what is considered mental "order" , and i maintain that , as i originally said

it can hardly be accepted that someone who wishes to be castrated , have their penis removed and have an artificial vagina fashioned out of what is left can be conidered as having a completely ordered mental state.

it might seem ordered to them , but to the rest it is certainly disordered , and it is certainly an aberration of normal function.

whether that disorder is serious enough to disqualify them from employment is not for me to say , as i dont know exactly what mental disorder the person in question was supposed to be afflicted with.

if you are asking me whether a transexual , katoey , or homosexual should be refused employment on the grounds of their sexual orientation alone , then my answer is no... unless the nature of their sexuality renders them incapable of doing their job properly.

the tolerance and acceptance shown to katoeys here in thailand is quite remarkable and to be admired. as an example , there is a big thai restaurant here in hua hin with 2 moustachioed men in skirts and full make up who are waiters. (almost comedy caricatures in the mold of the two laydeez from the little britain t.v. series ) and nobody bats an eyelid.

[meadish_sweetball]

as a heterosexual male , the thought of taking a friendship with another male beyond the platonic level would be impossible because of the revulsion i would feel at becoming intimate with another male.

is my revulsion at the thought of acts between men natural or unatural , to me it is a natural feeling , that revulsion is natures way of telling me that it is wrong , it is abnormal.

While I also do not feel comfortable with the thought of getting intimate with another male, I think the rest of your reasoning here is rather poor from a scientific or logical point of view.

This concept of "nature telling you it is wrong" can quite easily be questioned, as there is clear evidence for homosexuality to be more prevalent and accepted in some cultures and periods of time than in others.

Another observation regarding this concept of "nature" is that many men are turned on by watching acts of lesbianism, and or anal sex between different sex partners - and as a male, even in company of macho blokes who are extremely homophobic, it would be ok to say so, whereas if you say you are turned on by the thought of two men having sex, it is not all that unlikely to assume you would be ridiculed, frozen out or by some people threatened or subject to violence.

"Nature" is a very vague expression, although it sounds quite scientific - to say that that "nature" "tells you" something is even more unscientific - you might as well say "God" or "Gaia" or "The Force of Life" (but the argument would start to sound different then, wouldn't it?).

People who believe undefined entities speak to them are in some cases also classified as having a mental disorder - of course this is not quite what you meant though.