Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) Degrades Women!

[Spectrum]

Feminists are neurotic by default, but I am speaking of clinical psychology. The following caught my eye a couple of days ago:

The diagnosis of BPD has been criticized from a feminist perspective.[90] This is because some of the diagnostic criteria/symptoms of the disorder uphold common gender stereotypes about women. For example, the criteria of "a pattern of unstable personal relationships, unstable self-image, and instability of mood," can all be linked to the stereotype that women are "neither decisive nor constant".[91] The question has also been raised of why women are three times more likely to be diagnosed with BPD than men.[n 9] Some think that people with BPD commonly have a history of sexual abuse in childhood.[92] One feminist critique suggests that BPD is a stigmatizing diagnosis that can sometimes evoke negative responses from health care providers, and additionally, that women who have survived sexual abuse in childhood are therefore sometimes re-traumatized by any such abusive mental health service.[93]

Some feminist writers have suggested it would be better to give these women the diagnosis of a post-traumatic disorder as this would acknowledge their abuse, but others have argued that the use of the PTSD diagnosis merely medicalizes abuse rather than addressing the root causes in society.[94] Women may be more likely to receive a personality disorder diagnosis if they reject the female role by being hostile, successful or sexually active; alternatively if a woman presents with psychiatric symptoms but does not conform to a traditional passive sick role, she may be labelled as a "difficult" patient and given the stigmatizing diagnosis of BPD.[95]

BPD is termed "borderline", because the disordered individuals are on the verge of psychopathy and/or major neurosis. Borderlines are located within the same cluster (termed, "Custer B/Dramatic") as antisocials, narcissists, and histrionics (pathological attention whores; will do anything to anyone or anything for said attention). And yet, while certain disorders, syndromes, and personality profiles/types (Jungian/MBTI/etc.) "target" men, feminists wish to evade their probable issues with the usual progressive victimization. I would say the above is even more demoralizing than protesting for slut power, whilst rewriting the social term, slut, in the name of actual rape victims.

How far are feminists willing to go? Not only do they wish to hardwire young women with licentious morals and erase the perceived gender barrier, they will explicitly and publicly alter psychology for their own personal use.

When my schedule permits me, I am considering writing an article in In Mala Fide on this very topic.

[scourge]

In the Quote from: field, the URL links to an outside domain. That probably triggered the spam filter. Just use the following for creating a quote block:

Code: [Select]

[quote]some quote[/quote]

[Veritas]

For example, the criteria of "a pattern of unstable personal relationships, unstable self-image, and instability of mood," can all be linked to the stereotype that women are "neither decisive nor constant".

What exactly are they trying to say?

That those traits aren't unhealthy since women are more likely to have them?

Are we suppressing women by point out these things are unhealthy?

Is this an issue with the notion of diagnosing mental illnesses in general?

[Spectrum]

For example, the criteria of "a pattern of unstable personal relationships, unstable self-image, and instability of mood," can all be linked to the stereotype that women are "neither decisive nor constant".

What exactly are they trying to say?

That those traits aren't unhealthy since women are more likely to have them?

Are we suppressing women by point out these things are unhealthy?

Is this an issue with the notion of diagnosing mental illnesses in general?

I think I will research this when I have time. Cluster B has extreme disorders, especially considering they are not labeled "insane" despite their behavior. I am wondering if some of these feminists have the disorder themselves, so they have a prime motivator for disliking the diagnosis and criteria for BPD. Perhaps, some feminazi leaders have BPD and are trying to rally troops to clear their conscience (defective folk love equality more than self-actualization).

In the Quote from: field, the URL links to an outside domain. That probably triggered the spam filter. Just use the following for creating a quote block:

Code: [Select]

[quote]some quote[/quote]

That makes sense, since the author tag is reserved for domain usage. I was just trying to make the post a bit cleaner. Thanks for the heads up.

[Conservationist]

Feminists are neurotic by default, but I am speaking of clinical psychology.

RACITS!!1!

[sofiana]

What is your definition of feminism ?

[Veritas]

What is your definition of feminism ?

Probably something to do with what the self-appointed feminist movement as it is exists says, as opposed to the general notion of non-prejudice and such.

Of course, when you define an abstract notion in terms of its manifestations, you're going to get contradictions, in that some feminists will say one thing, others will say another, so we are looking for the general trend.

While the ideas behind metal are great, and there are some fantastic metal bands still around, metal as a whole - both its creators and its followers - sucks massive cocks and should be disregarded. Thus, a new label like Hessian is needed which defines itself in terms of what the best metal represents, so as to mark distance from the 90%+ who degrade the genre.

If feminism is inherently a good thing, then it seems it now represents something totally different from what that good thing actually is, so perhaps a new term would need to be used now. Given the universal applicability of the idea which underlies feminism, it should probably be assimilated into a more all-encompassing movement which doesn't focus on any specific dichotomy.

Marxist tactics seem to only further the division between one group and another because of its constant focus on these differences (while ironically maintaining the illusory nature of these differences). It's not "self-actualisation for all!" it's "give this easily identifiable group we have designated the same status as this other group, for the meek shall inherit the earth!", which doesn't follow from any realistic principle.