What do you think?
Rate this book
Homosexuality and American Psychiatry: The Politics of Diagnosis
In 1973, after several years of bitter dispute, the Board of Trustees
of the American Psychiatric Association decided to remove homosexuality from its official list of mental diseases. Infuriated by the
Board's action, a substantial number of dissident psychiatrists
charged the association's leadership with capitulating to the pressures
of Gay Liberation groups, and forced the board to submit its decision
to a referendum of the full APA membership. Ronald Bayer presents
a political analysis of the psychiatric battle involved, from the first
confrontations organized by gay demonstrators at psychiatric conventions to the referendum initiated by orthodox psychiatrists. The result is a fascinating view of the individuals who led the debate and the fundamental questions that engaged social and cultural values, the definition of disease, and the nature of sexuality. Available for the
first time in paperback, the book includes a new afterword by the
author.
of the American Psychiatric Association decided to remove homosexuality from its official list of mental diseases. Infuriated by the
Board's action, a substantial number of dissident psychiatrists
charged the association's leadership with capitulating to the pressures
of Gay Liberation groups, and forced the board to submit its decision
to a referendum of the full APA membership. Ronald Bayer presents
a political analysis of the psychiatric battle involved, from the first
confrontations organized by gay demonstrators at psychiatric conventions to the referendum initiated by orthodox psychiatrists. The result is a fascinating view of the individuals who led the debate and the fundamental questions that engaged social and cultural values, the definition of disease, and the nature of sexuality. Available for the
first time in paperback, the book includes a new afterword by the
author.
249 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1981
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
October 2, 2025
A "POLITICAL ANALYSIS" OF THE DECISION TO REMOVE HOMOSEXUALITY FROM DSM II
At the time this book was written in 1981, Ronald Bayer was an Associate for Policy Studies at the Hastings Center in New York. He said in the Introduction, "This book represents a political analysis of the psychiatric battle over homosexuality. Such an analysis is not, however, external to the `real issue' of whether homosexuality represents a psychiatric disorder. To assume that there is an answer to this question that is not ultimately political is to assume that it is possible to determine, with the appropriate scientific methodology, whether homosexuality is a disease given in nature...The status of homosexuality is a political question... It requires a political analysis." (Pg. 4-5)
He summarizes, "The entire process, from the first confrontations organized by gay demonstrators at psychiatric conventions to the referendum demanded by orthodox psychiatrists, seemed to violate the most basic expectations about how questions of science should be resolved. Instead of being engaged in a sober consideration of data, psychiatrists were swept up in a political controversy... The result was not a conclusion based on the approximation of a scientific truth as dictated by reason, but was an action demanded by the ideological temper of the times." (Pg. 3-4)
He states, "At a panel on transsexualism and homosexuality, Irving Bieber experienced his first face-to-face denunciation... he was still unprepared for the kind of rage that greeted him. His efforts to explain his position to his challengers were greeted with derisive laughter... This verbal attack with its violent tone caused Bieber considerable distress... at a panel on 'issues of sexuality'... the meeting was adjourned and pandemonium ensued..." (Pg. 102-103)
At a May 3, 1971 meeting, "gay and antiwar activists stormed into the prestigious Convocation of Fellows. During the ensuing uproar, [activist Frank] Kameny grabbed a microphone and denounced the rights of psychiatrists to discuss the question of homosexuality... he declared, `...You may take this as a declaration of war against you.' ... [Kent] Robinson, who had been acting as an intermediary between the APA and the homosexuals, was himself taken aback by the intensity of the rage and cautioned Kemeny to temper the tactics of his codemonstrators." (Pg. 105-106)
Of the crucial 1974 referendum itself, he notes, "Just over ten thousand psychiatrists participated in the vote. The results were clear, though not overwhelming, expression of support for the nomenclature change... What does require some explanation, however, is the fact that though each of the central decision-making bodies of the APA had supported the nomenclature change unanimously... almost 40 percent of those who voted in the referendum expressed their opposition." (Pg. 148)
He summarizes, "That the American Psychiatric Association responded to the concerted pressure of an angry, militant movement that had made full use of coercive and intimidating tactics is undeniable. To assert, however, that the decision of December 1973 represented nothing more than a capitulation in the face of force involves a great distortion. Though it is difficult to determine the precise proportion of psychiatrists who have adopted the nonpathological view, it is clear that the numbers are substantial." (Pg. 189)
This book is probably the most detailed treatment of this fascinating historical issue, and will be "must reading" for anyone interested in this matter.
At the time this book was written in 1981, Ronald Bayer was an Associate for Policy Studies at the Hastings Center in New York. He said in the Introduction, "This book represents a political analysis of the psychiatric battle over homosexuality. Such an analysis is not, however, external to the `real issue' of whether homosexuality represents a psychiatric disorder. To assume that there is an answer to this question that is not ultimately political is to assume that it is possible to determine, with the appropriate scientific methodology, whether homosexuality is a disease given in nature...The status of homosexuality is a political question... It requires a political analysis." (Pg. 4-5)
He summarizes, "The entire process, from the first confrontations organized by gay demonstrators at psychiatric conventions to the referendum demanded by orthodox psychiatrists, seemed to violate the most basic expectations about how questions of science should be resolved. Instead of being engaged in a sober consideration of data, psychiatrists were swept up in a political controversy... The result was not a conclusion based on the approximation of a scientific truth as dictated by reason, but was an action demanded by the ideological temper of the times." (Pg. 3-4)
He states, "At a panel on transsexualism and homosexuality, Irving Bieber experienced his first face-to-face denunciation... he was still unprepared for the kind of rage that greeted him. His efforts to explain his position to his challengers were greeted with derisive laughter... This verbal attack with its violent tone caused Bieber considerable distress... at a panel on 'issues of sexuality'... the meeting was adjourned and pandemonium ensued..." (Pg. 102-103)
At a May 3, 1971 meeting, "gay and antiwar activists stormed into the prestigious Convocation of Fellows. During the ensuing uproar, [activist Frank] Kameny grabbed a microphone and denounced the rights of psychiatrists to discuss the question of homosexuality... he declared, `...You may take this as a declaration of war against you.' ... [Kent] Robinson, who had been acting as an intermediary between the APA and the homosexuals, was himself taken aback by the intensity of the rage and cautioned Kemeny to temper the tactics of his codemonstrators." (Pg. 105-106)
Of the crucial 1974 referendum itself, he notes, "Just over ten thousand psychiatrists participated in the vote. The results were clear, though not overwhelming, expression of support for the nomenclature change... What does require some explanation, however, is the fact that though each of the central decision-making bodies of the APA had supported the nomenclature change unanimously... almost 40 percent of those who voted in the referendum expressed their opposition." (Pg. 148)
He summarizes, "That the American Psychiatric Association responded to the concerted pressure of an angry, militant movement that had made full use of coercive and intimidating tactics is undeniable. To assert, however, that the decision of December 1973 represented nothing more than a capitulation in the face of force involves a great distortion. Though it is difficult to determine the precise proportion of psychiatrists who have adopted the nonpathological view, it is clear that the numbers are substantial." (Pg. 189)
This book is probably the most detailed treatment of this fascinating historical issue, and will be "must reading" for anyone interested in this matter.
December 26, 2009
Excellent review of the topic. I'd recommend it to anyone going into the field of psychology or psychiatry- or, for that matter, queer studies.
Read
October 11, 2011On its way...for the Master's final project.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews