Total Posts:18|Showing Posts:1-18
Jump to topic:

Is this normal?

Mysterious_Stranger
Posts: 1,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 1:12:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Tell me normal people. Is it considered normal to not experience any kind of attraction to any sex? I have never been concerned about this until recently when someone highlighted it to me. I also find the concept of love strange. Should I see a doctor?
Turn around, go back.
Mysterious_Stranger
Posts: 1,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 2:32:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/19/2013 2:16:01 PM, Cermank wrote:
No. It's normal.

Don't worry.

Ah good, I was told that it was strange not to be attracted to anyone but I really don't see the problem.
Turn around, go back.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 6:00:09 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
You seem to be asexual. An estimated 1% of the population fits the description. Nothing wrong with it. Enjoy it, by the way. It's like a gift.
YYW
Posts: 36,233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 9:38:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/19/2013 1:12:00 PM, Mysterious_Stranger wrote:
Tell me normal people. Is it considered normal to not experience any kind of attraction to any sex? I have never been concerned about this until recently when someone highlighted it to me. I also find the concept of love strange. Should I see a doctor?

You might be asexual. Greg Gutfeld is. I think he's normal. Even still, don't worry about being normal. As long as you're not hurting anyone, you're ok.
YYW
Posts: 36,233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 9:38:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/19/2013 6:00:09 PM, Mirza wrote:
You seem to be asexual. An estimated 1% of the population fits the description. Nothing wrong with it. Enjoy it, by the way. It's like a gift.

lol, right on. I should read threads to see if others have said what I have said before posting about them.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 9:59:06 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/19/2013 1:12:00 PM, Mysterious_Stranger wrote:
Tell me normal people. Is it considered normal to not experience any kind of attraction to any sex? I have never been concerned about this until recently when someone highlighted it to me. I also find the concept of love strange. Should I see a doctor?

Can you live a happy, fulfilling life without that?

If you can confidently, unquestionably say "yes" then all the power to you.

However, if for even a moment, you think you might be missing out on something, then what's the harm with talking to a professional?

You don't go to a doctor/psychologist to "be normal" you go to "be healthy." Not all individuals have the same conception of "health" nor should there be a single "type" of person that should be aimed for.

I know that if I acted more "normal" I would probably end up less happy.
YYW
Posts: 36,233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 10:02:27 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/19/2013 9:59:06 PM, Wnope wrote:
You don't go to a doctor/psychologist to "be normal" you go to "be healthy."

That is an exceedingly bold claim.
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 10:08:06 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/19/2013 6:00:09 PM, Mirza wrote:
You seem to be asexual. An estimated 1% of the population fits the description. Nothing wrong with it. Enjoy it, by the way. It's like a gift.

That's pretty cool actually.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2013 1:54:22 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/19/2013 10:02:27 PM, YYW wrote:
At 9/19/2013 9:59:06 PM, Wnope wrote:
You don't go to a doctor/psychologist to "be normal" you go to "be healthy."

That is an exceedingly bold claim.

The idea of a single category of "normal" makes no sense beyond being an imagined average among among large sample of people.

Say two people enter a doctors office. One is six five and the other three foot two. Both weigh 130 pounds.

The doctor should not treat these two in order to get them to "normalcy" as defined by the large sample.

Instead, we speak of "normal for x" such as "normal for his height" or "normal for his body-size." You can iterate with, for instance weight can be "normal for his height" but "abnormal for his height and metabolic rates." Another iteration could be "normal for his height, metabolic rates, and diet."

The first one you might argue "he is abnormally tall, but for his height he weighs a normal amount." At the same time, "he weighs the normal amount" is not true. Which normal should we be using diagnostically? His abnormality of weight with regards to the average population? His normality of weight with regards to the average population minus those who are not the same height? His normality of weight with regards to the average population minus those who are not the same height and do not have the same metabolic rates/diets?

In the end, "normal" is cached in in terms of a particular individual's ideal function of systems (health). Is the individual functioning as the individual would if he were healthy? Namely, does he have a lack of disorders?

If someone lacks disorders but is abnormal, what is the point of psychiatric or medical treatment? Being "normal" has no medical meaning beyond referring to health in terms of ideal function (lacking disorders).

But lacking disorders does not make you "normal." In fact, an individual in perfect health would be extraordinarily ABNORMAL. The goal of medical and mental professionals is to promote physical and mental health. Not normality.

"Psychology aims for normalizing" is the kind of mindset that leads to labeling homosexuality a disorder.
YYW
Posts: 36,233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2013 5:43:49 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/20/2013 1:54:22 AM, Wnope wrote:
At 9/19/2013 10:02:27 PM, YYW wrote:
At 9/19/2013 9:59:06 PM, Wnope wrote:
You don't go to a doctor/psychologist to "be normal" you go to "be healthy."

That is an exceedingly bold claim.

The idea of a single category of "normal" makes no sense beyond being an imagined average among among large sample of people.

Say two people enter a doctors office. One is six five and the other three foot two. Both weigh 130 pounds.

The doctor should not treat these two in order to get them to "normalcy" as defined by the large sample.

Instead, we speak of "normal for x" such as "normal for his height" or "normal for his body-size." You can iterate with, for instance weight can be "normal for his height" but "abnormal for his height and metabolic rates." Another iteration could be "normal for his height, metabolic rates, and diet."

The first one you might argue "he is abnormally tall, but for his height he weighs a normal amount." At the same time, "he weighs the normal amount" is not true. Which normal should we be using diagnostically? His abnormality of weight with regards to the average population? His normality of weight with regards to the average population minus those who are not the same height? His normality of weight with regards to the average population minus those who are not the same height and do not have the same metabolic rates/diets?

In the end, "normal" is cached in in terms of a particular individual's ideal function of systems (health). Is the individual functioning as the individual would if he were healthy? Namely, does he have a lack of disorders?

If someone lacks disorders but is abnormal, what is the point of psychiatric or medical treatment? Being "normal" has no medical meaning beyond referring to health in terms of ideal function (lacking disorders).

But lacking disorders does not make you "normal." In fact, an individual in perfect health would be extraordinarily ABNORMAL. The goal of medical and mental professionals is to promote physical and mental health. Not normality.

"Psychology aims for normalizing" is the kind of mindset that leads to labeling homosexuality a disorder.

On medical doctors, we agree. On mental health professionals, their purpose and function is to normalize.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2013 4:19:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/20/2013 5:43:49 AM, YYW wrote:
At 9/20/2013 1:54:22 AM, Wnope wrote:
At 9/19/2013 10:02:27 PM, YYW wrote:
At 9/19/2013 9:59:06 PM, Wnope wrote:
You don't go to a doctor/psychologist to "be normal" you go to "be healthy."

That is an exceedingly bold claim.

The idea of a single category of "normal" makes no sense beyond being an imagined average among among large sample of people.

Say two people enter a doctors office. One is six five and the other three foot two. Both weigh 130 pounds.

The doctor should not treat these two in order to get them to "normalcy" as defined by the large sample.

Instead, we speak of "normal for x" such as "normal for his height" or "normal for his body-size." You can iterate with, for instance weight can be "normal for his height" but "abnormal for his height and metabolic rates." Another iteration could be "normal for his height, metabolic rates, and diet."

The first one you might argue "he is abnormally tall, but for his height he weighs a normal amount." At the same time, "he weighs the normal amount" is not true. Which normal should we be using diagnostically? His abnormality of weight with regards to the average population? His normality of weight with regards to the average population minus those who are not the same height? His normality of weight with regards to the average population minus those who are not the same height and do not have the same metabolic rates/diets?

In the end, "normal" is cached in in terms of a particular individual's ideal function of systems (health). Is the individual functioning as the individual would if he were healthy? Namely, does he have a lack of disorders?

If someone lacks disorders but is abnormal, what is the point of psychiatric or medical treatment? Being "normal" has no medical meaning beyond referring to health in terms of ideal function (lacking disorders).

But lacking disorders does not make you "normal." In fact, an individual in perfect health would be extraordinarily ABNORMAL. The goal of medical and mental professionals is to promote physical and mental health. Not normality.

"Psychology aims for normalizing" is the kind of mindset that leads to labeling homosexuality a disorder.

On medical doctors, we agree. On mental health professionals, their purpose and function is to normalize.

Normalize with respect to what? The average human? The average male? The average white male? The average gay white male? The average gay white male with genetically inherited hormonal imbalances?
YYW
Posts: 36,233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2013 4:52:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/20/2013 4:19:44 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 9/20/2013 5:43:49 AM, YYW wrote:
At 9/20/2013 1:54:22 AM, Wnope wrote:
At 9/19/2013 10:02:27 PM, YYW wrote:
At 9/19/2013 9:59:06 PM, Wnope wrote:
You don't go to a doctor/psychologist to "be normal" you go to "be healthy."

That is an exceedingly bold claim.

The idea of a single category of "normal" makes no sense beyond being an imagined average among among large sample of people.

Say two people enter a doctors office. One is six five and the other three foot two. Both weigh 130 pounds.

The doctor should not treat these two in order to get them to "normalcy" as defined by the large sample.

Instead, we speak of "normal for x" such as "normal for his height" or "normal for his body-size." You can iterate with, for instance weight can be "normal for his height" but "abnormal for his height and metabolic rates." Another iteration could be "normal for his height, metabolic rates, and diet."

The first one you might argue "he is abnormally tall, but for his height he weighs a normal amount." At the same time, "he weighs the normal amount" is not true. Which normal should we be using diagnostically? His abnormality of weight with regards to the average population? His normality of weight with regards to the average population minus those who are not the same height? His normality of weight with regards to the average population minus those who are not the same height and do not have the same metabolic rates/diets?

In the end, "normal" is cached in in terms of a particular individual's ideal function of systems (health). Is the individual functioning as the individual would if he were healthy? Namely, does he have a lack of disorders?

If someone lacks disorders but is abnormal, what is the point of psychiatric or medical treatment? Being "normal" has no medical meaning beyond referring to health in terms of ideal function (lacking disorders).

But lacking disorders does not make you "normal." In fact, an individual in perfect health would be extraordinarily ABNORMAL. The goal of medical and mental professionals is to promote physical and mental health. Not normality.

"Psychology aims for normalizing" is the kind of mindset that leads to labeling homosexuality a disorder.

On medical doctors, we agree. On mental health professionals, their purpose and function is to normalize.

Normalize with respect to what? The average human? The average male? The average white male? The average gay white male? The average gay white male with genetically inherited hormonal imbalances?

Whatever "normal" is... conveniently, it's the shrinks who get to decide who/what is normal.
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2013 4:59:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/19/2013 1:12:00 PM, Mysterious_Stranger wrote:
Tell me normal people. Is it considered normal to not experience any kind of attraction to any sex? I have never been concerned about this until recently when someone highlighted it to me. I also find the concept of love strange. Should I see a doctor?

Yeah, a love doctor.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2013 6:29:22 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
No it's not "normal." But I what's good about normal? If it isn't associated with unhealthy or harmful behavior or thoughts (e.g. Depression), and you're ok with it, then don't worry about it.

More for me.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2013 6:36:57 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/20/2013 4:52:16 PM, YYW wrote:
At 9/20/2013 4:19:44 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 9/20/2013 5:43:49 AM, YYW wrote:
At 9/20/2013 1:54:22 AM, Wnope wrote:
At 9/19/2013 10:02:27 PM, YYW wrote:
At 9/19/2013 9:59:06 PM, Wnope wrote:
You don't go to a doctor/psychologist to "be normal" you go to "be healthy."

That is an exceedingly bold claim.

The idea of a single category of "normal" makes no sense beyond being an imagined average among among large sample of people.

Say two people enter a doctors office. One is six five and the other three foot two. Both weigh 130 pounds.

The doctor should not treat these two in order to get them to "normalcy" as defined by the large sample.

Instead, we speak of "normal for x" such as "normal for his height" or "normal for his body-size." You can iterate with, for instance weight can be "normal for his height" but "abnormal for his height and metabolic rates." Another iteration could be "normal for his height, metabolic rates, and diet."

The first one you might argue "he is abnormally tall, but for his height he weighs a normal amount." At the same time, "he weighs the normal amount" is not true. Which normal should we be using diagnostically? His abnormality of weight with regards to the average population? His normality of weight with regards to the average population minus those who are not the same height? His normality of weight with regards to the average population minus those who are not the same height and do not have the same metabolic rates/diets?

In the end, "normal" is cached in in terms of a particular individual's ideal function of systems (health). Is the individual functioning as the individual would if he were healthy? Namely, does he have a lack of disorders?

If someone lacks disorders but is abnormal, what is the point of psychiatric or medical treatment? Being "normal" has no medical meaning beyond referring to health in terms of ideal function (lacking disorders).

But lacking disorders does not make you "normal." In fact, an individual in perfect health would be extraordinarily ABNORMAL. The goal of medical and mental professionals is to promote physical and mental health. Not normality.

"Psychology aims for normalizing" is the kind of mindset that leads to labeling homosexuality a disorder.

On medical doctors, we agree. On mental health professionals, their purpose and function is to normalize.

Normalize with respect to what? The average human? The average male? The average white male? The average gay white male? The average gay white male with genetically inherited hormonal imbalances?

Whatever "normal" is... conveniently, it's the shrinks who get to decide who/what is normal.

If you wanna go back a few decades in psychology/psychiatry, yes it about was about trying to re-establish the status quo within individuals. For instance, turning gays into straights using conditioning.

But modern psychological methods revolve around disorders and their treatment. Disorders are recognized not as a matter of "abnormality" but as something obstructing an individual's preferred outcome (though not necessarily consciously aware of it at first).

For instance, in the modern DSM, a paraphilia is not a disorder unless it "causes clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning."

You'll notice it sets no stands for those areas of functioning. Only that there is "distress" or "impairment" in "function."
Jack212
Posts: 572
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2013 9:46:24 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/19/2013 1:12:00 PM, Mysterious_Stranger wrote:
Tell me normal people. Is it considered normal to not experience any kind of attraction to any sex? I have never been concerned about this until recently when someone highlighted it to me. I also find the concept of love strange. Should I see a doctor?

You're asexual. Nothing to be ashamed of, no matter what your Health teacher says.