View source for Hebephilia as mental disorder? A historical, cross-cultural, sociological, cross-species, non-clinical empirical, and evolutionary review

<b>Abstract</b> Blanchard et al.(2009)demonstratedthathebephiliais a genuine sexual preference, but then proposed, without argument or evidence, that it should be designated as a mental disorder in the DSM-5. A series of Letters-to-the-Editor criticized this proposal as a <i>non sequitur</i>. Blanchard (2009), in rebuttal, reaffirmed his position, but without adequately addressing some central criticisms. In this article, we examine hebephilia-as-disorder in full detail. Unlike Blanchard et al., we discuss definitions of mental disorder, examine extensive evidence from a broad range of sources, and consider alternative (i.e., non-pathological) explanations for hebephilia. We employed Wakefield's (1992b) harmful dysfunction approach to disorder, which holds that a condition only counts as a disorder when it is a failure of a naturally selected mechanism to function as designed, which is harmful to the individual in the current environment. We also considered a harmful-for-others approach to disorder (Brülde, 2007). Examination of historical, cross-cultural, sociological, cross-species, non-clinical empirical, and evolutionary evidence and perspectives indicated that hebephilic interest is an evolved capacity and hebephilic preference an expectable distributional variant, both of which were adaptively neutral or functional, not dysfunctional, in earlier human environments. Hebephilia's conflict with modern society makes it an evolutionary mismatch, not a genuine disorder. Though it should not be classified as a disorder, it could be entered in the <i>DSM</i>'s 5-code section, used for non-disordered conditions that create significant problems in present-day society. [...]<br>
<br>
Concluding Remarks<br>
<br>
The broad-based scientific evidence indicates that hebephilia is not a dysfunction, and therefore cannot justifiably be declared a mental disorder in the <i>DSM</i>. Yet it remains that hebephilia misfits contemporary Western socio-economic structures and egalitarian ideals, often eliciting hyperbolic social reaction. In this context, such behavior is problematic for all concerned: the hebephilic actor, his or her junior partner or target, and significant others connected to them. Recognizing this, hebephilia might usefully be entered in the <i>DSM</i>'s 5-code section, which recognizes the need to treat non-disordered conditions associated with significant problems in present-day society. This solution avoids adding yet a new chapter to psychiatry's troubled history of scientific misclassification - especially notable vis-à-vis sexual behavior - and yet provides direction for psychiatry in helping those with hebephilic impulses to control their behavior.<br>
<br>
<i>source: Article 'Hebephilia as Mental Disorder? A Historical, Cross-Cultural, Sociological, Cross-Species, Non-Clinical Empirical, and Evolutionary Review' by Bruce Rind & Richard Yuill; www.emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/Rind-Bruce-and-Richard-Yuill.-Hebephilia-as-Mental-Disorder-A-Historical-Cross-Cultural-Sociological-Cross-Species-Non-Clinical-Empirical-and-Evolutionary-Review.-Archives-of-sexual-behavior-2012-1.pdf; Archives of Sexual Behavior; Received: 30 September 2009; Revised: 24 August 2011; Accepted: 24 August 2011</i>

[[Category:Bruce Rind]]
[[Category:Richard Yuill]]
[[Category:Ephebophilia/Hebephilia]]
[[Category:Efebofilie]]
[[Category:Sickness]]
[[Category:Ziekte]]
[[Category:DSM]]
[[Category:Ray Blanchard]]
[[Category:Jerome C. Wakefield]]
[[Category:Bengt Brülde]]