The half-response to the letter of 2018 has been received!

Message for 2020: Protect the scientific sovereignty and demographic security of Russia

Appeal of 2023 to Murashko M.A.: https://pro-lgbt.ru/open-letter-to-the-minister-of-health/

Addressee:

Minister of Health of the Russian Federation
Mikhail Albertovich Murashko
127051 Moscow, st. Neglinnaya, 25, 3rd entrance, “Expedition”
info@rosminzdrav.ru
press@rosminzdrav.ru
Public reception of the Ministry of Health to send a letter

Federal State Budgetary Institution Scientific Research Center named after V.P. Serbian »Ministry of Health of Russia
119034, Moscow, Kropotkinskiy per., D. 23
info@serbsky.ru

President of the Russian Society of Psychiatrists
Nikolay Grigorievich Neznanov
Russian Society of Psychiatrists
N. G. Neznanov
192019, St. Petersburg, ul. Ankylosing spondylitis, 3
rop@s-psy.ru

President of the Russian Psychological Society
Yuri Petrovich Zinchenko
Russian Psychological Society
Yu.P. Zinchenko
125009 Moscow, st. Mokhovaya, d.11, p. 9
dek@psy.msu.ru

Notification copy: recipients listed at the end of the document

Sender:

c. m. n. Lysov V.
member of a community initiative group
"Science for the truth"
science4truth@yandex.ru

Dear Mikhail Albertovich, dear Nikolai Grigorievich, dear Yuri Petrovich.

I ask you to answer the following question, first of all, from your position as people with the appropriate managerial potential, proper knowledge and authority, and also from your position as specialists with impressive experience in the field of psychiatry, psychology and neurology:

Does modern psychiatry and psychology in the Russian Federation have a concept of the norm of sexual attraction, which would correspond to the domestic theoretical, empirical and cultural experience?

I believe that at present, in a specialized approach to sex drive disorders in Russia, inconsistency and selectivity are observed, due to the influence of the so-called "Mainstream" science. In particular, it is not clear according to what criteria in the specialized professional environment of Russia (I mean certified psychiatrists, psychologists and psychotherapists), homosexual sexual preference is not considered a disorder, and forms such as sexual attraction to inanimate objects, children or animals are considered sexual disorders drives.

Below I will present the issue in expanded form, with the premise and comments.

Background to the Question

The above statement - which is, in my opinion, a selective and illogical approach to the definition of sex drive disorders - is based on an analysis of class V (F) of the International Classification of Diseases of the 10 revision of the World Health Organization (hereinafter ICD-10).

Russian medicine switched to ICD-10 from 01.01.1999 of the year according to Order of the Ministry of Health No. 170 of 27.05.1997 of the year.

It should be noted that in the Russian Federation, almost simultaneously with the introduction of ICD-10, the clinical manual “Models for the diagnosis and treatment of mental and behavioral disorders”, edited by prof. V.N. Krasnova and prof. I. Ya. Gurovich. This guide has provided a clear and indiscriminate definition of sexual norm and sexual disorder:

"The criteria for sexual norms are: paired, heterosexuality, maturity of partners, voluntariness of communication, desire for mutual agreement, lack of physical and moral damage to the health of partners and other persons. Disorder of sexual preference means any deviation from the norm in sexual behavior, regardless of its manifestations and nature, severity and etiological factors. This concept includes both disorders in the sense of deviation from social norms, and from medical norms ”¹.

The criteria for the sexual norm in our time: pairing, heterosexuality, sexual maturity, voluntary communication and the desire to preserve it, the absence of physical and moral damage to oneself and others. Correspondence of self-identification, as well as sexual and social behavior, to the biological sex, type and age of a person. Sexual deviation means any deviation from the sexual norm, regardless of its manifestations and nature, severity and etiological factors. This concept includes both deviations from social norms and from medical norms.

Definition "Science for Truth" 2023

But, by order Ministry of Health No. 1042 by 13.12.2012 the above clinical guide “Models for the diagnosis and treatment of mental and behavioral disorders” was canceled², that is, the criteria of sexual norm and sexual disorder were abolished. Accordingly, with 13.12.2012 in Russian psychiatry, the approach of the ICD-10 authors applies to sexual preference disorders.

Contradictions in the ICD-10 approach

In the ICD-10, it is stated that:

«by her own gender orientation is not considered a disorder»³.

ICD-10 does not specify the definition of the term “[sexual] orientation”. However, it can be concluded from the ICD-10 text that “[sexual] orientation” means a phenomenon identical to “[sexual] preference”. For example, in the paragraph “F66.1x Egodistonic Sex Orientation” it is mentioned:

"... sexual preference ...»⁴.

And also in the paragraph “F65 Sexual Preference Disorders” it is mentioned that:

«... problems related to gender orientation [moved to F66.-] ...»⁵.

The use of the term “orientation” in sexology and sexopathology is a phenomenon that has massively penetrated into domestic psychiatric and psychological science relatively recently, in the 1990's. In the second edition of the dictionary, edited by professors A.V. Petrovsky and M.G. Yaroshevsky "orientation" is defined as:

"Orientation of sexual erotic feelings and drives"⁶.

So, according to the logic of the authors of ICD-10, both “orientation” and “attraction” denote preference, orientation of sexual-erotic feelings, while “orientation” means a variation of sexual preference based on gender.

Therefore, the definition from ICD-10

«gender orientation alone is not considered a disorder»

identical to the following:

«sex preference alone is not considered a disorder».

Further, under the heading, “F65 Sexual Preference Disorders,” pedophilia is defined as:

«Sexual preference children»⁷.

Moreover, in the same section, in paragraph F65.8 it is indicated:

“Many other species can be found. violation of sexual preference and sexual activity, each of which is relatively rare. These include obscene phone calls, touching people, and rubbing them in crowded public places for sexual stimulation (i.e., frotting). with animals; compression of blood vessels or strangulation to enhance sexual arousal; preference for partners with any special anatomical defectsfor example, with amputated limb ... This heading also includes necrophilia»⁸.

So, according to the logic of the authors of the ICD-10, sexual desire [preference], aimed at a living object of the same sex as the subject of attraction (“homosexual orientation”), “in itself not considered as a disorder ”, while a sexual drive aimed at an immature object of the opposite sex drive with the subject (heterosexual pedophilia), in itself being considered as a sexual disorder. Also, sexual attraction directed at an inanimate object of the opposite sex with the subject of attraction ("heterosexual necrophilia") is in itself a sexual disorder. Moreover, sexual attraction directed at a living object of the opposite sex with the subject of attraction, which has anatomical defects, is in itself a sexual disorder. And, finally, sexual attraction directed at an object of a different biological species and opposite sex to the subject of attraction ("heterosexual bestiality") is in itself a sexual disorder.

This is precisely how the “logic” of the criteria presented in Class V (F) of the ICD-10 comes from.

Sexual attraction to an object of the opposite sex meets the criteria of sexual norm given in the clinical manual of Krasnov and Gurovich (see above), which was withdrawn by order of the Ministry of Health in the 2012 year.

Deviant forms of sexual attraction - to an object of another biological species, its gender, inanimate objects, etc. - do not meet these criteria. However, the ICD-10 for some reason distinguishes homosexual attraction from deviant forms of attraction (attraction, which is a disorder per se, see F65.0, F65.4, F65.8), indicating that it per se not a disorder.

On the basis of what is such a selection allowed? Such an arbitrary classification implies that, in comparison with heterosexual attraction, between homosexual deviant attraction (according to the above Krasnov and Gurovich guidelines) and other deviant forms (according to the above Krasnov and Gurovich guidelines) there is a difference, as a result of which homosexual attraction is “a kind of norm equal to heterosexuality. "

What is the difference?

Heterosexual attraction is a component of human health, since the behavioral realization of this attraction promotes reproduction - reproduction is an important indicator of health both at the ontogenetic and phylogenetic levels.

It is worth noting that reproductive disorders are recognized as a deviation from the norm by the World Health Organization itself (hereinafter WHO):

"Infertility is failure sexually activenot using contraception vapor achieve pregnancy in one year "⁹.

And also infertility is characterized as:

"A disease of the reproductive system, which is expressed in the absence of clinical pregnancy after 12 or more than regular months sex life without pregnancy protection "¹⁰.

The Big Medical Encyclopedia (the third edition edited by academician Boris Vasilievich Petrovsky) defines “sex life” as:

“The totality of somatic, mental and social processes and relationships, which are based on and through which sexual desire is satisfied”¹¹.

It is logical that WHO experts do not give additional characteristics of a couple and sex life from the above definitions: it goes without saying that, by default, we mean a couple of heterosexual individuals and a sexual act between heterosexual individuals, since this corresponds to the fundamental principles of biology and physiology.

Therefore, one of the fundamental criteria that clearly separates heterosexual attraction from non-heterosexual forms of attraction, and at the same time combining homosexual attraction with attraction to inanimate objects, objects of another biological species, immature objects (and others), is the possibility of reproduction as a result realization of attraction in the form of coitus. Realization of a hetero-sexual attraction in the form of hetero-sexual coitus (for example, between subjects of the same sex or of different species) excludes pregnancy.

At the ontogenetic level, in a particular individual with a homosexual attraction, the reproductive potential can be preserved. However, in this case, the reproductive potential is not associated with the realization of non-heterosexual attraction. And this again equates homosexual attraction with other forms of non-heterosexual attraction: in other words, the reproductive potential of an individual with an attraction to a different biological species, inanimate objects, immature objects (and others) can also be preserved. This fact is not an argument in favor of normativity. «sexual cravings» to children or «focus on some inanimate objects as stimulants of sexual arousal». Therefore, there can be no argument in favor of the normativity of sexual attraction to objects of the same sex.

Moreover, as already mentioned above, sexual intercourse, according to the definition of the Big Medical Encyclopedia, is based on the physiological complementarity of the genitals of men and women:

"Sexual intercourse (coitus; synonym: sexual intercourse, sexual rapprochement, copulation, intercourse) is a physiological process starting from the moment the penis is inserted into the vagina and ending with ejaculation and orgasm"¹².

Thus sexual intercourse [by which sexual desire is satisfied, see above] is possible only between two sexually mature individuals of the opposite sex.

Professor Andrei Anatolyevich Tkachenko in his work also gives a definition of the sexual norm based on the reproductive ability and physiological compatibility of the genitals of a man and a woman:

“Later (Godlewski, 1977) the concept of an individual norm was introduced, which emphasized biological aspects. In accordance with these criteria, such types of adult sexual behavior are normal that: 1) for unintentional reasons do not exclude or limit the possibility of genital-genital intercourse that could lead to fertilization; 2) are not characterized by a persistent tendency to avoid sexual intercourse "¹³.

In addition, the so-called substitute forms of sexual activity are even fraught with health risks: for example, the practice of anal eroticism, due to the anatomical inability of the final section of the gastrointestinal tract to a receptive role, is associated with a number of traumatic and infectious disorders. In support of this, there is a significant base of empirical observations: Markland et al. (2016)¹⁴, Yarns et al. (2016)¹⁵, Rice et al. (2016)¹⁶, Boehmer et al. (2015)¹⁷, Spornraft-Ragaller (2014)¹⁸… However, a detailed listing of the health risks associated with surrogate forms of sexual activity is not the purpose of this letter.

No consensus among experts

There is no consensus on the normativity of homosexual attraction among specialists in psychiatry and psychology. Affirmative consensus is observed at the level of some professional communities, the most famous and most cited of which are the American Psychiatric Association (hereinafter APA) and the American Psychological Association. However, these and even others do not represent all American associations of specialists. Negative consensus is observed, for example, among specialists of the Alliance for therapeutic choice¹⁹, American College of Pediatricians²⁰, American Christian Psychologists Association²¹ and the Catholic Medical Association²². Moreover, professional organizations of psychiatrists and psychologists are not only in the United States of America, but in Russia this is still not officially taken into account. As far as we think, the Russian Society of Psychiatrists and the Russian Psychological Society are independent structures, and not affiliates of the respective American societies. It is obvious that the domestic medical school (in particular psychiatry and psychology) has sufficient scientific and clinical experience in order not to accept arguments based on argumentum ad verecundiam. Moreover, as indicated in the preface to the classification of mental disorders in the ICD-10, the descriptions in this document are conditional and devoid of theory:

“The present descriptions and instructions do not carry a theoretical meaning and do not claim to be a comprehensive definition of the current state of knowledge of mental disorders. They are simply symptom groups and comments about which a large number of advisors and consultants in many countries of the world deal as an acceptable basis for defining category boundaries in the classification of mental disorders ”²³.

The scientific and medical classification should be based on strictly logical conclusions, and any agreement between specialists can only be the result of an interpretation of objective clinical and empirical data, and not dictated by any ideological considerations, even the most humane ones. The classification of mental disorders in the ICD-10 reflects a neglect of objective evidence for the sake of ideological interests, which may affect the health and well-being of patients due to failure to provide the necessary medical care.

I am sure that you are aware of a precedent with an adapted version of the International Classification of Diseases of the 9 revision, which took place in the 1983 year when section V “Mental disorders” was adapted for use in the USSR by an expert group of domestic specialists of the highest level. This adapted section has clearly stated what is the norm of sexual desire and what is a deviation from the norm. What prevents the modern professional community of psychiatrists and psychologists from not accepting the controversial views of some American experts on the approach to sexual desire disorders?

Empirical argumentation and the logical component of the approach to incorporate homosexual attraction into a variety of sexual norms have been criticized in numerous scientific publications, see for example Whitehead (2018)²⁴, Mayer and McHugh (2016)²⁵, Kinney (2015)²⁶, Rosik et al. (2012)²⁷, Cameron and Cameron (2012)²⁸, Schumm (2012)²⁹, Phelan et al. (2009)³⁰ and more

In addition to cultural studies, there are also psychopathological models of homosexual attraction: Nicolosi (2004)³¹, Vasilchenko and Valliulin (2002)³², Liebig (2001)³³, Tkachenko (1997)³⁴, van der Aardweg (1985)³⁵ ... Again, a detailed listing of etiopathogenetic and therapeutic approaches to same-sex attraction is not the purpose of this letter.

The danger of following the socio-political «mainstream»

I consider it important to emphasize that some researchers point to the dictatorship of sociopolitical ideas over the principles of scientific logic in determining sexual norms: Martin (2016)³⁶, Jussim et al. (2015)³⁷, Duarte et al. (2015)³⁸, Schumm (2010)³⁹ and more

Normalization of same-sex attraction (along with a number of other deviations, the listing of which does not belong to the purpose of this letter) according to such opinions refers to the so-called "Mainstream" science, that is, the following in the wake of certain political views, and so-called "Political correctness."

In the vanguard of “mainstream” views in sexology, the term “sexual orientation”, implying a combination of “NORMAL VARIATIONS” of attraction, began to be used in relation to an increasing number of deviations.

This includes sexual attraction to animals (Beetz (2004)⁴⁰, Aggrawal (2011)⁴¹, Miletski, 2017)⁴² - the so-called "Zoosexual orientation." T.N. “Pedosexual orientation” refers to sexual attraction to children (Harvard Medical School (2010)⁴³, Seto (2012)⁴⁴, Berlin, 2014)⁴⁵. This term [“orientation”] is also used to refer to attraction to inanimate objects (Marsh, 2010)⁴⁶ or lack of sexual desire per se (the so-called “asexual orientation.” see Bogaert (2015)⁴⁷, Helm (2016)⁴⁸).

And indeed, as already mentioned above, the criteria according to which same-sex attraction is defined as a kind of norm of sexual behavior are equally applicable to any manifestation of sexual desire in general. In the International Classification of Diseases of the 11 revision (hereinafter ICD-11), sexual attraction to children, animals, inanimate objects, etc. - is the norm per se, they [these forms of sex drive] are considered a disorder only if they cause the subject “significant stress”⁴⁹.

That is, the approach to all forms of deviant sexual attraction essentially repeats the path “traveled” by homosexuality, when as a result of the events of 1968 – 1973, same-sex attraction was first excluded from the list of deviations by voting, for which there are big questions (see, for example, Sorba (2007)⁵⁰, Satinover (1994)⁵¹, Bayer (1981)⁵²) It was decided that only such a same-sex attraction, which is combined with internal stress and rejection, is a deviation (the so-called “ego-dystonic homosexuality”), and it was even agreed that:

“... no longer listing him on the list of psychiatric disorders, we do not say that this is“ normal ”and is equivalent to heterosexuality” (1974 year)⁵³.

And later, the same organizations changed their minds to:

“Both heterosexual and homosexual behavior are normal expressions of human sexuality (...) Lesbian, homosexual and bisexual relationships are normal forms of human relationships” (2008)⁵⁴.

According to the ICD-11, such forms of deviations as pedophilia or bestiality are at the stage of "standardization", more or less corresponding to the stage of the 1973 of the year for homosexuality, i.e. they are not yet considered "a normal manifestation of human sexuality", but are no longer considered deviations as such, but only when combined with internal stress and rejection.

Legal conflict risk

Also, under the current conditions of the absence of one's own clear position with regard to homosexual attraction as a deviation from the sexual norm, legal conflict arises when providing psychotherapeutic assistance to minors who may seek specialized help when faced with homosexual urges during puberty, for example, due to sexual violence. One of the widespread approaches, including those for helping children, in Western countries, which, among other things, is enforced through legal means, is the so-called supporting or «gay approving» therapy. As part of this approach, it is proposed to inform the minor patient that allegedly “a consensus has been reached in science”, that his condition is supposedly «normal and positive kind of sexual orientation of a person» not requiring any change.

First of all, as indicated above, in reality in science there is no consensus on deviations of sexual desire, only dictates of the so-called «political correctness ”in some societies.

A legal conflict applies to every psychotherapist in Russia when working with adolescents, since domestic law establishes that:

“Advocacy of non-traditional sexual relations among minors, expressed in the dissemination of information, aimed at forming non-traditional sexual attitudes in minors, the attractiveness of non-traditional sexual relations, distorted ideas about the social equivalence of traditional and non-traditional sexual relationsor the imposition of information on non-traditional sexual relations, causing interest in such relationships ”⁵⁵.

Conclusion

So, the essence of my question can be briefly reduced to the following: if (according to the ICD-10 approved in Russia) homosexual attraction per se is the norm, then what arguments can be used to ensure that all deviant drives (e.g. pedophilia or bestiality) per se remained deviations?

In the case when there are no clear criteria, as, for example, in the clinical manual edited by prof. V.N. Krasnova and prof. I. Ya. Gurovich or in the work of prof. A. A. Tkachenko (see above), the understanding of the norm of sexual attraction becomes vague, relativistic. All arguments made by proponents of normative homosexual attraction apply to all sexual deviations. In the "mainstream" science, this has become a fact - an example is the approach to "paraphilia" in the Diagnostic and statistical manual for mental disorders of the 5 edition and in the International Classification of Diseases of the 11 revision.

Does this mean that a similar situation will soon be established in domestic psychiatry and psychology - a lot of different deviations, as well as homosexual attraction will become the norm?

I adhere to an unambiguous interpretation: there is a norm of sexual attraction (mutual attraction of sexually mature men and women) and deviant forms (for children, for their sex, for animals, etc.).

I hope that you will not ignore this letter.

Best regards

c. m. V. Lysov

Open letter published on the site https://pro-lgbt.ru/906  You can subscribe in the comments.

Note: cause; on which I decided to send a letter to so many recipients, is the fear that this message will not reach the main recipients. By acquainting as many interested persons and organizations as possible with the stated question, the possibility of hushing up this topic, in my opinion, will decrease. Therefore, I urge everyone who is interested in the affected issue to also send this open letter to these and other recipients, with their signature.

Copies of this open letter were sent to:

Presidential Commissioner for the Rights of the Child
Anna Yuryevna Kuznetsova
125993 Moscow, GSP-3, Miusskaya sq., D.7 p. 1
obr@deti.gov.ru

President of the Professional Psychotherapeutic League
Professor Doctor of Sciences Viktor V. Makarov
115280 Moscow, (m. Avtozavodskaya) 2-th Avtozavodsky passage, d. 4, Department of Psychotherapy and Sexology RMAPO
center@oppl.ru

Central Spiritual Administration of Muslims of Russia
450057 Ufa, Tukaev street, house 50
info@cdum.ru

The synodal department for the relationship of the Church with society and the media
119334 Moscow, Andreevskaya Embankment, 2
contact@sinfo-mp.ru

Information service of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Mother of God in Moscow
123557 Moscow, st. Malaya Gruzinskaya, d. 27 / 13, p. 1
info@cathmos.ru

All-Russian Public Organization for the Protection of the Family “Parental All-Russian Resistance (RVS)”
rvs@rvs.su

Public Commissioner for Family Protection in St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region
Olga Nikolaevna Baranets
detispb@bk.ru

Political Party Reception Office
Liberal Democratic Party of Russia
107045, Moscow, Lukov Lane, 9, p. 1
info@ldpr.ru

Political Party Faction Press Service
Communist Party of the Russian Federation
press-sluzhba@kprf.ru

Head of the Committee for Social Policy of the Political Party of the All-Russian Public Movement “Patriots of the Great Fatherland
Tatyana Gennadevna Soboleva
socpolitik@pvo.center

Minister of Health of the Chechen Republic
Candidate of Medical Sciences Elkhan Abdullaevich Suleymanov
info@minzdravchr.ru

Minister of Health of the Republic of Tatarstan
candidate of medical sciences Marat Nailevich Sadykov
minzdrav@tatar.ru

Editor-in-chief of the newspaper “Zavtra”
Alexander Andreevich Prokhanov
zavtra@zavtra.ru

Honored Doctor of the Russian Federation Jan Genrikhovich Goland
kor-nn@yandex.ru

Interregional social movement "Family, love, Fatherland"
semlot-org@yandex.ru

Interregional public organization "For the rights of the family"
profamilia.ru@gmail.com

Professor of the Department of State and Municipal Administration Doctor of Sciences Igor Vladislavovich Ponkin
iv.ponkin@migsu.ranepa.ru

Information and Analytical Service
Russian folk line
info@ruskline.ru

Yelena Vladimirovna Kastorskaya, Candidate of Legal Sciences, Associate Professor, Department of Criminal Law
mihail.kastorskii@mail.ru

Assistant, Department of Ethics, PFUR
Candidate of Philosophy Ivan Evgenievich Lapshin
superdevice@mail.ru

Associate Professor, Department of Social Medicine and Social Work, RGUTiS
Candidate of Pedagogical Sciences Natalya Mikhailovna Zorina
nmz56@yandex.ru

Notes

1. Krasnov V.N., Gurovich I.Ya. (Ed.) Clinical guidelines: models for the diagnosis and treatment of mental and behavioral disorders. M .: Moscow Research Institute of Psychiatry, 1999. - 224 sec.
2. Clinical management approval order invalidated
3. Kazakovtsev B.A., Goland V.B. (ed.) Mental disorders and behavioral disorders (F00-F99) (Class V ICD-10, adapted for use in the Russian Federation). M.: Prometheus, 2013. – 584 p., note to section F66, highlighted by me
4. Ibid., Rubric F66.1x
5. Ibid., Heading F65
6. Brief Psychological Dictionary / Ed. A.V. Petrovsky, M.G. Yaroshevsky; ed. L.A. Karpenko. - 2 edition, extended, revised and supplemented. - Rostov-on-Don: Phoenix, 1998. - 512 sec.
7. Kazakovtsev B.A., Goland V.B. (Ed.), F65.4 column, highlighted by me
8. Ibid., Section F65.8, highlighted by me
9. WHO guidelines for laboratory testing and processing of human sperm, 2010. WHO translation http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/topics/infertility/definitions/ru/highlighted by me
10. Glossary of Terms of ART, 2009 Revised ICMART and WHO Glossary of Terms of ART, 2009 www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/infertility/art_terminology2_ru.pdfhighlighted by me
11. Big Medical Encyclopedia, 3 edition, available online bme.org / index.php / sv sex life
12. Ibid., Sv sexual intercourse
13. Abnormal sexual behavior / Ed. A.A. Tkachenko. - M.: RIO GNSSSiSP them. V.P. Serbian, 1997. - 426 sec.
14. Markland et al. Anal Intercourse and Fecal Incontinence: Evidence from the 2009 – 2010 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. The American Journal of Gastroenterology volume 111, pages 269 – 274 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1038/ajg.2015.419
15. Yarns et al. The Mental Health of Older LGBT Adults. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2016 Jun; 18 (6): 60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-016-0697-y
16. Rice CE, Maierhofer C, Fields KS, Ervin M, Lanza ST, Turner AN. Beyond Anal Sex: Sexual Practices among MSM and Associations with HIV and Other Sexually Transmitted Infections. The journal of sexual medicine. 2016; 13 (3): 374-382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2016.01.001
17. Boehmer U, Ronit U. Cancer and the LGBT Community. Unique Perspectives from Risk to Survivorship. Springer, 2015. https://www.springer.com/la/book/9783319150567
18. Spornraft-Ragaller P. [Syphilis: the new epidemic among MSM]. MMW Fortschr Med. 2014 Jun 12; 156 Suppl 1: 38-43; quiz 44. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25026856
19. Alliance for Therapeutic Choice, https://www.therapeuticchoice.com/
20. American College of Paediatricians, https://www.acpeds.org/
21. American Association of Christian Counselors, https://www.aacc.net
22. Catholic Medical Association, http://www.cathmed.org/
23. Kazakovtsev B.A., Goland V.B. (Ed.), Introduction, highlighted by me
24. Whitehead N. My Genes Made Me Do It! Homosexuality and the scientific evidence. 5th edition, Whitehead Associates 2018; www.mygenes.co.nz/mgmmdi_pdfs/2018FullBook.pdf
25. Mayer LS, McHugh PR. Sexuality and Gender: Findings from the Biological, Psychological, and Social Sciences. The New Atlantis, Number 50, Fall 2016, p. 116. http://www.thenewatlantis.com/sexualityandgender
26. Kinney III RL. Homosexuality and scientific evidence: On suspect anecdotes, antiquated data, and broad generalizations The Linacre Quarterly 82 (4) 2015, 364 – 390 https://doi.org/10.1179/2050854915Y.0000000002
27... Rosik, CH, Jones, SL, & Byrd, AD (2012). Knowing what we do not know about sexual orientation change efforts. American Psychologist, 67 (6), 498-499. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0029683
28. Cameron P, Cameron K. Re-examining Evelyn Hooker: Setting the record straight with comments on Schumm's (2012) reanalysis. Marriage and Family Review. 2012; 48: 491 – 523. https://doi.org/10.1080/01494929.2012.700867
29. Schumm WR. Re-examining a landmark research study: A teaching editorial. Marriage and Family Review. 2012; 8: 465 – 89. https://doi.org/10.1080/01494929.2012.677388
30. Phelan JE, et al. What Research Shows: NARTH's Response to the APA Claims on Homosexuality A Report of the Scientific Advisory Committee of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality. Journal Of Human Sexuality 2009, Volume 1.
31... Nicolosi J. Reparative therapy of male homosexuality. A new clinical approach. - Lancham, Boulder, New York, Toronto, Oxford: A Jason Aronson Book. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2004. - XVIII, 355 p.
32. Vasilchenko G.S., Valiullin R.N. About some nuances of providing medical care for male homosexuality // Actual problems of sexology and medical psychology: Materials of a scientific and practical conference dedicated to the 15 anniversary of the Department of Sexology and Medical Psychology of the Kharkov Medical Academy of Postgraduate Education. - Kharkov, 2002. - S. 47 – 48.
33. Libikh S.S. Human Sexual Health // Guide to Sexology / Ed. S.S. Liebig. - St. Petersburg, Kharkov, Minsk: Peter, 2001. - S. 26 – 41.
34. Abnormal sexual behavior / Ed. A.A. Tkachenko. - M.: RIO GNSSSiSP them. V.P. Serbian, 1997. - 426 sec.
35. van den Aardweg G. Male Homosexuality and the Neuroticism Factor: An Analysis of Research Outcomes. Dynamic Psychotherapy; 1985: 79: 79. http://psycnet.apa.org/record/1986-17173-001
36. Martin CC. How Ideology Has Hindered Sociological Insight. Am Soc (2016) 47: 115 130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12108-015-9263-z
37. Jussim L, et al. Ideological Bias in Social Psychological Research. Conservative Criminology 2015, June 1st.
38. Duarte JL, et al. Political diversity will improve social psychological science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences (2015) https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X14000430
39. Schumm WR. Statistical Requirements For Properly Investigating A Null Hypothesis. Psychological Reports, 2010, 107, 3, 953-971. https://doi.org/10.2466/02.03.17.21.PR0.107.6.953-971
40. Beetz AM. Bestiality / Zoophilia: A Scarcely Investigated Phenomenon Between Crime, Paraphilia, and Love, Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 4: 2, 1-36, https://doi.org/10.1300/J158v04n02_01
41. Aggrawal A. A new classification of zoophilia. Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine Volume 18, Issue 2, February 2011, Pages 73-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jflm.2011.01.004
42. Miletski H. Zoophilia: Another Sexual Orientation? Arch Sex Behav. 2017 Jan; 46 (1): 39-42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-016-0891-3
43. Harvard Mental Health Letter. Pessimism about pedophilia. July 2010. http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/pessimism-about-pedophilia
44. Seto MC. Is Pedophilia a Sexual Orientation? Archives of Sexual Behavior 41 (1): 231-6. DOI: 10.1007 / s10508-011-9882-6
45. Berlin FS. Pedophilia and DSM-5: The Importance of Clearly Defining the Nature of a Pedophilic Disorder. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law 2014, 42 (4) 404-407
46. Marsh A. Love Among the Objectum Sexuals. Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality. Vol. 13. March 1st 2010
47. Bogaert AF. Asexuality: What It Is and Why It Matters. Journal of Sex Research, 52 (4), 362 – 379, 2015 https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2015.1015713
48. Helm KM. Hooking Up: The Psychology of Sex and Dating. ABC-CLIO: Santa Barbara, 2016; page 32
49... In the original in English: “in order the… disorder to be diagnosed… the individual has to be markedly distressed…”. ICD-11 for Mortality and Morbidity Statistics (ICD-11 MMS) 2018 version Version for preparing implementation. Paraphilic disorders: 6D30-36. https://icd.who.int/browse11/l-m/en
50. Sorba R. The “Born Gay” Hoax. Ryan Sorba Inc. First edition 2007, pp. 15 – 28
51. Satinover J. Neither Scientific nor Democratic. The Linacre Quarterly. Vol. 66: No. 2, Article 7. 1999; 84
52. Bayer R. Homosexuality and American Psychiatry: The Politics of Diagnosis. Xnumx
53. Homosexuality and Sexual Orientation Disturbance: Proposed Change in DSM-II, 6th Printing, page 44 position statement (retired). The American Psychiatric Association, APA Document Reference No. Xnumx
54. American Psychological Association (American Psychological Association). (Xnumx) Answers to your questions: For a better understanding of sexual orientation and homosexuality. (Answers to your questions: For a better understanding of sexual orientation and homosexuality.) Source: http://www.apa.org/topics/sexuality/orientation.aspx
55. Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses” dated December 30.12.2001, 195 N 03.08.2018-FZ (as amended on August 26.09.2018, XNUMX) (as amended and supplemented, entered into force on September XNUMX, XNUMX), emphasis added

---

THE MINISTRY'S RESPONSE TO AN OPEN LETTER ABOUT DEPATOLOGIZATION OF HOMOSEXUALISM IN THE ICD

In September 2018, the Science for Truth group sent an open letter to the Minister of Health Veronika Skvortsova, the presidents of the Russian psychological and psychiatric society, as well as religious political and public organizations (https://pro-lgbt.ru/906/).

Of all the recipients, only the public representative for family protection in St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region responded by sending an open letter to the above authorities on his own behalf (http://katyusha.org/view?id=10649) and the Interregional Social Movement "Family, Love, Fatherland".

A reply from the Ministry of Health was received on this appeal: "Your opinion has been received, thank you."

Both the Ministry of Health and the presidents of psychological and psychiatric associations preferred to remain silent about a politically charged topic. At the same time, an official response was given to the request of LGBT activists from Pyatigorsk recognizing the priority of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) directory over Russian ideas about sexual behavior standards. 

The Ministry of Health reacted differently to the next request of another member of the Science for Truth group by redirecting the request to experts at the FSBI NICC PN named after V.P. Serbian »Ministry of Health of Russia.

General Director of FSBI “NICC PN them. V.P. Serbsky ”, MD, professor Z.I. Kekelidze confirmed the relevance of the questions raised in the letter and pointed out the need for a broad discussion in the scientific community of psychiatrists, sexologists and psychologists. 

Taking into account the national interests of the peoples of the Russian Federation described in the message of President Vladimir Putin, along with the ongoing discussions on the ICD-11 project, this discussion should contribute to the development of a clear position of the Russian scientific community regarding the diagnostic criteria for psychosexual disorders.

It should be especially noted that the interests and moral values ​​of the peoples of the Russian Federation, as well as the strategic plans for the development of Russia, contradict the order of the Western elites to reduce the world's population through the indoctrination of the younger generation: the propaganda of abortion, unnatural sexual behavior and the destruction of the institution of the family, committed under the guise sexual "education". 

As you know, from the middle of the 20th century, under the banner of the “overpopulation crisis,” the world has been undergoing a global campaign aimed at drastically reducing the birth rate and reducing the population. This policy has been repeatedly voiced on all world platforms, including in the scientific publications of the Club of Rome, which brings together representatives of the world political, financial, cultural and scientific elite. In most developed countries, the birth rate has already fallen significantly below the level of simple reproduction of the population, and the number of older people is equal to or more than the number of children. Marriage increasingly ends in divorce and is replaced by cohabitation. Extramarital affairs, homosexuality and transgender phenomena have gained priority status. Depopulation, not mythical "overpopulation" has become the new reality of the world.

In 1954, the US Population Bomb pamphlet was published, where the threat of high population growth was inflated and the urgent need for birth control was stated. In 1959, the US State Department issued a report on global population trends, which concluded that its rapid growth threatens international stability. In 1969, in his address to Congress, US President Nixon called population growth “one of the most serious problems for the fate of mankind” and called for urgent action. The Kingsley Davis demographer, one of the central figures in the development of birth control policies, along with the popularization of contraceptives, abortion and sterilization, proposed "changing sexual morals" and promoting "unnatural forms of intercourse." Davis's wife, a sociologist Judith Blake, proposed abolishing tax and housing benefits that encourage childbearing and removing legal and social sanctions against homosexuality. Preston Cloud, representing the US National Academy of Sciences, recommended that the government legalize abortion and homosexual unions. In the same year, Frederick Jaffe, vice president of the International Federation of Family Planning (IFES) issued a memorandum in which “encouraging the growth of homosexuality” was considered as one of the methods to reduce the birth rate. Three months later, the Stonewall riots broke out and pressure began on the American Psychiatric Organization (APA), which culminated in an administrative decision to exclude homosexuality from the classification of disorders, which allowed the start of the popularization of same-sex relationships. In 1970, the author of the theory of demographic transition, Frank Noutstein, speaking at the National Military College in front of senior officers noted that “homosexuality is protected on the basis that it helps to reduce population growth” (more: https://pro-lgbt.ru/13/).

Under pressure from gay activists who staged shock events and directly participated in “depatologization,” the American Psychiatric Association (APA) held a scandalous vote to exclude homosexuality from the list of mental disorders. The diagnosis "302.0 - homosexuality" was replaced by the diagnosis "302.00 - egodistonic homosexuality" and transferred to the category of "psychosexual disorders."

Barbara Gitting, the mother of the Gay Rights Movement, later frankly admitted: “It was never a medical decision, and that’s why it all happened so fast. After all, only three years have passed since the first shock event at the APA conference and before the vote of the board of directors, which excluded homosexuality from the list of mental disorders. It was a political decision ... We were healed overnight with a stroke of the pen ”(more: https://pro-lgbt.ru/295/).

In 1987, APA quietly removed all references to homosexuality from its nomenclature, this time without even bothering to vote. The World Health Organization (WHO) simply followed in the footsteps of the APA and in the 1990 year also removed homosexuality from its classification of diseases, retaining only its egodistonic (problematic for the individual) manifestations. In the scientific and popular science environment, questions are increasingly being raised about the recognition of bestiality and pedophilia as sexual orientations by analogy with homosexuality.

It should be noted that in the Russian Federation, almost simultaneously with the introduction of the ICD-10, by order of the Ministry of Health No. 311 dated 06.08.1999, the clinical guide "Models for the diagnosis and treatment of mental and behavioral disorders" was approved, edited by prof. V. N. Krasnova and prof. I. Ya. Gurovich. This guide provided a clear and non-selective definition of sexual norm and sexual dysfunction: “The criteria for a sexual norm are: pairing, heterosexuality, maturity of partners, voluntariness of communication, striving for mutual consent, absence of physical and mental harm to the health of partners and others. Disorder of sexual preference means any deviation from the norm in sexual behavior, regardless of its manifestations and nature, degree of severity and etiological factors. This concept includes both disorders in the sense of deviation from Social norms, and from the norms of medical "

In the first months of her appointment, the Minister of Health of Russia Veronika Skvortsova, by order No. 1042 of 13 on December 2012 of the year, declared this manual invalidated, in effect, abolishing the concepts of the “sexual norm” in force in the Russian Federation and thereby opening a “window of opportunity” for committing LGBT people -revolution in our country (https://vk.cc/8YHcgs).

As the authors of the ICD-10 themselves indicate, the directory descriptions are conditional: “The present descriptions and instructions do not carry a theoretical meaning and do not claim to be a comprehensive definition of the current state of knowledge of mental disorders. They are simply symptom groups and comments about which a large number of advisors and consultants in many countries of the world deal as an acceptable basis for defining category boundaries in the classification of mental disorders ”.

Scientific and medical classification should be based on strictly logical conclusions, and any “agreement” between specialists can only be the result of an interpretation of objective clinical and empirical data, and not dictated by any ideological considerations, even the most humane ones. The classification of mental disorders in the ICD-10 reflects a neglect of objective evidence for the sake of ideological interests, which may affect the health and well-being of patients because of the failure to provide them with the necessary medical care.

On 7 on May 2018, President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin signed a Decree “On national goals and strategic objectives of the development of the Russian Federation for the period up to the 2024 year”, the first paragraph of which spoke about ensuring sustainable natural growth in the population of the Russian Federation. Since the propaganda of homosexuality proposed to reduce the birth rate and undermining the traditional family values ​​of LGBT ideology has proven its effectiveness, punishment for propaganda of homosexuality, including criminal liability, and restoration of approaches to determining the norm of sexual behavior are required.

The President also signed the Federal Law of December 25.12.2018, 489 No. XNUMX-FZ “On Amendments to the Federal Law “On the Fundamentals of Protecting the Health of Citizens in the Russian Federation” on Clinical Recommendations.”

New clinical guidelines will be introduced gradually, and work on them should be completed before 31 декабря 2021 года.

According to federal law, clinical guidelines will become the basis for medical care and will be mandatory.

Clinical recommendations are subject to consideration by a special body - scientific and practical advice, formed from representatives of scientific, educational and medical organizations subordinate to the Ministry of Health of Russia.

The Scientific and Practical Council will decide on the approval, rejection of clinical recommendations or their direction for revision. The responsibility to create a council, approve the regulation on it and approve the composition of the council rests with the Ministry of Health of Russia (more: https://vk.cc/8R2RoC)

In response to an open letter from the Science for Truth group, the Russian scientific community received an official invitation to discuss issues related to preserving the sovereignty of the peoples of Russia in relation to Western “values” promoted to reduce the population in accordance with the Cairo Accords of the 1994 year.

The Oxford Historical Dictionary of Psychiatry notes that while in some areas, such as the origins of schizophrenia, psychiatry tried to be as scientific as possible, in matters related to sexuality, psychiatry behaved like "the servant of its cultural and political masters." Her malleability is most evident in the field of homosexuality. 

As the President said in an address to the Federal Assembly: “Russia was and will be a sovereign, independent state. It’s just an axiom, it will either be like that, or it won’t be at all ”. Russia should not become a "servant of foreign cultural and political masters."

Join our work! We invite participants in the scientific and practical council deciding on clinical recommendations in the field of psychosexual disorders to familiarize themselves with the materials of the site https://pro-lgbt.ru/.

Science for Truth Group https://vk.com/science4truth
Group website: https://pro-lgbt.ru/

Additionally

Appeal: Protect Russia's Scientific Sovereignty and Demographic Security

Homosexuality: mental disorder or not?

Jan Goland on the treatment of homosexuality (exclusive video interview)

Garnik Kocharyan on reparative therapy for homosexuals

Advocacy turns teens into transgenders