I find it astounding how people who clearly don’t understand the science of psychology will attempt to use outdated psychological terms and findings to justify their positions. As if what was psychological fact 10 years ago will always hold true in the present. As if the psychologists of today, who are infinitely more equipped to understand how the brain works than their predecessors of the 20th century, are somehow less authoritative or informed and thus less trustworthy in their conclusions. Like shit people, you may as well be livid that Freud is no longer the most relevant psychologist of the day with how much we’ve moved pat his works.
Fun fact: It’s not really that astounding. Reactionaries always use disingenuous arguments and insincere appeals to authority to forward their points. Because without their hollow appeals to “disorders” and normativity, they have nothing. And they know that. But it’s easier for them to pretend that science is stagnant and does not evolve to new understandings because otherwise they’d have to stop pretending as if they’re somehow above the liberal “hive mind” or that their incorrect whining is anything more than just that. It’s the same for climate change deniers, the same for antivaxxers, and the same for opponents of LGBTQ+ communities. Their attempts to use cherrypicked scientific “evidence” to legitimize their arguments against the actual scientific community would be laughable if the causes they support weren’t so disgusting.
Representation is not propaganda. Diversity, especially when clearly not forced, is not an attack on established norms and trends and is certainly not an attack against you. Unless of course you’re so hateful that you can’t stand to share even a fraction of a medium with someone that differs from you.