Deliberation on Homosexual OCD

Journalist Chadwick Moore wrote an opinion article in Out, a popular magazine, called “Homosexual OCD is a Thing, and Thousands of Americans Suffer From It“. In this article, he tells the story of a 13 year old girl named Olivia Loving and many other individuals who have experienced what is considered Homosexual OCD or HOCD. Moore argues that HOCD exists and that it entails obsessive worrying about whether or not oneself is homosexual. However, he also argues that it does not necessarily make someone homophobic because it is not that the individual who experiences HOCD views homosexuality as bad but rather the individual experiences “unwanted thoughts” about it.

As there is not real scientific literature on HOCD yet, there was a lot of skeptical doubt in the comments. In fact, it got quite intense and argumentative. People completely denounced this article, arguing that it is media produced by discomfort with different types of sexuality. Some even argue that this article makes homosexuality appear as a mental disease. Others retort back, arguing that such an article is not making commentary on whether or not different sexualities should be acknowledged, accepted, or appreciated but rather about the compulsive obsession of checking one’s own sexuality.

The arguments in the comments do not really classify as effective deliberation. Neither personal nor emotional experiences are incorporated (which I encourage). Facts are somewhat included but are not used very properly. However, one can only expect so much from a comments section on a magazine article. Values are somewhat established. People’s emphasis differ between a focus on the societal perception of homosexuality vs. the acceptance of a potentially rare type of OCD. Additionally, some solutions are proposed such as the advocacy to do scientific research before making definitive conclusions on the issue. Some argue to abandon the exploration of HOCD while others argue for readily accepting HOCD as a serious condition. I think I would count these as mini-solutions. While they do not propose societal change, it proposes a perspective.

However, a lot of things are missing in these comments. None of the comments really evaluate the pros and cons of each viewpoint effectively. Also, people do not update their own viewpoint in light of new information. This is probably tied to the lack of respect in these arguments (another important factor for effective deliberation). Mutual comprehension is not really ensured and people do not listen carefully to what each other says. At the very least, there is equality when it comes to speaking opportunities but that is inevitable as it is in a comments section.

Overall, whether or not the arguments are good, the debate over this article is an ineffective deliberation.