I remember the 1972 atmosphere, and, yes, there was a large political upheaval when homosexuality was removed. Whether one considered it a research-driven change or not depended on your opinion of homosexuality.
Certainly, there are people still selling “treatments” to “cure” homosexuality. Now, however, they can’t get insurance companies to cover the costs anymore - patients have to pay out of pocket.
But more and more people have to pay out of pocket for medical, dental and psychiatric procedures these days. Psychiatric in-stay treatments aren’t covered, in most csses, unless they are considered emergencies that threaten the life of the patient. Even eating disorders have to fall into a critical category.
Of course, if there was a pill that someone developed which ostensibly “cured” homosexuality, then perhaps that category would be once again included. So many of these psychiatric illnesses seem to be nothing more than excuses to sell more pharmaceuticals. I’d argue that the influence of drug companies is much larger on the medical community than any political argument, from which the doctors are well-shielded.
I was still in High School and wasn't paying attention to the field of psychology (although I ultimately earned a degree in Psychology, oddly enough).
Of course, if there was a pill that someone developed which ostensibly “cured” homosexuality, then perhaps that category would be once again included. So many of these psychiatric illnesses seem to be nothing more than excuses to sell more pharmaceuticals. I’d argue that the influence of drug companies is much larger on the medical community than any political argument, from which the doctors are well-shielded.
If there were a pill to "cure" homosexuality there would be an outcry that it's hateful to market such a thing. I know that the ex-homosexuals get treated quite badly, both by the media and the homosexual community because their mere existence counters the lie that one has no choice in being homosexual or not.