Are you saying that in the cases of mental illness, especially those which revolve around issues of identity, you have to have to have a "compelling, valid, and peer-reviewed evidence" that supports an assertion that those conditions are pathological? You can't just observe the social and personal trauma associated with the condition?
All the sick and/or violent people in institutions because of their danger to themselves and others couldn't have been diagnosed and placed there without that "compelling, valid, and peer-reviewed evidence"?
If a kleptomaniac steals from you every time he is in your house, do you need "compelling, valid, and peer-reviewed evidence" to boot him out?
Can't you just note that their condition is sick when contrasted with entire mass of normal people, and how the structure of reality is obviously set up? You need astudy, the conclusions of which everyone must agree?
Incidently, how is homosexuality equivilent to hetrosexuality? 