I’m not sure that’s what the criticism is about. The law references ego-dystonic sexual orientation as one of the “mental illnesses” it covers. From Wikipedia (edits mine):
Ego-dystonic sexual orientation is a highly controversial mental health diagnosis that was included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) from 1980 to 1987 and in the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) from 1990 to 2019. Individuals could be diagnosed with ego-dystonic sexual orientation if their sexual orientation or attractions were at odds with their idealized self-image. It describes a conflict between the sexual orientation a person wishes to have and their actual sexual orientation.
The addition constituted a political compromise between those who believed that homosexuality was a pathological condition and those who believed it was a normal variant of sexuality. Under pressure from mounting scientific evidence that the desire to be heterosexual is a common phase in a gay, lesbian, or bisexual person’s identity development rather than a mental illness, the diagnosis was removed. Leading up to the ICD-11, a WHO-appointed working group recommended its deletion, due to a lack of clinical utility and the potential for negative consequences. The ICD-11 does not include any diagnostic categories that can be applied to people on the basis of sexual orientation, bringing the ICD in line with the DSM-5.
The current manuals for mental disorders (ICD-11, DSM-5) already include diagnostic categories that can be used as a basis for providing healthcare to LGBTIQ+ people (e g., gender dysphoria). The criticism of the Peruvian law is that it is based on outdated categories that regard the actual sexual identities and orientations as a whole as “mental illnesses” (rather than the affective and emotional issues that LGBTIQ+ are vulnerable to), which has no clinical value and is extremely prone to being used to discriminate against LGBTIQ+ people.
Obwohl das für dich vielleicht kalter Kaffee ist, darf man nicht vergessen, dass jedes Jahr viele Menschen zum ersten Mal (oder nach langer Abstinenz wieder) zur Urne gehen. Dass die eine Gelegenheit haben, sich schnell und niederschwellig einen Überblick über die Programme zu machen, finde ich extrem wertvoll.
That wasn’t really Freud’s achievement though. There are many early psychologists who deserve credit for this much more than him, such as William James, Gustav Fechner, Wilhelm Wundt, Hermann Ebbinghaus, or (later) B. F. Skinner.
Freud’s work was mostly in the medical tradition, developed independently from the emerging psychological science of that time, and that’s where his theories still have the largest impact.
Changing our way of life is required to limit climate change and the effects it will have globally and locally, not to accommodate immigrants. Your rant is misplaced, and I don’t agree with it either.
From what I see, lots of people in Germany understand that some countries will be hit hard by climate change. The key issue is that they don’t care, and instead of stopping climate change their solution to this is to shut the borders and let no one in. These people are so resistant to changing their way of life, they’d happily trade people’s lives for it.
Not an app, but here in Germany we have a public warning system that broadcasts an alert to all phones in an area in case of catastrophic events. Happened twice in my city since I moved here two years ago. Once for a mass shooting, and once for an accident at a chemical plant.