No. But isn't it ironic for someone to complain about armchair psychologists and then start talking about a condition that's not even recognized anymore? The w

No. But isn't it ironic for someone to complain about armchair psychologists and then start talking about a condition that's not even recognized anymore? The way you put it sounded like the thing didn't even exist. Whereas, it was just a name change. If that wasn't deliberately misleading, it might as well have been. Someone who isn't familiar with these issues might have looked things up briefly, then concluded that someone was lying. In my view, intellectual honesty demands taking care not to create such misleading situations, even at the cost of strongly "scoring a point." Especially at that cost!