One does not need credentials to understand plain, clearly written language One does need to study the terminology which is used so as to understand it, to understand how it is being used contextually, and to understand how it is being applied. And to more fully understand, one must also read and understand the other materials referred to, especially the writer's explanations of how they reached their conclusions. All of this is available to anyone who seeks it- none of the information you were given in school is secret. Credentials do not prove intelligence, they only prove that the person holding them has been able to answer a list of questions at at least a minimal degree of which competence is generally believed to be acceptable, and that they have performed other tests and analysis related to those studies similarly. I have not read everything in the DSM, but I have read those sections (and all the related and referred to sections) relating to areas I have interest in- sexuality, gender, and being ABDL. In these areas the DSM has validated concepts which I have not always found to be true, especially in the area of gender. If glaring errors in one area are left in place after further study and revisions, then the whole book's validity becomes suspect.
So you claim a greater understanding than I have here. I challenge you to prove it by listing here the causes of being ABDL (which in a previous post you say do exist and thus can be identified). If those answers be true and valid, then they will be able to be found in all of us. If you cannot do this, then I stand my ground and hold that my opinion is more valid- that being ABDL in itself is not really a disorder, but how one handles it may be, or may indicate one existing elsewhere.
And as to your analogy of a Christian reading the Koran, I have read and understand both it and the Bible and I fully believe neither one, for both are full of contradictions and neither has enough provability to be relied upon as a believable reference. Holding beliefs which cannot be proven indicates that the person is not perceiving reality correctly, yet because this concept is so unpopular the DSM won't list this form of insanity anytime soon which further aids my argument that the DSM is sometimes more based in popular opinion than in fact, so is therefore as unreliable as the aforementioned religious texts
BTW, your profile lists you as a bedwetter. I am curious as to whether the cause of that is physical?
Bettypooh