>But if characterizing them as part of a continuum instead of as
>diseased causes them to have less suffering, isn't that a good thing?
Only in the very narrow sense. It may reduce suffering for the individual to pretend that s/he doesn't have a problem, but acknowledging a problem is the first step to solving it. Perhaps that won't solve the individual's problem, but it might help others who have the problem later.
For instance, characterising people with AIDs "as part of a continuum" may make them feel better, but it rather suggests there is no need to work on prevention and cure. Would that be a good thing?
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas