Lowlights include Blanchard's proposed definition of paraphilia as “any intense and persistent sexual interest other than sexual interest in genital stimulation or preparatory fondling with phenotypically normal, consenting adult human partners.” This definition is a great example of unscientific, ideologically-motivated gerrymandering. Apart from the fact that Blanchard steps carefully around the tricky question of homosexuality, and uses medical rather than religious language, it might have been written by St Thomas Aquinas. Sex is for reproductive purposes only, goddamit! Not only does this pathologize, for example, masturbation, or anyone who enjoys erotic literature or art, it also - depending on what is meant by 'phenotypically normal' - implies that anyone who is attracted to a trans or intersex person must ipso facto be mentally disordered.
Specifically, the diagnostic criteria for Transvestic Disorder remain:
A. Over a period of at least 6 months, in a heterosexual male, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving cross-dressing.
B. The fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.
Winters points out some of the many problems with this, the most important of which to my mind is the victim-blaming conflation (in B) of the distress caused by the "disorder" in itself, and that caused by the transphobia that trans people are likely to meet. There's more gerrymandering in A, too, which, as one of the commenters points out, makes a wholly irrational distinction whereby the same behaviour that would indicate a disorder in a heterosexual male would not do so in a homosexual one.
There's plenty of bad science here, but underneath it there seems to be a strong whiff of old-fashioned puritanism, too. Having Blanchard in charge of the DSM subcommittee on paraphilia is a bit like making Savonarola Chief Executive of Victoria's Secret.