Riddle me this. The fact that there are no serious answers does not mean that there is not a serious question. Why is it that Bruce Jenner, a male passing himself off as a female, is hailed by all and sundry for his courage, while Rachel Dolezal, a white woman passing herself off as black, is being treated as a fraud? Dolezai is the president of the Spokane NAACP, not noted for its roots among the Swedes.
Why is Dolezal not permitted to play by the same rules as Jenner and simply self-identify as black? Her ancestry is Swedish, Czech, and German, but what is that compared to how she feels? If a woman can be trapped in a man’s body, why can’t other things be trapped down in there?
Iowahawk nailed our drunk generation to the wall when he said that my gender is apparently what I think it is, while my race is what other people think it is. Let us draw a completely arbitrary line here, instead of there, and then steadfastly refuse to take any questions. But we have to take questions sometime. This isn’t the Hillary campaign, folks.
How is it that someone can, by simple fiat, make themselves their parents’ daughter instead of son, but to then be told that simple fiat cannot do the heavy lifting of switching ethnicity? Trans-racialism is an absurdity — I mean, look at the DNA, for pity’s sake. And then lo! Transgenderism is the apex of courage, and if you point to the DNA your only possible motive for doing so would be HATE, and we, the intolerista generation, have fines and sensitivity seminars for HATE like YOURS.
Right. This is hate all right. I plead guilty. The fear of the Lord is to hate evil, and that necessarily includes hatred of lies, scams, shams, frauds, mountebankeries, cons, shakedowns, rackets, hoaxes, and lies. We live in a generation that loves a lie, and stands ready to club any who might dissent from it. This means that our population is made up of three groups — liars, cowards, and the willing to be clubbed.
Not only are we insisting that genetic realities be obeyed in the one instance and NEVER in the other, we shout down anyone who points out the incongruities. Moreover, the one canyon that our masters of the universe insist we all jump, like Evel Knievel on a motorcycle, is the Snake River Canyon of sexual identity, while the one that makes everybody go whoa is an ethnic transgression like this one. Why is the ethnic background of the president of the Spokane NAACP a national story?
But let him who is not at least one sixteenth part Cherokee cast the first stone. And that opens up another line of thought. If she felt these powerful internal yearnings to self-identify outside the oppression of being too pale, Rachel Dolezal really needed to go the Elizabeth Warren route. Americans will almost always spot you one sixteenth part Cherokee.
Only a real pro can get away with more. I heard of one case where a man was born in New Orleans a black Roman Catholic and died in Ohio a white Lutheran. That takes talent. But it can also be done without fraud because ethnic mixing happens all the time, unlike gender mixing, and choosing what you are going to be is kind of necessary. I have to deal with this all the time, my father being Scots and my mother Scots/Irish and all. You know how it is. You get stopped in airports. “Are you . . .?” “No, not really. Well, yes, on my mom’s side . . .”
Incidentally, I humbly apologize for all the ALL CAPS episodes in this post. This is not done by the best writers, but it is just that I feel STRONGLY about this. And THAT.
Also, color is literally on a spectrum. And isn’t race a by-product of nations which are literally social constructs?
Races are extended families, genetic constructs.
Biologically, there IS only one race: Human. (And spiritually, two: Adam’s, and the Second Adam’s.)
While biologically, there are two distinct sexes.
Semantics trumps biology I guess.
You use “biologically” like Walton uses “literally”.
Actually, that’s pretty snarky. I apologize. Too much time spent on Twitter.
Not sure what this means, but color IS literally on a spectrum. The definition of spectrum pertains to color, and the concept of color requires a spectrum to be meaningful.
I thought Barnabas was just being fun and silly, but then I’ve never been on Twitter…
I begin to feel like I am eating my breakfast at Faulty Towers…
Carole, I’ve never been on Twitter either, and have no interest. It often becomes a war of egos, in my opinion. Sadly, this social media age has contributed to humans connecting less and less with the real part of us – who we really are – like in the days of our grandparents and prior. Nothing comes close to relationships in the flesh where we can actually look each other in the eye and embrace. In social media we are limited to bleeps on a screen, i.e. – Twitter. Our society has become big on *virtual* media relationships, and small… Read more »
As a Painting contractor who deals with both color and people.. One mans gray, is another mans dark green.. Never mind that the Actual formula is White,black,maroon and deep gold… We painters have learned to agree with whatever the person sees in the color, because it is pointless to convince them that what they see is all in their head..
No, there’s more than two distinct sexes. Biologically defining sexes as simply ‘XX’ or ‘XY’ is too simple. High school science likes simple so it’s not widely known, but actually there’s more to defining a person’s gender (from a biological point of view) than just chromosomes. There are all sorts of intersex ‘conditions’, such as androgyny. These anatomical differences can lead to physiological and hence psychological/social/behavioural differences – in other words nature gives you one set of conditions and nurture determines how you deal with them. As a result it is entirely possible for people to be uncertain of what… Read more »
The percentage of those with genetically confused sex (XXY, XYY, etc) or development of the uro-genital tract that went awry is minuscule – far less than 1%. That does not mean that the condition and the problems such people face are not real; it simply means that we do not have to let the ambiguous situation of a very tiny minority set the agenda for everyone and throw out the idea that there are two sexes. How people feel about their particular sex is certainly important – but it is quite possible that their feelings are more akin to that… Read more »
You are correct that the numbers are small, but your examples are incorrect. XXY is Kleinfelters and clearly male. XYY male and unlikely to be picked up (as it is so normal). XXX female and normal phenotype. X still clearly female but abnormal features and picked up easily.
Intersex conditions are even less common than chromosomal problems and are more likely to be related to metabolic defects of the adrenals; and even then only the severe ones show ambiguous genitalia.
I am aware that there are (as you call them) “intersex conditions.” They are statistically insignificant — outside the norm of being born a boy or a girl. Abnormal. Exceptions that prove the rule.
Are you familiar with the story of David Reimer?
What really frightens me is that when insanity becomes the cultural norm then sanity becomes aberrant.
When I learned that someone had invented a term for those who grasp the true concept of gender I knew some academic had laid his/her/its foot on the gas pedal of the cultural bus and promptly passed out.
Incidentally, the prefix in cisgender is “cis,” meaning “on the same side of.” It is not to be confused with “cess” as in cesspool, which according to Dictionary.com comes from the Latin “recessus” meaning “place of retirement” (which is where I want the majority of academia to reside posthaste).
I recently found out that there is a category called *pan gender.” These folks identify as all genders. And then there’s pansexuality where a person has a sexual attraction to people of any sex or gender identity. So they aren’t particular. They’ll hook up with anyone one from the LBGTQ crowd. The epitome of open-mindedness, I suppose.
When the word “gender” replaced “sex” I too heard the engine sputter foul exhaust.
Aye aye
I haven’t been following this TERRIBLY closely, but I’m unaware of any on the left who are openly critical of Dolezal’s “trans-raciality.” Lots of lefty comments in the local alt-newsweekly sticking up for her: http://www.inlander.com/Bloglander/archives/2015/06/11/media-firestorm-swirls-around-rachel-dolezal-the-local-naacp-president
I’m no shrink, but this appears to have Munchausen Syndrome written all over it. “Look at me! I’m a member of an historic victim-class!”
“… my gender is apparently what I think it is, while my race is what other people think it is.”
Specially if them “other people” was census takers: http://m.spokesman.com/stories/2015/apr/29/man-lauded-as-african-american-councilman-was/
#Scots/IrishLivesMatter
I hereby self-identify as whatever will get me the most advantages in the next five minutes.
100 or so years ago 50,000 blacks a year were becoming whites, if Carl Ellis’s book “Free at Last?” and my memory thereof serve me correctly.
I gotta say, I think this writing was quite witty. And now since Bruce Jenner broke down so many barriers, I must ponder and meditate and contemplate and deliberate so that I can celebrate how I will self-identify for the rest of my days. “Be all that you can be” has taken on new meaning.
I understand why you might not care about Jenner, but I don’t understand why you would need to mock him. But, if it makes you feel more comfortable then by all means.
Ridicule of brazen folly and deviance helps enforce community norms. If we don’t mock Jenner, more people will feel emboldened to make his mistake.
If Jenner is delusional–if there is no truth to his belief that he was mistakenly born male–why would you respond to mental illness with mockery? We don’t mock anorexics or others suffering from delusions in which they truly believe.
Jenner isn’t the audience for it. Both those who are committed to supporting his delusion and those who are tempted to fall into a similar delusion are.
It sounds to me that you are mocking him for the same reason you consider him delusional. You are fearful of the disruption Jenner has created in the narrative in which you are strongly invested.
As long as he’s delusional you can maintain your narrative.
Its not fear darling. Its disdain, its pity, its disgust, its sadness, its sorrow and its grim determination to not allow your cultures perversions to mar our lives with its petty melodramas.
And yes, I called you ‘darling’ to belittle you; expect more of it as the culture war divides us and the belittlement becomes battle.
I’m pretty sure it’s fear. Often when we are fearful and don’t understand something it causes us to re-examine the world around us and we become not-very-nice. When we’re fearful we also tend to position things as them-against-us.
Fear is a powerful thing.
Janet, Some definitions. Fear: All men have felt it, including myself. At times I am afraid. Courage: Doing what one must even if one is afraid. Fear of the Lord: is qualitatively different than fear of man or “change”. It is another thing entirely. The Wrath of God: What Jesus endured on our behalf to purchase our salvation. I have felt the (a touch of) the wrath of God. Had He wanted to, I would have dissolved into nothing. As He saw fit, it was only to get my attention. The fear God produces in us is not of this… Read more »
Yeah, I don’t really buy into your fantasy stories and I’m not really buying into your narrative of Christendom. When you try to make everything fit into your little box and certain things don’t fit, people get hurt. I know you think it’s justified and all that, but I think it’s just an excuse to treat people badly.
Best of luck with that.
Janet,
It is Jenner and this White/Black gal who are hurt. They are hurt by their sinfulness. The attempt to justify their sin with Science!(tm) is worth treating badly as it affirms them in their sin, demeans Christendom and accelerates the spiral into the hell that awaits this degenerate generation.
I do not wish you luck, I wish your defeat.
Well, I guess that’s one way to defend treating others badly. It works for the terrorists.
Well Janet, Let’s look at the body count shall we? It is your “nice” that has killed hundreds of millions of souls the last century. By calling evil good and good evil, you invert the moral order–an order established by God–much to your and Jenner’s consternation. It is that moral order that you are rebelling against. Now, it is funny to watch your “nice” in action as you set about to ‘make things right” . In doing so, you kill yourselves, your children and your civilisation all the while blaming God that White is not Black and Black is not… Read more »
Your narrative is silly, violent and dark. And, when taken to the extremes that you appear to want to take it is no different than the “religious” terrorists of today.
Go on with your bad self, dude.
Your narrative is silly, violent and dark.
I don’t do narrative, toots; I live in reality.
My insight is historical, accurate, faithful and full of light.
By God’s grace, I see clearly.
That’s an interesting narrative.
Wait a minute.
Transgender people have killed hundreds of millions of souls?
I cannot keep up.
ashv wrote: “Ridicule of brazen folly and deviance helps enforce community norms. If we don’t mock Jenner, more people will feel emboldened to make his mistake.” Apparently Janet Orr feels competent enough to tell us that we can’t understand Jenner’s motives while she simultaneously ascribes motives of fear to us and compares us with terrorists. We may have an intolerista in our midst. In any case, we must carefully identify what is the target of our mocking. I would offer a correction (or at least a clarification) to ashv’s comment above. I have no particular trouble with the theory that… Read more »
There is a great history of humans responding to things they don’t understand with fear and blaming. The response of fear is not a motivation but a reaction. On the other hand, we don’t fully understand what Jenner has experienced and what he’s going through. Without that understanding, one that even Jenner can’t fully have, it is impossible to assign motivation. So, no you don’t have an intolerista in your midst. As a matter of fact I am quite tolerant of your fear of Jenner, my ignorance of what he’s going through as well as yours. I would argue that… Read more »
… Janet Orr said, as she continued claiming to know that we are afraid and ignorant.
Orr seems to think that sexual perversion is something new under the sun, that God had nothing to say about. Orr thinks that we are left to react in bewilderment. She might consider a careful reading of Romans 1, to note the progression.
In any case, empathy and running cover for deviant behavior are not the same thing.
Why are you responding to my post, then using the third person?
It appears that you are confusing sexual perversion with gender issues which demonstrates that you are ignorant. It’s also not clear what *behavior* you are referring to and what you would suggest Jenner do regarding his difficult situation – a situation that you don’t really understand.
I think it would be helpful if you could clarify what you see as the distinction between perversion and gender issues. I don’t want to put words into your mouth, but do you see a man wanting to have intercourse with other men as “perverted” but a man wanting to transition to a woman’s body as afflicted with gender issues?
Well, you’d first have to define perversion. Do you mean abnormal or do you mean unacceptable? Or perhaps both? I find a man wanting to have sex with another man as abnormal (to me), but not unacceptable. Furthermore, I suspect it’s not at all abnormal to them. It’s their normal and my abnormal. Generally, I’m not sure there are any *wants* that are wrong but actions can certainly be wrong. I am much more concerned with an action than a want. Having signals inside your brain that tell you that you are something that doesn’t match your body is a… Read more »
Perversion isn’t a word I normally use, but I suppose I would define it, in the context, as the wrong use of a normal impulse, or a normal impulse which has a wrong target. Bulimia is a perversion of the normal urge to eat. I asked you because you had used the term sexual perversion in your previous post, and I wondered how you distinguished it from other gender issues. If you are simply saying that a person ought not to be blamed for feeling as if he is “a woman trapped in a man’s body”, I completely agree with… Read more »
Having a desire to hurt a child is troubling and appalling. However, it’s not wrong. It’s how you feel. Hitting or hurting the child (action), or not taking the proper precautions (lack of action) to prevent yourself from doing so would be wrong. Wanting to do it is not wrong. As far as humoring one’s delusions – yes, that could be considered unkind if their delusions are causing harm. You should be damn sure it’s an illusion, however, or you can do real damage. This is why it is so easy for people to have their religious illusions. They don’t… Read more »
What happened to “you be you”? Orr seems to be pronouncing what is wrong and what isn’t, as if she was reading from a holy text. What authoritative standard is she waving at us, or is she just appealing to her own personal religious illusion?
Unfortunately, the confusion is all Janet’s in this case. I could say something about Orr’s inability to discern perversion when she looks at the cover of the vanity magazine, but I don’t make my appeal to her subjective opinions or to my own. We have God’s direct word on the subject: “A woman shall not wear man’s clothing, nor shall a man put on a woman’s clothing; for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God.” — Deuteronomy 22:5 Notice, contrary to Janet Orr’s “withholding of an understanding” nonsense, that this exact Jenner business is as… Read more »
Perhaps Jenner doesn’t follow your god. We all get to pick for ourselves.
For some reason, that third person thing is creeping me out more than the Jenner cover.
What if third person debate is my personal preference , and not established precedent? Where’s the patient understanding? What if I don’t follow Orr’s god and pick a debate form for myself?
Apparently Orr’s tolerance blade only works in one direction.
I am more inclined to believe that it makes it much easier to dismiss people who don’t see the world in the same way. Just pretend they’re not real.
But I could be wrong. That’s just a guess. Either way, by all means, you be you.
Never fear, Orr is just worried that I might be dismissing her when I write in the third person. Somehow that bubbled out with a reactionary and prejudicial remark that it creeps her out more than the Jenner cover. Seems perfectly rational and believable, right?
(As an aside, how can something creep her out *more than* the Jenner cover? Is that an accidental admission that the Jenner cover creeps her out too? Or is her “creep out” reflex simply broken? In any case, where’s the patient waiting for understanding that she was on about earlier?)
It’s been a pleasure.
Pardon me for saying so, but that little sulk sounds… well… dismissive.
Who didn’t see that coming?
Janet, we all dismiss people who don’t see the world in the same way. You do too. I believe you think you are tolerant of the views you have encountered on this site, but your tone suggests you have mistakenly wandered into the Salem witch trials and you can’t believe your eyes and ears.
jillybean,
In general, I don’t dismiss people who don’t see the world the way I do. I seek them out. Additionally, I don’t believe I am tolerant of the views encountered here. I am restrained, but I don’t feel tolerant toward them. They aren’t kind or understanding.
However, I do agree that it feels that I have mistakenly wandered into the Salem witch trials (I almost made that reference in an earlier post) and you are absolutely right, I can’t believe my eyes and ears.
So everybody needs to be tolerant, except when Orr doesn’t want to be tolerant, because we don’t deserve patient understanding. Got it.
There is a word for this behavior. The word is hypocrite.
Well, I think that if you visit a board run by a Christian pastor of the reformed tradition, it is reasonable to expect to encounter traditional Christian viewpoints. It is easy to simply dismiss these as unkind and thick-headed, but I believe this reaction is simplistic and wrong. I thought from your offer to pray for Carole that you were religious, but I could be mistaken. And, of course, you could be religious in a non-Christian tradition. Sometimes people write as if traditional Christians view some sexual acts as sinful solely to be hateful and unkind. I would personally like… Read more »
In my mind, what is simplistic and wrong is to jump to all sorts of judgements about a person who is likely suffering a great deal and trying to find a way to cope with a problem where there isn’t much precedent, understanding, or history of people successfully addressing such an issue. Mostly what I have seen is the demonizing of someone who is trying to navigate a difficult and challenging life situation for which he has been struggling a long time. Being famous doesn’t make this type of challenge any easier. But instead of understanding, and perhaps some empathy… Read more »
The poor dear.
The judgements we express have a long, fruitful history; katecho, referenced Romans 1 where just such judgements where expressed some 2000 years ago.
Furthermore, what you see is not the point. The point is what is.
Having not seen, you label us ugly and ignorant for seeing clearly.
Such a stunning display of hubris mounted on such a vaporous wisp of vanity. Truly, you are of your culture.
Thank you Timothy. It was nice of you to comment.
Janet Orr wrote:
If Orr is genuinely committed to this “you be you” piffle, then why does she bother attempting to change our views? Even supposing we are as backward and fearful as she thinks we are, what standard of authority is she going to use to pull off that magic trick? Why won’t she leave us alone to “be who we are”? Who put her in charge of correcting us? I’m just not seeing what might be construed as rational consistency in her approach.
katecho,
Thank you, again, for the case study.
EDIT: I go hunt for Roger Scruton, Sculptors, Beauty, VIrtues and make my opening statement on how this nonsense from Orr might be approached and while I am collecting material, you slay the dragon and leave the bloodied carcass crumpled at the cave entrance. You probably cleaned your sword, honed your lance and brewed a cup of tea and crumpets to boot!
It’s also possible that I’m too eager. Flattery on top of eagerness might just be my undoing. 8-) Yet I don’t want to seem ungrateful, so thanks.
It creeps me too. It’s weird.
But Jenner on the cover of a magazine doesn’t? I think this is telling us more about Laura and Janet Orr’s emotional disposition than anything about me. Is it their fear? Their lack of understanding? Their intolerance? How have they taught us to judge these matters?
I shudder to speculate at what their fear masks.
I need a hug!
Why is katecho so devoid of caring for his/her fellow humans that the concept of a human deeply troubled is a matter of creepiness and weirdness to him/her, rather than an occasion for empathy and compassion? Does katecho not ever contemplate how off-putting the victims of leprosy were, who Jesus approached and healed? Does katecho think the shepherd should have looked after his 99 sheep and left the one wondering, and the woman been happy with her 99 coins and left one in the crack on the floor, because they were statistically insignificant?
katecho’s empathy and love for the body of Christ and the souls of the unrepentant is well understood on these pages. You, being new here, are evidently unfamiliar with his exemplary character and good works.
Now, to the substance of your charge, you should retract it as katecho explains in this comment: https://dougwils.com/books/black-is-black-i-want-my-country-back.html#comment-2082821470
Not seeing it here.
I assume that katecho is a big boy, and if he is going to persist in talking *to* people in third person after they have expressed how they don’t like it, he isn’t going to swoon because of any comments they make.
“But Jenner on the cover of a magazine doesn’t [creep me/seem weird]? I think this is telling us more about Laura and Janet Orr’s emotional disposition than anything about me. Is it their fear? Their lack of understanding? Their intolerance?”
How am I supposed to understand this, timothy, from a person you assure me has empathy and love?
Hi Laura, Remember Jacob as he wrestled the Angel and the Angel fought dirty and kicked Jacob in the testicles*? That was an act of love and compassion on the Angel’s part. Jacob didn’t think so at the moment, but after a bit of painful reflection, he came around to the Angel’s point of view. As for the third-person? I personally think its cool, but then, I grew up around surfer dudes. Some find it off-putting at first and then get accustomed to it. One suggested that katecho used it to dispassionately form his arguments. Whatever the reason, the effectiveness… Read more »
Sorry, but at times your debate style confuses me. let me get this straight, you joined another in calling Katecho creepy and now you are upset because Katecho didn’t respond with enough love and empathy to your name calling? This is as dizzying as when you spoke of your husband.
It is called mirroring, Carole, and it’s a technique used sometimes when you want people to see what they’re doing.
timothy, I have to conclude after days of reading Laura’s and Janet’s posts that they are just having a joke. Debating them and watching others do so, is like watching Pastor Wilson debate on whether or not accepting homosexuality was good for the republican party. There is no debate. Questions are not answered, accusations without substance or cause, are consistently made. No one is able to speak reasonably to them. I truly think they must be having us all on.
Hi Carole, Truth wins out. We hearken to the truth because it is of Him. It is what we pursue here. We are blessed in that Pastor Wilson gives us the space to pursue truth using vigor that many (churchian) places will not abide. By pursuing the truth, we bear witness of Him and by bearing witness of Him we awaken some to the truth. Namely that He exists, is who He says He is, loves us, has redeemed us and is presently sanctifying us. A lot of visitors here think its b.s. upon entering, but leave having doubts about… Read more »
You are right. Thanks, timothy.
I’m not joking and I’m not having you on.
I think you can’t deal with any ideas that challenge your worldview so I’ll probably bow out of the discussions on this blog and leave you to it.
The sensitivity sham won’t work. If Laura will go back and look, she may be startled to notice that she and Janet Orr are the ones using the terms “creepy” and “weird”. I have never used such terms for Jenner. My personal opinions and gut instincts about his behavior are not the issue. What matters is what God thinks of it. God is the One who has made us male and female. He is the one who assigned gender roles and made Jenner to be a male. It is God’s purposes and intentions which are the standard for how we… Read more »
Katecho questioned why I don’t see Jenner on the magazine cover as creepy and weird, so his second sentence is pretty silly. The first one is appalling. Timothy, take note – katecho says that to have compassion for a troubled human must be a sham. Perhaps he thinks no one really could, and anyone who says they do is only pretending. “God is the One who has made us male and female.” Shhh – no one tell katecho about people who are born intersex. His religion may not survive it. “It is God’s purposes and intentions which are the standard… Read more »
Hi Laura, Search the Blog and Mablog search for a post by Pastor Wilson entitled “Doing the Sensitivity Sham.” Katecho’s phrase is an allusion to that. I also suggest that you slow down for a couple of months to get a sense of katecho’s wisdom and intelligence before engaging him directly. You and I are not in his league* intellectually or rhetorically. Often the wisest thing to do is just remain silent and learn from our bettors. Grace and peace. (Well, I am in the league, just fourth string rookie on the last place team that never had a winning… Read more »
Timothy, I am new here, as you say, so how can you know what league I’m in?
I didn’t know about sticking around. I seem to be upsetting people.
Timothy, I am new here, as you say, so how can you know what league I’m in? Remember that scene from Amadeus where Mozart was introduced to the King and Scalieri was coaching the King on a work the King was attempting to play ? Mozart took the bench and ad-libbed Scalier’s work and in the process, without even thinking about it or furrowing his brow, displayed the disparity between Scalieri’s competence and Mozart’s genius? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ciFTP_KRy4 Its like that. I didn’t know about sticking around. I seem to be upsetting people. Its up to you Laura, but I would prefer… Read more »
So I’m Scalieri to his Mozart? This guy, who continues to use third person in speaking to people after they’ve expressed that they don’t like it? Not feeling it, buddy.
Laura, Truly, timothy is giving you loving advice and trying to save you embarrassment. Katecho’s mind is uncommon. I appreciate that he writes to all of us, as it is all of us who benefit from his comments. And as we were able to see the mistake you and Janet were making regarding the words “creepy and weird” when neither you or Janet were recognizing the error, it was particularly appropriate. This happens often. Pastor or Katecho are teaching us, they are not just in a private conversation. We who write like we are in private conversations are distorting what… Read more »
When someone tells you “I don’t like it that you are addressing me in third person” you have a choice to make. You can stop, or you can keep on. Y’all are telling me what a superior person katecho is. I am going by what I see here.
It’s not a private conversation, but when you click “reply” you are in fact addressing the person whose comment you are replying to.
I did not say that Katecho was a superior person. I said Katecho has an uncommon, and will add, a stunningly brilliant mind. Clearly by what Katecho has written I conclude that he is wise, mature and strong in the Christian faith. btw, I say he, for mankind; I don’t know if Katecho is a man. I like to imagine that she is a she with the brilliance of Dorthy Sayers and a stronger faith. But that could be from vanity and sexism! :) And of course you don’t have to like the use of third person, I was just… Read more »
katecho chose to keep on. Your point is?
Then he was willfully offending someone for no good reason. In my book that does not make him someone to look up to. But you still can if you want to, of course.
You don’t know his reasons because he has told nobody what they are. Nor is he under any obligation to do so and your presumption that they are not good is unsupported by any evidence.
Laura, when I am in the presence of somebody who is my bettor*, I shut up and listen and thank God for the opportunity to learn from them.
Its the same thing for beauty. I listen to the birds, I don’t presume to tell them how to sing I shut up and enjoy them.
*for now (:
I guess I’m not convinced someone is my better when they’re deliberately being offensive and not telling anyone why.
Yes.
Paul Alinsky wrote “The issue is never the issue.” Katecho is wonderfully adept at clearing the underbrush of the first in order to reveal the second. He did it to marvelous effect on this comment thread.
We are blessed to have him in the Body of Christ.
You keep using this word, Love. I do not think it means what you think it means.
What do you think it means, and how do you think we differ?
Laura, I am delighted you are part of the discussion, but when you refuse to acknowledge questions or arguments it can become unusually frustrating for me personally. As timothy rightly corrected me, and I am reminded of the pastor’s “debate” with Andrew Sullivan, that these conversations can still be very edifying and profitable even if they are not really debates. It is just a bit frustrating for me. Especially if Jill or Katecho are not respected with earnest replies. If you look back you will notice that I too employeed mirroring with Janet, but she did not acknowledge it even… Read more »
Okay. Thank you for your kind words.
Sometimes I don’t answer direct questions because I start to do it and I feel like I am just repeating myself. And sometimes I don’t because I feel like the person asking is trying a gotcha game.
I have been putting off doing some tedious work and trying to get past the headache I woke up with, and I’m past it now so I have to dig in. : ( Will pick up the convo later.
What is ‘mirroring’ ? Is it an honest thing? or a power/control thing?
timothy, are you asking me or Laura? My understanding is when you reflect how a person is speaking or behaving back to them, they can then see how they are being ______, whatever it is that you want them to be conscious of. So, I did that with Janet and so did Katecho, but it didn’t seem to get picked up as obvious mirroring. I mirrored Janet and she reacted to it by calling me angry…LOL. Even more funny because I took it a bit further to my Joe Pesci imitation :) I was pretty tickled when she called me… Read more »
Laura, I will happily answer this question, I thought I had, but am also happy to repeat myself. In earnest of a conversation, will you do me the honor of also sincerely explaining what you believe love is? And how it relates to Bruce Jenner. I believe we are commanded to love our neighbor. Our neighbor is a creature of God the one Creator who has defined what Love is and who embodies Love. Love is to encourage our neighbor to follow God’s commands. We are not to trip a blind man. We are to tell him what he needs… Read more »
I eat shrimp from time to time, not to mention ham and bacon, so I’m not going to quote Deuteronomy at anybody. My thing about Jenner is this: I am not transgender. I have no idea what that is like. I’m a woman, both physically and psychologically, and I’m happy to be one. So I have not walked in those shoes and that forces me to slow down about judging. I have read something about what people with gender dysphoria experience and it looks pretty miserable. Here for instance is a description of two little boys in different families whose… Read more »
Paul specifically addresses eating food and we are no longer to limit what we eat. He specifically addresses circumcision as well. I don’t know what it is like to be a transgender either, and I am grateful to my Lord. I don’t know what it is like to be anorexic, and I am grateful to my Lord. But both the Bible and natural law tell me that purposely hurting our bodies is wrong except in very special circumstances (child birth, the old circumcision). Are there others, I can’t recall? Bruce Jenner was born a man. He was an amazing male… Read more »
Between judging someone, and encouraging them, there’s the whole middle ground of “I don’t understand this so I will let God work it out. In the meantime, I want the best for that person, whatever it is. Even if it makes me uncomfortable. Because it’s really not about me.”
“I want the best for that person, whatever it is”
What is it? Do you know? Do you care to know?
“Even if it makes me uncomfortable.”
What if it makes them uncomfortable? Do you love them enough to make them uncomfortable?
The sensitivity sham won’t work.
See! Stuff like that. You’re like Deon Sanders with a 20 yard lead on the trailing defenders dancing your way to the end zone.
Katecho
Are you familiar with the now-retired Op-Ed feminst author Ellen Goodman? Her writing and methodology mirrors Orr’s somewhat.
Imagine different colored dollops of paint freshly squeezed from the tubes and onto the artist’s pallet. We, being normal, expect the artist to apply the colors and mix them such that they create something coherent–something that conveys something.
What Goodman did and what Orr is doing is muddying the colors so as to prevent meaning and to inhibit clarity. To switch metaphors, stir the pot, muddy the waters, point to the clouds and say “we can’t be sure”
Indeed. I’m not familiar with Goodman, but I can certainly see how foggy Orr wants to be in Jenner’s direction while she loads us up with terms like fear, reaction, and ignorance. She claims to read our inner hearts and motives like an open book, meanwhile we point out that our position doesn’t require reading Jenner’s hidden heart at all. His perversion is available on newstands everywhere.
Some good news on the newsstand front. I work part-time at a local grocery store and the manager and purchasing clerk (both Christians, neither wanting the local children to be exposed to that perversity or to accept it as normal) took it upon themselves to remove that foul rag from the store.
I thanked them and the Lord for letting me live among such principled men and women.
“It kills judgement” is a modification of a statement that the chief sculptor for the Queen of England made to Roger Scruton in his video “Why Beauty Matters” https://vimeo.com/112655231 The Sculptor told how students would sneak out of art school and surreptitiously visit him so as to learn how to sculpt. The students, you see, where being instructed to hate beauty and to desecrate their own work. Scruton asked why the modernists insisted that the students desecrate beautiy as part of their studies. “It kills thought” was the reply. “It kills judgement*” is the “why” of Goodman’s and apparently Orr’s… Read more »
Are you mocking him when you call him, him? Why can’t you use his name? Why do you mock and demean him with some pedestrian pronoun? What are you so afraid of him you can’t call him by his name? And why do you say he? Are you mocking him? Is he a joke to you? Does he look like a joke to you. You mean spirited, fearful pronoun user.
I’m not mocking him, but I will admit a certain level of ignorance regarding how he or she wants to be referred.
You sound a little angry and cynical, Carole. Is something bothering you or is it just that mockery is the only way you know how to respond to things that make you uncomfortable?
Are you mocking people who are angry, Janet? People who are anger really suffer from… anger and angry stuff. Does it make you comfortable to call me angry because you don’t understand how i react to your posts? I think it is pure mockery to label me that way.
I guess you’ve answered my question indirectly.
But you didn’t answer mine. Do you think it is good, helpful or kind to encourage Bruce Jenner and others suffering in this way by putting him on a magazine cover and calling him courageous? I believe it is cruel, do you?
I’m not really sure what you mean by “to encourage Bruce Jenner and others.” That’s generally not the purpose of a magazine article.
Janet,
But we actually have put anorexics on magazine covers and said look how beautiful they are….And hasn’t doing just that contributed to more young girls becoming anorexic?
I do not want to mock Jenner, I want to pray for him, at the same time you agree we should not celebrate him or encourage his madness…
When you say “encourage his madness,” you are mocking him and all the others who struggle with similar issues.
Whatever it is he’s struggling with, and whatever his solution, there is no good reason to define it as madness. It probably makes you more comfortable to think of it as a madness, but it doesn’t lead to understanding.
History tells us that labeling of things we don’t understand doesn’t usually work out very well.
Are you kidding me? What is wrong with calling madness, madness? I hope that you are laughing because this is funny and if you have been having a joke this whole time, well done.
I’m not kidding. Dismiss and laugh all you want. People who go through this really struggle with it and they often find it a very painful experience. I don’t find it funny.
Praying for Jenner while laughing at the same time suggests it might be you that is suffering madness. Perhaps you’d like me to pray for you.
Im not laughing at him, I am laughing at what you wrote. And I would love for you to pray for me. Thanks so much for asking.
I will happily discuss this subject with you. I have lots of ideas, and my patience online is almost inexhaustible. But I don’t think you should bait people, and your last two sentences were definitely an attempt to bait Carole. This wouldn’t bother me, but some of the people here feel really awful about themselves if they get irritable and respond in kind. And that does bother me. It would be nice if you made your case (and I am sure you have excellent points well worth discussing) without sarcasm or unkindness.
You are right. I am triggered when people use religion/prayer as an excuse or cover for talking ill of other people who may be hurting. I shouldn’t have said that.
I’m glad you said that.
Janet, I don’t see the word “madness” as mockery. It is a strong word, but it does mean mental disorder, and I think it is legitimate to view gender dysphoria as a cognitive or emotional condition. Even some clinicians who work in this field classify this as a mental disorder and doubt whether gender reassignment surgery is helpful. According to Dr. Paul McHugh, former chief of staff of psychiatry at Johns Hopkins, the suicide rate for those who have transgender surgery is 20 times higher than for non-transgender people. I realize that for this statistic to be truly meaningful, we… Read more »
jillybean,
I don’t have any problem with particular terms either, provided it is used to understand or explain. However, these terms can also be used to trivialize, minimize, or dismiss someone’s experiences.
It is absolutely legitimate to question a treatment model – even in cases where effects aren’t as serious as you describe. I didn’t really see that conversation happening and I certainly didn’t see it happening in a compassionate way.
Thank you for your comments.
My sense of community norm isnt hinged on the actions of some nut…and yours shouldnt be either.
Janet, if what you understood from my comment is that I don’t *affirm* Jenner’s behavior, then we’ve gotten somewhere. Sometimes, certain behaviors are so absurd, they need to be seen for what they are. And make no mistake about it, if Jenner can self-identify as a woman even when his genitalia says something quite different, then that opens the door for folks to self-identify with all kinds of categories. Come to think of it, Jenner while more widely known, isn’t the first to start this craze. Some time ago, a man who loved felines (Dennis Avner, aka Stalking Cat), decided… Read more »
I am very confused by your post. I’m not at all clear by what you mean by “behavior” or by “so absurd.” I am also not convinced that you are the one to “see them as they are” unless you are claiming expertise. Also, I’m not at all convinced that genitalia is the be-all and end-all of determining gender. Furthermore I’m not troubled by people self-identifying as all kinds of categories. We do that already. It seems to me that these things are best served by understanding before judging and we’ve got a ways to go before getting to understanding.… Read more »
“It seems to me that these things are best served by understanding before judging and we’ve got a ways to go before getting to understanding.”
Exactly. And I think you are spot-on about the fear.
In case anyone here is interested in considering a non-hypothetical argument, here’s a transsexual writer responding to this particular line of critique today:
“The fundamental difference between Dolezal’s actions and trans people’s is that her decision to identify as black was an active choice, whereas transgender people’s decision to transition is almost always involuntary.”
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/12/comparison-transgender-people-rachel-dolezal
That’s the myth but who is to say that Dolezal “chose” to be black? Biology? That is going to fly in the face of the trans argument since Jenner still possess an XY chromosome pair. The best argument I’ve heard yet is that Dolezal lied. She said that she is the product of a mixed race couple when both mom and dad are white as Scandinavian snow. But if Jenner has always felt that he is a she, at least as far back as when s/he competed in the Olympics, didn’t s/he lie and say he was a he when… Read more »
There’s a lot we don’t know about these cases but as far as I can judge, there seems to be a pretty obvious range of sincerity going on, where Dolezal’s claim seems to be fairly strategic/cynically duplicitous and Jenner’s is more sincere. (And yes, based on the interview it seems Jenner would be willing to grand that he/she was “living a lie” re: his/her true identity in the past). Obviously even if Jenner was 100% sincere that wouldn’t justify a transition because self-report in itself is not sufficient to determine sexual identity for many Christians. At the same time, I… Read more »
Well, I think we’ve arrived firmly in the land of guessing at this point. Dolezal appears to me to not be so much lying as self-deluded. Which is to say, also lying to herself. I read a quote from here somewhere that said she doesn’t consider her biological parents to be her real parents. She seems to have become so enamored of the idea of being a person of color that she’s convinced herself that she is. There have been some dubious death threats against her in the past that really look suspicious. Maybe this is part of her pathology.… Read more »
“[Dolezal] seems to have become so enamored of the idea of being a person of color that she’s convinced herself that she is.” Wait, what evidence are you putting forth that suggests Dolezal was sincere and deluded? An open-ended quote you read somewhere? We’re only in the land of guessing if there’s a credible scenario in which Dolezal deluded herself into thinking she actually is black. In my opinion, the only people who find this likely are the ones who do so out of convenience, i.e. those who are already gleefully committed to using the Dolezal controversy as a means… Read more »
Well, we are speculatin’ here so I guess my guess is as good as your guess. What I’m trying to do is take both Jenner and Dolezal at their word. Jenner says she’s always felt like a woman? Okay. Let’s go with that. Her biology says that she is male so clearly he isn’t a female but he feels like she is, I don’t doubt that she feels what he feels. Dolezal says she’s black. Her genealogy says otherwise but I’ll go with what she says. It is as untrue as Jenner being a woman. So I either have to… Read more »
What an odd use of the word involuntary. He just woke up one morning and his body forced itself into the women’s department of the clothing store? He became physically unable to get a haircut? His limbs spasmodically reached for the makeup?
I don’t think the word “involuntary” means what this person is trying to make it mean.
Perhaps involuntary in the sense that my pulling out my teeth to prevent Martians from using my amalgam fillings in order to send messages to our country’s enemies would be involuntary. I think that perhaps it is involuntary in the way that the transformation in Kafka’s Die Verwandlung is involuntary.
Involuntary? The hormones needed to appear to be female or male simply come to the person and enter their system? A surgeon appears and says, “I am going to cut off your whatsis, and then make a thingamabob for you”? I don’t think so.
Studies have shown that many who get surgery regret it, and even those who do not are still in psychological difficulty ten or more years later.
I didn’t read the article, but what the quote above leads me to think is that this writer is judging motivations – the intent of a person’s heart – and defending one intent over the other. Further, how does this writer know the inner motivations of Dolezal? Perhaps she so closely identified with the Black race and had such a consuming empathy, that she wanted more than anything to be Black and eventually really believed herself to be Black. How is that any less of a justifiable reason for her than Jenner?
Geez, why is everyone on here so stiffly committed to the idea that gender dysphoria couldn’t possibly exist? Yes, a certain minority of people do have a condition that causes them to identify with the opposite gender. Yes, it’s a rather large group of people and it’s been clinically observed for decades. Yes, it starts really early. No, it’s not a “chosen” or “voluntary” experience that one opts into as they might a fantasy about being a celebrity or a professional athlete. No, a slap on the wrist from a stern dad is not going to be sufficient to set… Read more »
BVRU: Hold it….I do think gender dysphoria (gender identity disorder) exists. Note the change in the label removing the word *disorder.* By the way, I said nothing about voluntary or involuntary in my comment to you. I think where you and I would part ways is how to address such a situation with a person who has this disorder – and yes, I will call it what the psyche field once called it. I think counseling from a perspective that needs to align with the reality is needed. And yes, compassion would be in order – and being an intent… Read more »
It sounds like you and I are in agreement on all that; I was responding more to your previous comment, which seemed to posit some roughly equivalent hypothetical condition of “race dysphoria” on the part of Dolezal, which I think would be a misleading comparison because while such a thing could hypothetically exist according to current psychological frameworks, it most certainly does not in a widespread form like the gender version. Setting up a comparison between Dolezal and Jenner on the premise of supposed “race dysphoria” on the former’s part, as many commenters as well as Pastor Wilson did in… Read more »
What is ..the phenomenon that is at the heart of the Jenner episode ?
And if you have time, what is the phenomenon that is at the heart of the Dolezal episode?
Hi timothy, I have no idea what these heart issues are, but I think the Dolezal case is pretty interesting. I am eager to hear when it all gets explained. Her (ex?) husband is black as well as her son and she has, albeit adopted, black siblings. She is actually an accomplished artist. I read that her black students never thought she was black… that no one has ever asked her before because folks just assumed either way. Even the photo was a photo of her father in law…My husband says she is just like Clinton, the Mr, lying in… Read more »
The phenomenon I’m referring to is the widespread psychological occurrence of individuals whose internal sense of gender identification is dominated by the intuitive, pre-rational, involuntarily desire to express and embody the opposite sex of their given, biological gender. As for Dolezal, there’s a number of options of that could conceivably explain her motives. The problem, as it relates to Wilson’s analysis (and to that of many in this comment section), is that precisely none of these options allow for meaningful parallels with Jenner’s case. Only the truly desperate and/or uniquely unreflective opponent of identity politics will be willing to entertain… Read more »
“the intuitive, pre-rational, involuntarily desire to…”
Isn’t that called sin?
I know a bunch of folk who have that for whiskey but no one calls them courageous when they give in to it, and they surely don’t get their picture on the cover of Vanity Fair.
I am much more inclined to think of it as pathology and delusion. I believe that gender dysphoria is a real psychiatric issue; I’m not sure that science has found the best way to deal with it yet. No reputable surgeon would do liposuction on an anorexic, even though she is absolutely convinced that she is obese (I struggle with anorexia, and when I am in remission, I can see how completely crazy it is). I don’t understand the anger and contempt some people direct towards transsexuals; to me it seems like blaming the patient for being deluded rather than… Read more »
You are always so forthright, God bless you, Jill. I am so glad I know you. For me the part of alcoholism that is sinful is the idolatry of it. I think it could be the same for lots of people with different issues. Instead of taking the uncomfortableness, the pain, the anxiety, the despair whatever that aching inside us is, to God, we imagine that our problems will be solved if we just do ….fill in the blank. And there is only One who can make that aching go away, and we are not He.
hi Jill, I woke up this morning with a terrible feeling that my response to what you shared may have come off flippant. I pray you know my heart and how sincerely I respect your courage and strength for sharing. When I said, “God bless you,” I meant it. It has been my experience that every time someone in a room of people shares their addiction/struggle, there is someone else in that room who desperately needs to hear it. I am praying for you daily, that you will stay in remission, And that there is very little, if any, long… Read more »
All is well, Carole, thank you so much for your prayers and your friendship. I hope that some day we will meet in person!
uniquely unreflective opponent of identity politics .. Yep! That’s me! I do quibble with the word “opponent” because that implies “intention” as in “paying attention to”. Rather, I have observed that you and yours are collectively insane and I have decided to step aside as you commit suicide. I do confess to a desire to ‘help’ from time to time, ‘help’ being a boot in your ass to push you over the cliff that you are determined to jump over, but that is probably a sin. But so will smiling when you do decide to jump. I have seen too… Read more »
Self-identity is entirely subjective and thusly untrustworthy. This is true regardless of which iteration of the DSM you consult (and there are many).
For example, one could argue that … anorexia-nervosa (lipid dysphoria) is a result of the widespread psychological occurrence of individuals whose internal sense of body-mass is dominated by the intuitive, pre-rational, involuntarily desire to express and embody the opposite body-mass of their given physical state.
The only real factor distinguishing transsexuality from anorexia and trans-racialism is that it rides the waves of the legal and cultural successes of homosexuality. It all boils down to social acceptance.
The fact that a cohort of homosexuals took it upon themselves to re-write the DSM is enough to convince me that the ‘science’ has been politicized as has ‘global cooling/global warming/climate change’ and that appeals to it can be safely ignored. Remember when homosexuality was a disorder? Some pervert with a PhD in Science!(tm) from “The very best! University!” pulled the psychiatric equivalent of Wikipedia SJW enforcer on the DSM and poof! Poofery is no longer a disorder. “Oh! We know so much more now”, you assert. I do not think so. I think you are fools. Scripture is a… Read more »
That cracked me up. Thanks for that.
The feelings may well be involuntary.
Acting on them is not. That’s the “transition.”
If you are trying to make a subtle and complex argument, it would be a normal expectation that you would grasp so simple a distinction.
Darlene, I hope that is the case and that this is not a case of deliberate deception. I think that, at the very least, the motives of both people show a tragic and pathological lack of self-acceptance. This poor woman may well believe she is black, that her parents are not her parents, and that she receives frequent hate literature in the mail. To a cynical observer, her situation would be better if she had not received honors and remuneration for her pretense. My daughter is an actress, and in the course of educating me about what she thinks I… Read more »
Jillybean, I finally read an article about Rachel Dolezal. I think there are some mental disturbances going on there. Did she delude herself so much that she actually believed her lies? That takes a boat-load of delusion. It would be interesting to have a case study done on her behavior.
I also sense mental disturbance–there is too much going on in terms of alienation from parents and so on. But I am also skeptical. To take an extreme example, if a man dresses and acts like a woman in order to get into one of the Titanic lifeboats, it seems a bit too convenient for him to claim he has always had gender dysphoria.
,
Except, she got into an MFA program with a focus on African American art. She got in because her painting is really excellent and its subject is African American…isn’t that why we want people to get into art school, not because of their race?
Hi Jill, I pray Caroline is still recovering well.
Dolezal is the mother of a black son though, sister to black siblings and wife to a black husband…do you see any exception for her here, career wise, particularly because of her son?
On her application, according to what I read she never lied to Howard. She was accepted based on talent and content.
If she told the truth to every hiring/academic committee (that although she was born of white parents, she has black siblings with whom she feels blood kinship and that she has always identified as black and so on), then I think she behaved ethically–assuming that she did not tell students, clients, and the public any direct lies about her background. If she is deluded to the point that she believes everything she says, then ethics don’t really apply. I do struggle with that, however. When my daughter was first enrolled in LAUSD pre-kindergarten, her registration slip came home marked Hispanic… Read more »
I’m not sure what I think; I think I am a bleeding heart conservative! LOL. For some reason, I feel terribly sorry for her, because I think if she has done good work,( and by that I mean art and anti-discrimination work) regardless of her race. What does it matter, and from what I read she never actually lied. People assumed. There is the problem of getting factual reports of course (by the way, I still only read that Josh confessed to his parents…) So on focusing on the Howard entrance; she submitted her work which content was the black… Read more »
I think you’re right, and I do feel sorry for her and hope it can all just go away. Thinking it over, I can see how it could have happened without outright deception, especially at the beginning. People made assumptions, and because she identified so closely, she didn’t correct them. Her past has caught up with her, and I hope she has some help in dealing with it because I do sense real disturbance. Most of us have told a lie, or let a misconception stand, at some point or other, and we are not exposed and shamed on the… Read more »
Im so glad the surgery went well. Poor love. How long until the pain is better? Disneyland, honestly is an example of great employee training. We were staying there for a homeschool conference. We had such a wonderful time and the hotel was so reasonable due to the conf. The employees just go out of their way in every aspect to be sure you are happy. So I wish ACCS would have their conference there, hint hint pastor Wilson. In fact, I was able to meet some of the folks from Logos School which was a lot of fun and… Read more »
I get Pastor Wilson’s point here, but it is, for me, a significant difference that in Jenner’s case there was candor rather than deception. If Jenner had passed himself off as a woman to gain a competitive advantage in the Olympic Games, I think the analogy would be closer. I don’t know much about this woman but I imagine she might not have attained her position quite so easily if she had not passed herself off as a person of color. It is conceivable that she truly believes herself to be African-American, in which case there may be unusual thought… Read more »
Hi Jillybean!
I think your analogy dies the death of a thousand qualifications because self-deception is precisely what Jenner has done, whether he is cognizant of it or not.
Doug’s point here is not that you can’t draw a venn diagram juxtaposing the differences between Jenner & Dolezal. Doug’s point is that smack-dab in the middle of that hypothetical diagram is the unavoidable fact that it’s impossible not to be a deceiver of some sort when you self-identify with something that has nothing to do with reality.
You have no idea whether Jenner has self-deceived himself or not and how could you possibly know his reality.
Hopefully the Internet is big enough to hold your arrogance.
Someone can’t at one time have competed in the premier male athletic competition in the world, and then later identify as a woman, without either having deceived himself or others somewhere along the line — unless he actually essentially changed from one to the other, which is not what is being claimed. The claim is that he has always essentially been a woman. Either that claim is deceptive or self-deceptive, or it was deceptive or self-deceptive of him to compete as a man, or it’s deceptive or self-deceptive that he is now a woman. Logic forbids any possibility that does… Read more »
Of course one could. If he was unclear as to what was taking place in his body and mind, he wasn’t deceptive. And frankly, it’s doubtful he fully understands now as we are still learning about all the components of gender and sexuality.
You are easy to assign intent which can lead to very wobbly thinking.
What leads to wobbly thinking is the notion that feelings determine reality.
Truth doesn’t change no matter how desperately we try to change it to make us feel better about our sin.
Well said, Doug. And as you are aware, the real issue here goes back to cultural justification. Hans Fiene wrote a great article for The Federalist recently, wherein he points out that the justification-language in our culture’s conflation of homosexuality (with civil-rights) is no mistake, because our culture has memorialized the civil-rights era as its own golden-age–a symbolic Davidic Kingdom of liberation. Fiene argues that the whole debate over same-sex marriage is more about what he calls “Selma Envy” than actual civil-rights. I think he’s dead-on. In this controversy Dolezal has been guilty of making an idol in the image… Read more »
To suggest Jenner, or others simply declare their gender by fiat is disingenuous.
>> If a woman can be trapped in a man’s body, why can’t other things be trapped down in there?
This is also disingenuous. It’s neither “trapped” nor “down in there.”
The fact that you brought up H. Clinton and Warren in a conversation regarding Jenner, suggests that perhaps you have all sorts of issues with gender – and that’s okay too.
disingenuous ˌdisinˈjenyo͞oəs adjective – not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does. I don’t think that word means what you think it means. And your assumption to know Jenner’s motivations better than Doug does doesn’t seem totally above the boards to me. And the shot at Clinton was sexists, was it? I missed where he said that she is like that because she’s a woman. What was implied was that H. Clinton has not been quick to answer questions. There was nothing sexist in Doug’s comment except what you read into… Read more »
You’re absolutely right that I don’t know Jenner’s motivations – no one can ultimately know one’s motivations. Sometimes we don’t even know our own. However, it’s very difficult to imagine what Clinton or Warren has to do with Jenner or the issue at hand. The mention of them makes me wonder, is there something else at play here.
Warren is the most recent major public example of someone lying about race and getting away with it. That seems obvious to me. And Clinton is the most recent major public example of a politician who refuses to answer really important questions and gets away with it. You could probably find another example easily, but she is the one currently in the news, so this one seems pretty obvious to me also. With more women in high government positions, it is no longer the case that all corrupt politicians are male, which means occasionally women get used as negative examples… Read more »
Janet, the Clinton point was a side point, just about a refusal to face questions. The point about Warren had to do with her bogus claim a few years back to be Native American.
Still not really clear what either has to do with Jenner. It makes it sound like the author simply needs to throw stones at everyone with whom he disagrees.
It gets in the way of understanding.
It’s actually entirely consistent.
So sex which seems to be about as dichotomous as can be is in actuality fluid?
And race which is continuous over several spectrums is actually dichotomous?
Got it.
No, you don’t get it. But the question is: do you care to get it, or like Wilson do you just want to abuse people you hate?
I do not think the word “abuse” means what you think it means… Do you think it means “speak the unpleasant truth about”? I wish men wouldn’t pretend to be women and women wouldn’t pretend to be men, but I am not abusing them if I speak the truth about them. Telling the truth is the only way they can be free from their slavery to sin. The only way to help them gently is to speak firmly against the liars and cowards who want to keep them enslaved for their own selfish purposes. We need to speak more gospel… Read more »
Bethyada is a Poly-racist full-spectrum hater!
And the abuse is where Matt?
You have no idea of how many transsexuals I have been involved with, my level of involvement, nor how in fact I have treated them.
But as nice as I am to them, it is abuse if I don’t agree with their position, or if I try to show that such position is in fact illogical or foolish?
Consider a paedophile, the world still considers this unacceptable. If I interact with actual paedophiles in kindness but mock those who publicly advocate paedophilia am I also abusing paedophiles?
Consider a paedophile, the world still considers this unacceptable
Give it a few months. At that time the exact same arguments will be trotted out.
1. Studies show that….
2. A new psychological term of the kind like “gender dysphoria” or “id” will enter the common lexicon for a time because “studies show…”.
3. You will be accused of hatred and irrationality and being primitive and anti-science.
4. State funded temple prostitutes will be the next thing on the radar as part of Obamacare
It’s abuse if you don’t care if their position is logical and merely try to score some internet points with a witty quip or two. If you don’t like the word abuse, you can call it bullshitting instead. Because their position is logical, so you should retract your previous statement if you are sincere. Also, you seem to be confused about the topic. It’s not whether transgender should be advocated or not, it is whether gender must be the same as race such that it be inconsistent to treat it otherwise. Advocates of transgender acceptance, for lack of a better… Read more »
Their position is both illogical and immoral. I was speaking to the position, not to any one person. One is allowed to denounce incorrect positions, and mocking or not, disparaging immorality for the sake of those listening is both moral and has a long precedent.
Further, abuse is not defined by the listener, otherwise the same situation could be both abuse and non abuse just by someone dialling up his sensitivity gauge.
Adam and Eve were probably black, since it’s easier to lose pigment than gain it, so are we all black?
Okay, so why do we have something called the naaCp?
Calling out secularist for being inconsistent? But that is the one thing they are consistent about.
One chief difference: Jenner openly identified herself as a person born with a male body who identified as female and was taking medical steps to transition to a more feminine looking appearance. Dolezal, to the best of my knowledge, never said she was born white but identified more strongly with African-American culture. There are, indeed, a lot of interesting questions to unpack here. Case in point: Iron Eyes Cody was an Italian-American born in Louisiana who identified as a Native American, successfully enough to have a long career as an actor playing Native American roles. The Native American community knew… Read more »
Not so. According to most news outlets I’ve read, Dolezal did actually claim to have a Black father. Jenner is only female according to postmodern sensibilities. Hundreds of years from now when Bruce’s casket is unearthed by archaeologists, they will identify him as a man–replete with male chromosomes and bone structure. Only in a self-asserting, politically correct, and media-saturated culture can you deny physical reality and get away with it. >>One chief difference: Jenner openly identified herself as a person born with a male body who identified as female and was taking medical steps to transition to a more feminine… Read more »
Yes there is a difference between secretly living a lie and openly living one.
Welp. I don’t think I have anything to add to that.
What causes the hoi polloi to go capslock in comment threads—do they think we uppity educated folk cannot discern their brand of subtlety?
Ah yes, the 70’s. When women were women and men jumped great distances on motorcycles.
There was also an olympic athelete I admired as a kid, but the name eludes me.
What is(are) the sin(s) here?
Know that the LORD Himself is God; It is He who has made us, and not we ourselves; We are His people and the sheep of His pasture. (Psalm 100:3)
Uccello’s St. George Slays The Narrative .
The answer to Doug’s question is science. Jenner had genes passed on from both a woman and a man (only 3 human beings who ever walked the earth didn’t). Brains and bodies are the results of male and female genetic material. A person with no black ancestors, that her family knows of, can more easily be characterized as pretending than a man who is thinking as a woman can be. God made Bruce Jenner’s brain and his body. Why do you believe the body but not the brain defines what he is? Being an effeminate man is also a sin.… Read more »
“Why do you believe the body but not the brain defines what he is?”
This is the thing that baffles me. Not just the brain, but the psyche, are slaves to the body here. That is contrary to the idea that we are immortal souls temporarily housed in bodies of clay.
I was just bringing up some science. I don’t think we are immortal souls…That would imply we weren’t created beings, wouldn’t it?
I am all about the science, Michael, but that doesn’t rule out our being created beings. Science is just the body of knowledge, that’s all. It doesn’t conflict with the existence of God. It can’t. It can (partially) answer, about creation, “how”, but never “who” and “why”.
This is brilliant. Thank-you.
Okay, all bets are off! I just read a description of Rachel’s childhood written by one of her brothers. No wonder she is distressed and confused! After reading the headline in the New York Post that Rachel lived in a Christian cult, I prepared myself for tales of abominable cruelty, intellectual deprivation, and emotional abuse. At last, I thought, we will all understand the reign of terror that gave birth to so much deception. I learned two facts. The children were forced to starve before dinner while their father read aloud a chapter from the Bible. How cruel. My own… Read more »
This guy gets it: http://i.imgur.com/NFMZWrx.png transfinancial