Transgender Man Here! Ask Me Anything! :)

[CuriositasEtFidem]

7 hours ago, Lilllabettt said:

Not trying to pick on you, but this is the language of performance.  You're playing the "part" our society has assigned men to play. 

The theory of trans identity (as being normal non pathological) has never been explained to me in a way that is not sexist. 

This story was featured in local media about a transwoman in one of Chicago's neighborhoods... we were meant to applaud the courage on display. I'm not sure if I've ever been sadder or more disappointed, as a woman, in my life due to the overwhelming misogyny encoded here and presented for applause... .. https://patch.com/illinois/beverly-mtgreenwood/transition-after-70-why-transgender-woman-made-change

Ah, you've been caught out. There's no there,  there my friend. You can make a decent argument from scripture and tradition which is what speculative theology is all about. But others can argue with you and there's nothing objective in our religion saying which is right. It's like, your opinion, man.

Catholicism has a lot fewer hard and fast rules than most people think. 

The Church hasn't said much because it needs a "why" and that is tricky. If the "why" is imprecise it could forbid cosmetic surgery. It could forbid surgery for those who have ambiguous genitalia. The Church hasn't defined what constitutes femaleness or maleness - it's only been very recently that we could peer into DNA and see sex chromosomes. Before this the determination was made looking at genitalia. Now people suggest it's brain/neuro structure. And we know a tiny % of the population has indeterminate genitalia and/or chromosomes. And indeterminate brains? So any teaching has to take into account their existence. It's difficult to say, transitioning between male and female is wrong, without first defining what female and male is - how they are objectively determined.

Very complex and difficult.  

I agree with you, I am frustrated by gender theory's dodging the question as to what is it to be male or to be female. 

At the end of the day, because of the lack of concrete definition on being trans by the Church, it is a sort of speculative-come-to-your-own-educated-conclusion type of thing, I guess. I fall into the more liberal camp.

As for the Chicago transwoman, her "courage" comes from her being able to openly be herself, despite the risk of jeers, general transphobia, assault, and worse, which is a sad reality for a lot of trans folks, especially transwomen. Forgive me, but I'm not quite sure where misogyny fits in here, could you please elaborate?

7 hours ago, Ash Wednesday said:

It's very uncharted territory of discussion for many Catholics, at the very least certainly myself. Which leads me to wonder if there also needs to be more concrete pastoral guidance with the Church on the issue in the future to help us all through a confusing time.

I think there may have been one person years ago that was on here that I think perhaps had some issues with gender and there may have been some discussion about what kind of guidance he had about it with a priest, but they talked about other things in general and it was only briefly discussed on a tangent somewhat.

My ideal is for people of all walks of life to be able to come together and have rational, charitable discussions -- even among faithful Catholics online from the traditionals to the charismatics to the hip hoppers -- I've noticed that people seem to struggle to come to grips with diversity of opinion on pockets of grey that aren't always entirely settled and clear. 

For the most part -- in general if nothing else, we really love cake and tacos around here, and we fight a lot on election years. 
 

 

Ah, tacos and cake. That's a unifying point I can agree with (Besides, of course, our being a family in Christ  ) 

7 hours ago, Lilllabettt said:

Not trying to pick on you, but this is the language of performance.  You're playing the "part" our society has assigned men to play. 

Nah, I don't think you're picking on me, don't worry :). For the sake of argument, if it is performance, what's wrong with that? I'm just a dude, living as one in peace

[Lilllabettt]

16 minutes ago, CuriositasEtFidem said:

Forgive me, but I'm not quite sure where misogyny fits in here, could you please elaborate?

"The choices she made were always from the perspective of a female. ' I have always tended to take jobs, and do things, that are typically for females.' "

"English described her childhood in Ohio as one of a typical "1950s girl" in a 2017 YouTube video titled "I Was Always In A Woman's Mindset."

"Helping care for babies is something she found natural. 'I was doing the things I wanted to do, and they were all female-based,' she said. 'I was so excited when my first nephew was born because I always wanted to be around babies.' "

"And each day since, she comes closer to knowing 'how it feels to be a woman.' "

"multitasking is noticeably easier, and her memory has improved immensely. Emotions are stronger, however. 'When the estrogen hits, I will get mood swings," she said. "I'll get crying spells. I'm becoming more and more sensitive to the cold.' "

"Her sexual desires changed along with the transition, too. 'What I'm attracted to sexually is very different for me,' she said. 'Now, if I see a muscular gay man, it's like nothing for me. I'm not interested. I'm now finding myself more attracted to straight men and trans men.' "

All of this is dripping with misogyny and sexism. 

There are in fact no jobs and "things" that are "for" females.  That's probably leftover sexist garbage from the 1950s. What the eff is a "woman's mindset"... what is that supposed to mean - women think a certain way??? What exactly are female-based activities? Oh, is caring for children a "female based" activity, really? It came naturally to this person, therefore that's evidence she's really a woman ... as if men don't find it natural to care for children??? Interesting that the chemicals being injected are letting her know what it "feels like to be a woman", whatever the eff that is supposed to mean. Apparently it has something to do with mood swings, and feeling cold all the time. Give me a break!!! Oh and apparently being a woman is related to being straight-  since this person was gay but now since "becoming a woman" likes straight men/transwomen. 

The article mentions she was constantly with her mother, who allowed her to act like a little girl (however little girls are supposed to act?) and that after being sexually abused by adult men she thought that was her purpose - "to please men sexually " ... interesting, I suppose that is also part of her understanding of what being a woman is as well? Pleasing men sexually?

Basically every other line in this article is red flag after red flag of internalized toxic nonsense. I want to protect little boys and girls from reading it. 

50 minutes ago, CuriositasEtFidem said:

if it is performance, what's wrong with that? I'm just a dude, living as one in peace

I mean, if reinforcing gender stereotypes is what you need to feel happy or alive, you do you.

But the fact you have this strong need to perform gender stereotypes is to me sad and depressing and evidence that society is inequitable.

For the vast majority of people in our society, gender stereotypes are corrosive and limit human flourishing. Of course if society were to heal and gender stereotypes were to dissappear, so would your "identity."  Afterall you can't play the "part" society assigns to men if there is no script provided for how men must look, sound and behave.

Basically, the existence of trans identity proves the existence of sexism. Not judging you, as it sounds like you probably got fed a lot of garbage from your parents about gender - much like the transwoman with the 1950s childhood did in this article.  In some ways trans people just rehearse the same poison we've all been fed - except for them, usually because of intervening factors (sex abuse, autism, maladjustment to non normative sexual orientation) it manifests as trans identity.  

 

[fides' Jack]

On 2/9/2021 at 6:12 PM, Lilllabettt said:

I'm sorry but this is nonsense. Gender stereotypes do not feature in natural law.  Did I skip over this in Aquinas? Can you quote me the Church's teaching on this?

What you call "gender stereotypes" is part of the natural order.  Natural law speaks derives from the natural order.  The vocabulary you employ to demean the idea of true masculinity and femininity is nothing but demonic propaganda.

On 2/9/2021 at 6:12 PM, Lilllabettt said:

However, yikes to: "truth matters more than people's lives." Yes I guess but also no. I mean, you can allow someone to live as they wish without harassment and still reject their version of reality as upside down. You can do both. Are you a psychiatrist, because your statement that "you don't treat mental illness by playing into it" isn't exactly true in every case. If mental illness is refractory to treatment, harm reduction is a viable option. I'm thinking specifically of dementia. When demented elderly people come up with nonsense, the best practice is to not argue with or correct them.  A lot of dementia patients benefit from having a doll or stuffed animal to care for as if it were real. Just 2 examples.

Truth will always matter more than people's lives.  That doesn't mean that you have to shove it in people's faces all the time.  Nor am I doing that right now.  A person is free to come to a board such as this one and bring up their baggage.  A responsible Christian will call them out on anything they say that's contrary to Church teaching - and they MUST, or they are not truly Christian.  On a public board, that's the expectation.  

The example of a dementia patient caring for a stuffed animal is a false analogy.  Nobody is telling the patient that the stuffed animal is actually alive. 

The ends do not justify the means.

On 2/9/2021 at 6:09 PM, CuriositasEtFidem said:

Not the first time I've been told I'm going to Hell lol. I believe that God created me transgender, and it's taken a very long time to crawl out of the pit of self-hatred and anxiety that religious guilt had trapped me in. I'm not going back. 

I didn't say you were going to hell.  I would never say such a thing.

I'm saying if you stay on this path that you're on, it will take you to hell.

That's a huge difference, morally speaking.

The guilt that you experienced probably came from a somewhat-informed conscience.  It sounds like you've closed off your eyes and ears to the truth.  Many theologians consider "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit" to be the adamant refusal to repent.  

I'm guessing there's still a still, small voice calling to you from your soul, gently nudging you to change your life.  Maybe you've already banished it; I don't know.  If you can't hear it anymore, I would beg you to search for it, again.

I will continue to pray for you.

1 hour ago, CuriositasEtFidem said:

I'm just a dude

That's a lie.

1 hour ago, CuriositasEtFidem said:

At the end of the day, because of the lack of concrete definition on being trans by the Church, it is a sort of speculative-come-to-your-own-educated-conclusion type of thing, I guess

There is a concrete definition, though unfortunately you won't hear it from many bishops.  It's not a matter of coming to your own conclusion.  The morality of it is set in stone, and it's condemned, absolutely.

[Lilllabettt]

18 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

What you call "gender stereotypes" is part of the natural order.  Natural law speaks derives from the natural order.  The vocabulary you employ to demean the idea of true masculinity and femininity is nothing but demonic propaganda.

There is nothing about gender stereotypes in natural law. You can't explain it because it doesn't exist. You may think it does or it should. It doesn't.  

Authentic masculinity has nothing to do with facial hair or math or pantaloons or blue. Sorry. Cosmic masculinity is about making the sacrifice play and using strength and power to protect and defend. 

30 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

The morality of it is set in stone, and it's condemned, absolutely.

You say this but you have no back up. I'm no fan of transgenderism and if there was anything concrete and objective to back me up I'd be first in line. It doesn't exist and I think you know that. 

[fides' Jack]

10 hours ago, little2add said:

 

Throughout Scriptural history, when God's people go astray, God allows them to debase themselves to the lowest extremes in order that they might eventually find true humility.  He does this by allowing them to blind themselves to truth, to the point that they can no longer recognize even basic truths, such as what a man is, and what a woman is.

You're right, it doesn't matter, because if someone can't see this truth, there is no way to convince them.  The teachings of the Church are clear as day if they're applied properly - in every possible circumstance.  Just because some new perverse idea comes along (though this one is actually pretty old), doesn't mean that the Church hasn't ruled on the morality of it.  

If a person is blind to this, which is so obviously clear, I wouldn't trust them on any moral issue, regardless of their educational qualifications (which, to be honest, in this day and age, is an indication that one might be more heterodox than orthodox).

3 minutes ago, Lilllabettt said:

You say this but you have no back up. I'm no fan of transgenderism and if there was anything concrete and objective to back me up I'd be first in line. It doesn't exist and I think you know that. 

See above.

8 minutes ago, Lilllabettt said:

Authentic masculinity has nothing to do with facial hair or math or pantaloons or blue. Sorry. Cosmic masculinity is about making the sacrifice play and using strength and power to protect and defend.

This is the first time I've heard the term "cosmic masculinity".  What a nonsensical term...

You first tell me what "authentic masculinity" isn't, and then tell me what "cosmic masculinity" is.

We're not arguing about facial hair or math or pantaloons or blue.  We're arguing about a woman calling herself a man, and about a man calling himself a woman.  It's intrinsically evil, and you should know that and recognize that publicly.

That's what transgenderism is.  It's not about a man having feminine qualities (because almost every single man on my side of this argument would tell you that, yes, they are more feminine in ways x or y).  It's about lying to yourself and expecting the world to accept your lie.

And I won't do it.  Neither should you.

[Lilllabettt]

14 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

This is the first time I've heard the term "cosmic masculinity".  What a nonsensical term...

Oh you big ol... Are you familiar with the term "feminine genius." It has nothing to do with skirts! It's the ultimate cosmic meaning and significance of femaleness in the universe. You make yourself look silly! Seriously! 

[fides' Jack]

On 2/9/2021 at 6:23 PM, CuriositasEtFidem said:

I do, however, intend to get top surgery, which is safer by miles. My chest is a major source of my dysphoria. I slouch, bind it, and dress in layers to hide it. To put it bluntly, if I may, it smells of elderberries a whole lot. I don't recognize myself in the mirror when I see it. It's not "me."

I'm sorry, I gotta say one more thing.  You might "feel" better calling yourself a man, but this entire attitude screams against ALL forms of masculinity, whether we're talking about stereotypes or culture or biology or virtue.  Biologically and stereotypically, men love breasts.  

If you hate them, you might feel better saying the word "man" to describe yourself, but the fact that you hate your breasts is a bigger indication that you are a woman than that you are a man.

5 minutes ago, Lilllabettt said:

Oh you big ol... Are you familiar with the term "feminine genius." It has nothing to do with skirts! It's the ultimate cosmic meaning and significance of femaleness in the universe. You make yourself look silly! Seriously! 

I guess you didn't read the paragraph following that one.  Oh, well...

[Jaime]

4 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

  You might "feel" better calling yourself a man, but this entire attitude screams against ALL forms of masculinity, whether we're talking about stereotypes or culture or biology or virtue.  Biologically and stereotypically, men love breasts.  

If you hate them, you might feel better saying the word "man" to describe yourself, but the fact that you hate your breasts is a bigger indication that you are a woman than that you are a man.

Well I don't want to dive into this too much but I'd like to point out two things you aren't considering

1. While men may like breasts, they absolutely don't like them on their own body.

B, This is just my opinion but I think truth be told, women admire breasts more than guys do. 

[Lilllabettt]

1 minute ago, fides' Jack said:

Biologically and stereotypically, men love breasts.  

Lol, no.

In some cultures women's breasts are not sexually charged objects. They fill the biological purpose of feeding offspring and that's their cultural meaning. Revealing ones breasts in public has no sexual significance; men having sexual interest in breasts are considered infantile childish and like they have a nanny kink or something.  Basically the opposite of masculinity.

Your world seems narrow.

BTW I as a woman love my breasts. God gave me them, they're perfect. 

 

[little2add]

45 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

You're right, it doesn't matter, because if someone can't see this truth, there is no way to convince them.  The teachings of the Church are clear as day if they're applied properly -

time for a brake from all the banter.  can we all just take 5 and dig a good song

Sing to Percy

sing it loud, sing it proud

 

BTW: Sledge married twice and was survived by his second wife, Rosa Sledge, whom he married in 1980.  He had 12 children, three of whom became singers.

 

Edited February 11, 2021 by little2add

[fides' Jack]

6 minutes ago, Lilllabettt said:

Lol, no.

In some cultures women's breasts are not sexually charged objects. They fill the biological purpose of feeding offspring and that's their cultural meaning. Revealing ones breasts in public has no sexual significance; men having sexual interest in breasts are considered infantile childish and like they have a nanny kink or something.  Basically the opposite of masculinity.

Your world seems narrow.

BTW I as a woman love my breasts. God gave me them, they're perfect. 

 

Praise God!  

I think women should love their breasts as being a gift from God.  

I also didn't use the term "sexual" intentionally - I considered it, but realized that "biological" covers so much more.  Breasts are life-giving.  A few men (a very small, small minority), don't care about breasts.  They don't dislike them, they just don't care.  All other men love breasts.  Yes, in some cultures they see them in normal life enough that it's not immediately sexual to them, but they love them nonetheless.  I would go so far as to say that even in our Western culture, truly virtuous men do not make breasts into sexual objects.  Nonetheless, they love them.

I don't think you understand the first thing about "my world".  You've clearly misunderstood most of what I've been trying to say here.

All that being said, you are not a man, you really can't speak to how men feel about anything, in any culture.  

 

My point stands - disliking your own breasts is an indication that you are a woman, not a man.  Men love breasts.

[CuriositasEtFidem]

30 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

Biologically and stereotypically, men love breasts.  

If you hate them, you might feel better saying the word "man" to describe yourself, but the fact that you hate your breasts is a bigger indication that you are a woman than that you are a man.

I guess you didn't read the paragraph following that one.  Oh, well...

Haha, I'm sorry, but what I meant by that is that I hate them on me, not on other people. It's weird how people fetishize them. They're there for feeding children. That's it lol.

[fides' Jack]

25 minutes ago, Jaime said:

1. While men may like breasts, they absolutely don't like them on their own body.

I don't even buy that.  Especially these days, when so, so many men are obsessed with their own genitalia, this doesn't fly.  

Logically speaking, good men would not want them on their own body, but for most men, if they had them, they wouldn't hate them, just because men are naturally so much more sexually-inclined than women.

[CuriositasEtFidem]

1 hour ago, Lilllabettt said:

I mean, if reinforcing gender stereotypes is what you need to feel happy or alive, you do you.

But the fact you have this strong need to perform gender stereotypes is to me sad and depressing and evidence that society is inequitable.

For the vast majority of people in our society, gender stereotypes are corrosive and limit human flourishing. Of course if society were to heal and gender stereotypes were to dissappear, so would your "identity."  Afterall you can't play the "part" society assigns to men if there is no script provided for how men must look, sound and behave.

Basically, the existence of trans identity proves the existence of sexism. Not judging you, as it sounds like you probably got fed a lot of garbage from your parents about gender - much like the transwoman with the 1950s childhood did in this article. 

 

I don't need gender stereotypes to be happy. In fact, I'm rather feminine, and enjoy stereotypically feminine things, but still identify as male. 

I agree with you that gender stereotypes are no good, and do limit people's flourishing. For example, a boy could have a wonderful gift for dancing, yet be discouraged from letting that part of himself flourish because it's a "girl's thing." 

If my identity were to disappear, so would everyone else's.

Yes, I was raised in a "girls do this, boys do that" environment, so I suppose that has something to contribute.

2 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

just because men are naturally so much more sexually-inclined than women.

Hmmm, bad time to mention I'm also asexual? (not meant in a mean tone)

[fides' Jack]

4 minutes ago, CuriositasEtFidem said:

Haha, I'm sorry, but what I meant by that is that I hate them on me, not on other people. It's weird how people fetishize them. They're there for feeding children. That's it lol.

And this attitude is also an indication that you're more a woman than a man.  Men are just naturally more prone to sexualizing and fetishizing - even to themselves (see my reply to Jaime).  

1 minute ago, CuriositasEtFidem said:

For example, a boy could have a wonderful gift for dancing, yet be discouraged from letting that part of himself flourish because it's a "girl's thing." 

And that's not bad.