I read it once.
Reading it twice is banned by the Geneva Convention.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Left now says there's no such thing as a "woman"
- Thread starter Earthtank
- Start date
Reading it twice is banned by the Geneva Convention.
“Welcome to Hell!! Oooh, you’re a philosopher you say? Here, your very own copy of Atlas Shrugged 2. Every time you read a page, it gets two pages longer!”
Strong with you the evil is.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
I find it rather mundane and not very exciting compared to what nature can really do. Transgender people have been around as long as people, and many cultures throughout history have stories of characters who end up changing sexes.
In other living organisms it just sometimes happens naturally. And when you consider the myriad factors and processes going on during development, it's no surprise a mix of brain and body can happen in humans.
What's strange is blackholes, tardigrades, fungus, and the incompatibly of Newtonian Physics and Einstein's Relativity.
Very true, I agree - it shouldn't be looked at as something 'bizarre'.
For a relative majority of humans, sex can all line up into a kind of neat "sexual dimorphism" or duality when all is said and done. I, for instance, am a genotypic, phenotypic male whose gender identity is also as a man.
But for a large minority of human beings this is not and has never been the case - the phenotype might not match the genotype (i.e. androgen sensitivity disorder) or the neurotype / identity might not match the phenotype (trans).
Every culture has people who don't confirm to the sex or gender binary. Across the board there are a fair number of intersexed and transgendered people and this all emerges naturally.
Here is a characteristic case from medieval European history:
Were there Transgender People in the Middle Ages? | The Public Medievalist
The medieval court case of Eleanor Rykener shows a legal system that is trying to square a person who lives as a woman, and calls herself Eleanor, with other information that leads the court to identify Eleanor as a man named John. In the testimony of this late 14th century London trial, Eleanor is brought into the courts on accusations of sexual misconduct—she was caught in the act performing sex work.
The court does not know, or rather cannot decide, because they cannot decide whether or not Eleanor is a man or a woman. She gives her name as Eleanor, and presents as a woman to the courts. But after interrogation, she is forced to confess that she once lived in London as a man named John. She tells the story of her transition, and her new work as a seamstress and sex worker. She discusses sleeping with both men and women—from aristocrats to nuns and priests—some of whom offered her pay or presents.
In the end, a verdict is not recorded. Indeed, while the text records both the names “Eleanor” and “John,” it is written in Latin, which allowed for the proceedings to continue without the male or female pronouns frequently required by English or French. The court, it seems, did not want to decide on a pronoun because they were still trying to decide what gender to consider Eleanor. Thus, history is left with a record of a trans woman, and also a record of the conflict which is textbook gender dysphoria: a marked difference between the individual’s expressed/experienced gender, and the gender others would assign to him or her.
The court does not know, or rather cannot decide, because they cannot decide whether or not Eleanor is a man or a woman. She gives her name as Eleanor, and presents as a woman to the courts. But after interrogation, she is forced to confess that she once lived in London as a man named John. She tells the story of her transition, and her new work as a seamstress and sex worker. She discusses sleeping with both men and women—from aristocrats to nuns and priests—some of whom offered her pay or presents.
In the end, a verdict is not recorded. Indeed, while the text records both the names “Eleanor” and “John,” it is written in Latin, which allowed for the proceedings to continue without the male or female pronouns frequently required by English or French. The court, it seems, did not want to decide on a pronoun because they were still trying to decide what gender to consider Eleanor. Thus, history is left with a record of a trans woman, and also a record of the conflict which is textbook gender dysphoria: a marked difference between the individual’s expressed/experienced gender, and the gender others would assign to him or her.
I have read studies suggesting that the brain activity and structure of trans people, from a young age, may more closely resemble the typical activation patterns of their gender identity, as opposed to their natal / physiognomic sex. It could be, in some or many cases, that whilst one's biological sex is determined chromosomallly at conception, sexual dimorphism in the brain is a secondary process that occurs in utero (in the womb).
This appears to suggest that gender dysphoria - the feeling of one's gender not matching up with one's physical sex - may be caused by the exposure of foetuses in utero to hormones or indeed foetal insensitivity to certain hormones while in the womb, and that the brains of transpeople neurochemically align with the structure and activation pattern of their 'acquired' gender, and not their natal sex.
In my own Catholic theological terms, therefore, I've long believed that my church should move towards acceptance of transgenderism, just as we already have of intersexed people since the Middle Ages.
In the medieval period, the Church recognised three classes of gender - male, female and hermaphrodite (not defined as 'both male and female' but understood as somehow ambiguous physiologically). It allowed people in cases of ambiguous genitalia or sex characteristics to self-identity under canon law which gender they felt appropriate for themselves.
The 12th-century Decretum Gratiani was the church's primary codex of canon law until reform in 1918. It recognises three sex categories: male, female and hermaphrodite. Of the latter it establishes a legal doctrine: "Whether an hermaphrodite may witness a testament, depends on which sex prevails" ("Hermafroditus an ad testamentum adhiberi possit, qualitas sexus incalescentis ostendit."). In 1271 the canonistic oath was of identity was phrased as follows: "I reply: s/he may say which sex s/he chooses, as our diocesan bishop, the bishop of Turin [demanded in this case];; and s/he may swear further- more not to use the other one." (Summa aurea ( n. 66), col. 612)
If a person is conceived with XY male chromosomes but in the womb develops a female phenotype because of a condition like androgen insensitivity syndrome (which means they are genetically male but physically have the secondary sex characteristics of women, including a vagina with clitoris, breasts etc.), the canon law principles above allow them to "say which sex she/he chooses" based upon their wish to "act like" one gender or the other, such that the "male or female sex prevails" in them.
To me, it is theologically inconsistent that this has so far not been extended in modernity to transgender people. The brain is a bodily organ just like the vagina, penis or breasts and in the case of trans people, of the evidence suggests their brain may be neurochemically gendered in such a way that it aligns with the gender they "feel" themselves to be rather than their chromosomal sex, then to me that's it. If a person of ambiguous genitalia can decide which 'sex' they wish to be identified as (and they can under canon law), it seems a 'no-brainer' to me (pun intended!) that transpeople should be treated exactly the same.
The Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith in my religion, so far, has apparently paid scientific studies like the aforementioned no attention and still portrays transgender identity as if it were just "choice", unlike intersex physical condition, when evidence appears indicates that is as innate as sexuality.
Last edited:
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
They wouldn't have known about that then. They just would have been regular women, as they often are today until they seek medical attention because they never started menstruating.
That's one I haven't heard of before. That's pretty interesting.
Kooky
Freedom from Sanity
You could politely ask how they want to be addressed, no?
Don't intersex people tend to have 1 side (m or f) more dominate than the other? So go with that imo
We also encounter circumstances where we refer
to someone, but without opportunity to ask their
preference. The language is cumbersome at times.
In Chinese, genderless pronouns are the norm.
English might evolve that way.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
I claimed English devolved losing das.
At least we've degendered nouns.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
That is true.
Kooky
Freedom from Sanity
I'm going to go out on a limb and argue that these opinions are going to vary wildly between individuals.
Us humans are not prone to think the same on nearly anything in our lives.
Kooky
Freedom from Sanity
Joke's on you, I'm going to Atheist Heaven!
PoetPhilosopher
Veteran Member
Atheist Heaven? Is that like starring in an episode of Bill Nye the Science Guy while listening to music by Chop Suey?
I think asking someone their pronouns before speaking to them is completely unrealistic nor should be expected, for obvious reasons. While I despise about 60% of what Steven Crowder says, he does have an awesome (and funny) video of how that would be if we really asked people their pronouns first (video below).
In the case of someone that is intersex( not to be confused with transgender) and we do not know or maybe know they are intersex but have more feminine traits, my auto go to will be to speak to her as female unless, and only in the case of someone intersex, asked I refer to them as a guy then I would given the fact that they actually have a real biological condition
If I use the wrong pronoun for someone.
They may simply request their preference.
No damage done.
Everyone happy.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
I just don't use them if I'm unsure and stick to more generic stuff, like you.
I can just imagine going to an engine show,
& asking the obviously men & obviously women
there what their gender preference is.
It would be hilarious.
Better to just assume, & anyone who wants me to
use a different one need only ask.