Go Trans – Figure

In her blog, Salad Bingo, Diana posts her struggles about Transgenderism and Catholicism:

“Transsexuals are even less compatible with Catholic teaching than homosexuals. Homosexuals are simply told to practice chastity. Transsexuals are told we don’t actually exist at all. Once again, I’m not exaggerating. Specifically, Catholic teaching does not acknowledge the possibility that someone could have an external body of one sex but a mind and gender identity of the other. They don’t say they’ve never considered it… they say it’s impossible.”

-Transsexuals in the Catholic Church

And… in a letter from a priest:

“I understand that you were in distress even to the point of your health being wrecked and I’m not in any way making light of that. But objectively speaking, what you proposed and carried out as a remedy to your distress was the breaking of God’s law that says that you may not mutilate your body.”  Kochan continued, “It is better to die than to offend God.

Picture courtesy DNA Creations

It would have been better for you to have given your life to stay in obedience to God, than to break His law and to drag along into sin your poor spouse.” Kochan continued, “That is hard, but really every one of us should feel that way about every serious sin we have committed. We should prefer the death of our bodies to the death of our souls, shouldn’t we?”

-Transsexuals in the Catholic Church

Geez… What happened to: “If your eye offends you, pluck it out? Hand… cut it off?” Nahhhhh… lets go straight for the death… just die… for God.  And we wonder why Queer kids are killing themselves.

No Light on at Home

Let’s sum it from the Roman Catholic point of view: There is no such thing Transgender. You were not born in the wrong body. You are suffering from a mental disorder. Medical transition is mutilating your body and that is against God’s law.  It would be better to die than to transition.

So, this is a part of Catholicism that never made sense to me:   God chose to create a natural world steeped in trangenderism, hermorphidites and homosexuality.  God is reflected in his creation. Even the Catholic Church explains that God is the Father but is also the Mother, and is ultimately beyond gender. So, God is transgendered, and a hermorphidite.

What nonsense!  Why on earth would anyone want to stay in the Catholic Church? They despise their own God, his creation and don’t even know it.

Catechism of HATE

The Roman Catholic Church has a very bloody history of hate and intolerance.  So, their stance on trannies and homos should not come as a surprise.  We are this century’s witches, the pagans and dissidents.

Picture courtesy Flickr/Outrage News Service

“In many nations, transexuality is equated with homosexuality in the eyes of the law. While transgenderism benefits from having a low profile that governments often don’t bother to legislate against us, many do legislate against homosexuality with the death penalty which brings us under indirect persecution. (Iran, India, and Egypt are some notable exceptions from this mistake.) Add to that many transexuals who do not realize they’re “really” trans and so identify and act gay. The connection with the Catholic Church is that the UN drafted a resolution calling for the decriminalization of homosexuality (transgenderism not mentioned) but the Vatican officially refused to support it. They said (in nicer words) they would rather allow gays to die than begin the slippery slope that might lead to states being encouraged to legalize same-sex marriage. By extension, this applies to heterosexual transmen and transwomen as well.”

Transchristians

Run, Baby, Run

When I found Terry’s blog, Queering the Church, I still held the belief that if you are gay or trans then it would be better if you dumped the church and went somewhere else. “Look, they made the rules. You don’t agree. So, why are you staying and forcing your beliefs on them?” In fact, it is one of the reasons why I left my vocation in the Roman Catholic Church.  I was also faced with such hypocrisy, I wondered why so many continued to belong to the Church and just didn’t move on to another church that aligned with their life choices and beliefs.

Look at what trans-people have to face:

And these are just the bigger expressions of hate and discrimination that have made the media.  I won’t list here the verbal and emotional abuse either, because you already know.  Being mean and many types of harassment is not illegal here in the US.

Epiphany

Yesterday on Queering the Church, Terry talked about obligation to dissent.  I responded:

“I guess my favorite part of your post is obligation to dissent.  When I worked in Long Term Care, and the elders would come to me with their complaints and wanting to do something about it, I would encourage it much to the disappointment of the staff.  I would help them in whatever capacity they wished to see that they were heard, to show them they had value, they were effective and could still make a difference.  It shows they were listening, they took an interest, that they cared, that they wanted to contribute, they wanted to stand up for something and most of all, wanted to correct a wrong for the people who came after them.  I never understood why anyone would want to squelch them, but there were often staff that did.”

And then, while writing this post, the most remarkable thing occurred: I changed my mind.

You see, I had supported my elder’s dissention in their facility for many reasons.  The main reason is because the long term care facility was their home and they were paying for it.  They had a right to have their home the way they thought it should be.

And so it is with Catholic laity.  It is their church and they paid for it! Hell, they ARE the church. They have a right to have their home of God reflect the revelation of Christ as they know him/her.

Those who decide to stay in the Church and stand up for what they believe are also bringing hope and change to millions:

Progress in Leadership

In 2007, an Archbishop conducted mass at a Gay Roman Catholic church in the Castro and he served Holy Communion to the “sister”. You know the ones: The Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence.  I commend him.  The following was taken from a scathing article regarding this “incident”:

“To hand over our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ to known practicing and promoting sodomites, in the middle of a ‘gay-friendly Mass’ is beyond the pale.”

 -.lifesitenews

I do not understand the fuss.  Christ did not appear to the righteous, or hang around with them… he hung around with us!  I say, the Archbishop was acting by Christ’s divine will in giving the Eucharist to where Christ says he wishes to go: to the sinners. In spite of calling for his resignation by Catholic hate-mongers, Archbishop Niederauer remains Archbishop of San Francisco.  Praise God!

And there are others:

Visit these two links and show yourself just how many Catholics are taking action to support love and equality.  Sometimes it is easy to forget, when a Cardinal or Pontiff appears to spew forth the hatred from one of the largest religions on earth. The Our Lady’s Warriors site have amassed an incredible list of hate targets… (or, for me,  a very comprehensive list of  Catholics spreading the love of Christ to LGBTQ.) Many thanks to Our Lady’s Warriors for making such a wonderful hate list as well as  making it easy for me to refer people to help these dissidents! I know it took months to compile such a list. I love when my adversaries are so very helpful and save me lots of time and effort! I guess this just goes to show there is a few good things about hate.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Mario is the Program Coordinator for the Sacramento Gay and Lesbian Center’s, The Lavender Angels. A non-profit program that serves the Lavender Heights district with on street “Angels” who provide safety, escorting, directions, maps, first aid, assistance with nuisance behaviors, homeless outreach, youth pilot employment program and environmental awareness during the day and on graveyard shifts on the weekends. https://www.facebook.com/SacramentoLavenderAngels

Enhanced by Zemanta
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

16 comments for “Go Trans – Figure

  1. January 14, 2012 at 10:02 am

    Trannie is a despicable and insulting word. I know of not one single trans person who thinks otherwise, ALL think it a highly offensive word. Please confine your descriptors to those put forward by trans people themselves.

  2. January 14, 2012 at 10:07 am

    Just learnt you ARE trans… my comment stands however. Apart from yourself now, I know of no other trans person who believes it is a suitable word to use.

    I would be grateful, as someone is probably more familiar with the Catechism than I, if you could point out any references to trans people in it. I can’t find any.

  3. January 14, 2012 at 11:01 am

    I speak as an outsider on this. However, I have a few observations.

    I know that this is an extremely controversial word, which very many people find highly offensive, but I also know that Mario is not the only trans person to use it. It is certainly used in the drag community (as in “Tranny Shack”), but that may be part of the problem – I don’t know. I have also heard it used by an occasional cross-dresser I know, who mixes freely in both trans and cis groups.  

    My experience is that almost every specific word can meet objections from some people. I have been criticized on this site for using “transgendered”, and for using “transsexual”.  

    I’m on a huge learning curve myself, but my observation is that there are huge complexties and internal diversity inside the trans /intersex community, which makes really accurate terminology, acceptable to everyone, difficult to agree on.

    We have a similar problem in the broader LGBT community, in which there are no really accurate and acceptable, simple terms. I prefer “queer”, which is offensive to many people, and so is probably the worst possible term – except for all the rest.

    • January 14, 2012 at 11:33 am

      Drag queens have NOTHING to do with transsexual people, this is where the confusion, and hurt starts. I find the word completely unacceptable and was making my opinion known. The word is NOT regarded as a “re-owned” word by the trans, meaning transsexual community, as generally recognised in this country, trust me on that.

      As you point out, as an outsider, you know the word is highly charged, is it possible that as editor whom all posts have to be cleared by you could have flagged it as a trigger word? I certainly would.

      Tranny, Shemale, these terms are pejoratives and nearly always used as such. There are many trans lexicons available on the web, written by trans people themselves however. I suggest a small study of them in order to inform what may and may not be acceptable to the majority. Just a suggestion.

  4. January 14, 2012 at 11:02 am

    I speak as an outsider on this. However, I have a few observations.

    I know that this is an extremely controversial word, which very many people find highly offensive, but I also know that Mario is not the only trans person to use it. It is certainly used in the drag community (as in “Tranny Shack”), but that may be part of the problem – I don’t know. I have also heard it used by an occasional cross-dresser I know, who mixes freely in both trans and cis groups.  

    My experience is that almost every specific word can meet objections from some people. I have been criticized on this site for using “transgendered”, and for using “transsexual”.  

    I’m on a huge learning curve myself, but my observation is that there are huge complexties and internal diversity inside the trans /intersex community, which makes really accurate terminology, acceptable to everyone, difficult to agree on.

    We have a similar problem in the broader LGBT community, in which there are no really accurate and acceptable, simple terms. I prefer “queer”, which is offensive to many people, and so is probably the worst possible term – except for all the rest.

  5. January 14, 2012 at 4:08 pm

    Christ did indeed hang around with sinners, and by definition sinners are those who should repent and change… are we sinners that need to change? Although rarely acknowledged in the Catholic church, I assume that they, meaning the hierarchy, see us as sinners, and therefore we need to change; i.e. NOT have sex with people of the same gender or try and live as the opposite of what we were assigned at birth.

    It is the definition of sinner, no, of sin itself that needs to change, a fresh look at just what sin is. that Jesus teaches us about. It’s fairly easy to say He believed hate was a sin, but what about those He hung round with? Us.

    There is an excellent book that may be able to help us draw conclusion on this, ‘The Crime of My Very Existence: Nazism and the Myth of Jewish Criminality’ by Michael Berkowitz. Isn’t that what the Catholic church has done, labelled us a crime against God?

    I like the positivism you provide, and I like the way you make a point of suggesting that it is possible to be trans and stay within the Catholic church if it is what drives your faith. We all exist in some way, outside of God’s law, and we all break so-called natural law. Isn’t flying, eating shrimp, even hair styling breaking natural law?

    To utilise a hypothetical position, that is to say we are an abomination in the eyes of God (and it is hypothetical), to discriminate and deny a persons very existence IS breaking natural law. It flies in the face of what God may well have chosen for His creation. It assumes, presumes sorry, what God is thinking and has done/is doing. Basically what people say in this regard second-guesses God. Surely the most heinous of sins; putting words into God’s mouth.

  6. January 14, 2012 at 4:10 pm

    Christ did indeed hang around with sinners, and by definition sinners are those who should repent and change… are we sinners that need to change? Although rarely acknowledged in the Catholic church, I assume that they, meaning the hierarchy, see us as sinners, and therefore we need to change; i.e. NOT have sex with people of the same gender or try and live as the opposite of what we were assigned at birth.

    It is the definition of sinner, no, of sin itself that needs to change, a fresh look at just what sin is. that Jesus teaches us about. It’s fairly easy to say He believed hate was a sin, but what about those He hung round with? Us.

    There is an excellent book that may be able to help us draw conclusion on this, ‘The Crime of My Very Existence: Nazism and the Myth of Jewish Criminality’ by Michael Berkowitz. Isn’t that what the Catholic church has done, labelled us a crime against God?

    I like the positivism you provide, and I like the way you make a point of suggesting that it is possible to be trans and stay within the Catholic church if it is what drives your faith. We all exist in some way, outside of God’s law, and we all break so-called natural law. Isn’t flying, eating shrimp, even hair styling breaking natural law?

    To utilise a hypothetical position, that is to say we are an abomination in the eyes of God (and it is hypothetical), to discriminate and deny a persons very existence IS breaking natural law. It flies in the face of what God may well have chosen for His creation. It assumes, presumes sorry, what God is thinking and has done/is doing. Basically what people say in this regard second-guesses God. Surely the most heinous of sins; putting words into God’s mouth.

  7. January 14, 2012 at 4:11 pm

    Christ did indeed hang around with sinners, and by definition sinners
    are those who should repent and change… are we sinners that need to
    change? Although rarely acknowledged in the Catholic church, I assume
    that they, meaning the hierarchy, see us as sinners, and therefore we
    need to change; i.e. NOT have sex with people of the same gender or try
    and live as the opposite of what we were assigned at birth.

    It is the definition of sinner, no, of sin itself that needs to change, a
    fresh look at just what sin is. that Jesus teaches us about. It’s
    fairly easy to say He believed hate was a sin, but what about those He
    hung round with? Us.

    There is an excellent book that may be able to help us draw conclusion on this, ‘The Crime of My Very Existence: Nazism and the Myth of Jewish Criminality’ by Michael Berkowitz. Isn’t that what the Catholic church has done, labelled us a crime against God?

    I like the positivism you provide, and I like the way you make a point
    of suggesting that it is possible to be trans and stay within the
    Catholic church if it is what drives your faith. We all exist in some
    way, outside of God’s law, and we all break so-called natural law. Isn’t
    flying, eating shrimp, even hair styling breaking natural law?

    To utilise a hypothetical position, that is to say we are an abomination
    in the eyes of God (and it is hypothetical), to discriminate and deny a
    persons very existence IS breaking natural law. It flies in the face of
    what God may well have chosen for His creation. It assumes, presumes
    sorry, what God is thinking and has done/is doing. Basically what people
    say in this regard second-guesses God. Surely the most heinous of sins;
    putting words into God’s mouth.

  8. January 14, 2012 at 4:37 pm

    Christ did indeed hang around with sinners, and by definition sinners
    are those who should repent and change… are we sinners that need to
    change? Although rarely acknowledged in the Catholic church, I assume
    that they, meaning the hierarchy, see us as sinners, and therefore we
    need to change; i.e. NOT have sex with people of the same gender or try
    and live as the opposite of what we were assigned at birth.

    It is the definition of sinner, no, of sin itself that needs to change, a
    fresh look at just what sin is. that Jesus teaches us about. It’s
    fairly easy to say He believed hate was a sin, but what about those He
    hung round with? Us.

    There is an excellent book that may be able to help us draw conclusion on this, ‘The Crime of My Very Existence: Nazism and the Myth of Jewish Criminality’ by Michael Berkowitz. Isn’t that what the Catholic church has done, labelled us a crime against God?

    I like the positivism you provide, and I like the way you make a point
    of suggesting that it is possible to be trans and stay within the
    Catholic church if it is what drives your faith. We all exist in some
    way, outside of God’s law, and we all break so-called natural law. Isn’t
    flying, eating shrimp, even hair styling breaking natural law?

    To utilise a hypothetical position, that is to say we are an abomination
    in the eyes of God (and it is hypothetical), to discriminate and deny a
    persons very existence IS breaking natural law. It flies in the face of
    what God may well have chosen for His creation. It assumes, presumes
    sorry, what God is thinking and has done/is doing. Basically what people
    say in this regard second-guesses God. Surely the most heinous of sins;
    putting words into God’s mouth.

  9. Mario
    January 14, 2012 at 4:41 pm

    Good Morning Everyone!!  Sorry to be late to the party.  I slept in this morning in prep for graveyard street patrol tonight!!

    On Dec 27th on Facebook, I responded too a “national crisis”. A TV star used the word tranny in an interview and trangendered folks were preparing to press the “red button” of doom:

    “I am confused…. as a tranny, I am allowed to use the word tranny particularly when I am being cute and snappy. A black person can use the N word (wont say it here, y’all cause I am not African American… otherwise I would), when he/she feels like it and its OK. I could go on and on about other words too… use by cultures or persons identified by particular adjectives and when they use the words its OK….but if you are not “in the group” and you innocently use the word, you are guilty of harming a nation. Is there something wrong with this picture? PS: I happen to like the word TRANNY!!”
    I contend that words, even words like shit and fuck, are JUST WORDS.  I believe they can be used appropriately and in non-hateful context… which was the incident I was responding too. 

    This word also just suddenly became banned by a section of MY population after being freely used by said population.  The idea here from the alarmists is that verbiage like the word trannie is used in assaults, so in effect it is hate language.  This argument is laughable!  As someone who has witnessed numerous assaults, I would like to inform said population that there are MANY mundane words that will also have to be banned as “hate words” then!

    “Popular Dogma CREATES evil by defining their dirty words. Dirty words serve as a dividing line to tell whose side you are on… so punishment (discrimination) can be sent the correct way. Ahh… community policing… We shall protect you!!! Are you ready? Cause the words change daily!!! GO….” http://alllie.com/dirtywords.shtml

    There is no such thing as Hate words; it is how the words are used.  Guns do not kill people, people kill people. My personal belief is that trannies and fags as well as all the rest of the queer folks need to calm down and focus on intentions and stop attacking every Larry, Curly or Mo because they got their pronouns mixed up, or like me, use  legal names and gender because we have to use legal identifying information when referring to people in reports. (There was an out cry to media/police when they used a Trangendered persons legal name and gender and not the chosen one, saying it was discriminatory).

    This post was about anyone who struggles with gender issues… be they transsexual as in Drag Queens or Transvestites, or transgendered folks, or like me… intergendered.  WE are under the word: TRANS!  Which is why TRANNY works best here. But, the reality is while transfolks feel the sharper end of the hate stick than our fabulous fags and lezes (is that one z or two?), my post actually includes EVERYONE who identifies in the Queer spectrum.  Like it or not, we are all family and we all face the same hate.

    I like the word Queer, Terry. I think it does an excellent job of being inclusive to anyone who identifies!  

    Get prepared folks for a new uprising of : the Queer Heteros!! Whom, we Queer folk, will have to formally address and welcome soon! (Yes, this is a real)

    You Catholics should already be prepared for this new uprising: Christian Witches!!! (Yes this is real).

    Thank you Terry for the introduction and for allow me to formally contribute in the blog and here in the comments!

    Many Blessings!!

    Mario

    • January 14, 2012 at 4:56 pm

      I say what I want and screw your feelings. Fair enough, at least I know where you stand.

      • Mario
        January 15, 2012 at 1:24 am

        Actually, my trans-gression is way worse than that. I deliberately used a cheap literary trick to elicit response.

        It had little to do with people’s feelings and had everything to do with sparking a dialog.

        I misled you.  The purpose was not to offend it was to generate passion and the by-product is offense and misleading information regarding my intent.

  10. Advocatus Diaboli
    January 15, 2012 at 7:14 pm

         
    Interesting article Mario, thank you for your contribution. as usual, there are several thoughts that it brought to my mind, but I am busy and short of space for the next several days. I will write them down and try to get them back to you. 

        For now I will just comment that, as far as vocabulary is concerned (as someone who has studied linguistics, cultural definitions of words, etc.), I stand by my earlier comment in my article: “When Benedict does give some words of true wisdom every now and then, they fall on deaf ears because no one gives any meaning to what he says” and ” people only found the Cardinal’s statements to be so offensive because they wanted it to be so offensive”.    We are capable of controlling out reactions, and with effort and mental discipline, we can notice when we are reacting to the true meaning of the person’s sentence or if our reaction is to a specific vocabulary word. We give different meanings to the same words depending on who says them. I know of several homosexual people who use the word “gay” (as in “thats so gay”) with great regularity, and then I know of some other homosexual people who absolutely freak out if they hear that.        Personally I think there is no excuse for anyone to think that some people can use words like ‘Fag’ “b*tch’ ‘c*nt’ and so on and so forth but that others cannot. My mind and personality is ordered to where I have a natural tendency to despise when people go with their emotions and feelings over pure impersonal logic. My friends used to say things like “well it isnt logical so “AD” isnt going to accept it.” My most often used line was “Is it logical, is it consistent in principle? If not then STFU!”. However, after becoming a very distorted person because I rejected all emotion for logic, I realized (through a series of events) that humans are not logical creatures. Despite our modern love of ‘reason’ (reason itself is actually not a guarantee of logic and consistent principle), we are primarily emotional beings. Emotion is the antithesis of logic, as emotion gives meaning, and logic has no meaning (which is why you cannot program ‘true AI’ into a computer, it has logic capabilities that far out strip a human, but it is incapable of giving any meaning to anything).     Where am I going with this? Ultimately, I mean to say that any reaction (positive or negative) to any word ever invented is irrational. However, it is impossible for humans not to have such reactions (at least without dehumanizing themselves). For example, I know that any reaction I have to any word or phrase in any context is irrational, but that does not stop me from being wanting to hurt myself (and the other person)  when someone calls me a pussy or a faggot. I can learn to control having that reaction, but the result is that I loose emotional sensitivity towards other people as well (become dehumanized). Basically, since I know this is probably hard to follow: any reaction to words is irrational, but that is TOTALLY ok because irrational is more or less a synonym for emotional, and humans are first and foremost emotional beings. It is said that God is love, well God is therefore irrational because God is an emotion. I fully believe that, because the more I tried to drive ‘irrational’ emotions out of my person, I became more and more alienated from God (and everyone else around me). If there is no emotion (no irrationality) then there is no meaning; therefore if there is no emotion, then God does not exist. The concept of God (in any religion) is ultimately what the universe ‘means’.     In summary, one side has a valid point in pointing out the double-standards and reactions to vocabulary; and the other side is equally valid in their reaction to the words used. My favorite part of Catholicism is that it is one of the few religions that places that fact that humans need both reason (logic) and faith (emotion/meaning) together to function at the highest possible level. To be the best we can be, we need to recognize where our reactions and desires are coming from and learn why we feel the way that we do and temper our emotions, but we also need to equally recognize the truth and necessity of emotional connotations and reactions and respect and plan for them. Faith (meaning) tempered by reason (logic and consistency of principle), and reason (logic and consistency) ordered to faith (meaning and emotion).     Sorry if that is unintelligible, I was trying to cram some high-philosphy from religious studies, that took me a year to fully understand, into a few paragraphs. If you are offended by any of this, or just cannot understand it, then that means that I did not explain it right. Basically, I see where both of you are coming from and I firmly feel that BOTH of you are right. The fundamental lesson from studying Hinduism is to get out of our western ‘one or the other’ mode of thought, and learn that the answer is often ‘both and’. For example, in the west, we ask if a religion worships ‘one god OR many gods'; the answer to that question for eastern religions like Hinduism is: they worship ‘one god AND many gods’. The western mind has trouble understanding how that can be, as it seems like an oxymoron. Westerners view  EVERYTHING in dualism (from religions to daily confrontations: one side has to be right and one side has to be wrong); that is until one can get into the eastern mindset.Anyways, ill shut up now :-)On another note, does anyone know if the ‘Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence’ (uhg, I am sorry I am just torn and frustrated with them, as I have expressed before) are actually catholic or do they just using the trappings of Catholicism?  

    • Mario
      January 15, 2012 at 7:36 pm

      Thanks for writing just a little bit… LOL

      No, I got every word of it and thanks for taking the time.  I think you bring up good points and I have no issue with them at all.  

      Funny you should bring up the Sisters… I compared my word choice to them when speaking with Terry. I said, “My word choice are the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence of my article…”

      My next post will be on the Sisters, so I will get into them more then…

      But, we have a branch at our Center here in Sac and I have attended meetings, so I am very familiar.  They are not Catholic or even religious, though many members are! They are a “clowning” organization, a non-profit that raises money for charities but also promote certain political views as well.  Quite by accident the sister’s aligned with the idea of nuns and it stuck.  They patterned their organization around the organizational structure  of traditional convents and I must confess… it works quite well!

      More later in the next post… am formatting and will be submitting another one first.

      Thanks

      Mario

Leave a Reply