- This topic has 79 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
… in the line every night where I serve meals downtown…
You do that?
You must be too humble in your service to mention this at every possible opportunity.
Well, Broadway, you’ve truly outdone yourself. And in finding a new low bar to scuttle beneath have compelled me to make a rare appearance on this forum to offer a rejoinder on behalf of those of us not blissfully swimming in an ocean of ignorance.
To state the obvious: No, I don’t consider what Caitlyn Jenner has done with her life as perverted. I’m quite confident not only that I’m not alone in that opinion, but that yours is actually the opinion in the minority. Thankfully, your version of “society as you know it” has not truly existed anywhere in the real world for many decades. If ever. I.e. Many of the cherished chestnuts the far right clings to regarding the so called good old days are completely manufactured and lack all historical context or nuance and are invariably chained to (then) contemporary social convention.
While your opinions are certainly yours to hold and you have every right to express them, others in turn have the option of pointing out they’re utterly contemptible and offensive. “No hate here”, you claim apparently failing to appreciate the irony. And I suspect knowing full well you sound completely hateful; thus feeling the need to preemptively offer a limp and unsupportable defense.
I mean, really. What great “Christian” or “conservative” values are being upheld by your sick refutation of Caitlyn Jenner? It’s certainly not love. It’s not empathy. It’s not acceptance. It’s not kindness or understanding. It’s not even base level human sympathy as evidenced by your sneering, ignorant, and judgmental commentary regarding “his plumbing”. Way to represent those “Christian” ideals you’re always blathering about there, pal.
Either you don’t know, (which I doubt), or you don’t care (which seems far more likely) that transgender persons (not to mention many, many other members of the LGBT community; which happen to number in the tens of millions nationwide) have struggled for decades with bigotry, prejudice, bullying, psychological and physical violence, and even death. Guess what? The attitudes you espouse are contributory. Period.
I ask the following question semi rhetorically; as you’re demonstrably a buffoon of almost cartoonish proportions that has time and again proven incapable of thoughtful and reasoned dialogue. To wit, what “help” do you feel Caitlyn and other transgendered people need? Some form of forced psychiatric counseling while being involuntarily detained in a mental facility? Somehow, I don’t see Jesus being on board with that plan. Of course, the “help” you feel they need amounts to a blanket refutation of the very idea that one’s sexual identity is an inherent trait. Therefore, according to you, there’s something “wrong” with Caitlyn. A short excerpt from an article I recently read neatly encompasses the evangelical meltdown that accompanied Caitlyn Jenner’s Vanity Fair cover.
“In the minds of those who hold traditional views on gender (the equipment you’re born with dictates what you are), Jenner’s coming out represents a disquieting departure from the tidy gender basis of the traditional family: one man, one woman, united for the primary purpose of procreation. A subset of conservatives, mainly evangelical Christians, may never accept deviations from this worldview, not on matters of gay rights, nor marriage equality, divorce, gender bending, nor gender transition.
But the future of conservatism is moving in a different direction on at least one related issue, with a strong majority of young Republicans supporting same-sex marriage. While we shouldn’t conflate sexual orientation and gender, a conservative shift on marriage equality is an admission that, as far as our rights are concerned, there are more important things in our lives and in our relationships than forming procreative unions premised on fixed, traditional gender roles. Freedom to marry the people we love, and freedom to embody and perform the gender that our minds tell us we are, turn out to be freedoms that people want to enjoy equally with cisgender, heterosexual couples who already get to choose not to marry, not to reproduce, and not to stay married, all without giving rise to crass media backlash against our choices.
Fair enough, you could say; nobody’s trying to deny Caitlyn Jenner the right or the freedom to be who she is; conservatives just stand in value-opposition to Jenner’s choice to come out to the world as Caitlyn. Here again I ask: if it’s not about the relationship between traditional gender roles and the traditional family—a relationship that cisgender, heterosexual, conservative couples defy all the time—then what exactly is the conservative value that underwrites the backlash against Jenner and her gender transition”?
The answer is unseemly and thus your inability to confront it. You’re a bigot, Broadway. On some level you clearly recognize the viewpoints you hold on a wide variety of topics are not only unwelcome in public and mixed company but are not in any kind of way reflected in the mainstream. I’m sure that’s bothersome to you. (Sorry about that!) Furthermore, you’re a resentful and aggrieved bigot. One who conflates the inability to publicly denigrate those whom are different from you without engendering harsh condemnation, (as evidenced in this posting) with persecution.
No, you are not being persecuted. You are being ridiculed for being painfully and unrelentingly derpy. There’s a difference.
If you could ask any of the thousands of young people who have taken their own life’s due to being unable to cope with the unrelenting bullying that accompanies their own struggles with sexual orientation or gender identification, then you might have an actual idea of what persecution means.
In the meantime perhaps you should just restrict your opinions to something you actually have some informed knowledge about? Say, what’s on ABC Family Channel tonight? The color of the sky? If evolution is a scientifically verifiable fact then why did Fred Flintstone ride on the back of a dinosaur while working in the quarry? You know, the big questions.
P.S. It’s great that you like a book. Any book. I’m excited that you read anything at all. However, you might want to branch out and try reading something that wasn’t cobbled together by more than forty people around 1800 years ago. You may accidentally learn something usable.
Love,
LurkingGrendel
It’s a dilemma that few of us will face, but it IS a dilemma…
After transition, Caitlyn Jenner faces different access at Sherwood C.C.
Caitlyn Jenner, who has transitioned from her former identity as Bruce Jenner, may face a loss of privileges at Sherwood Country Club in Thousand Oaks, Calif., where she has been a member for 15 years.
The club grants men and women different access to portions of its property, including a male-only grill room, which Jenner is now prohibited from using. She is allowed to use a dining area off the women’s locker room. However, it is smaller and shuts her off from male members, many of which she has played alongside over the years.
Sherwood intends to enforce its gender-based segregation in Jenner’s case, according to TMZ, but may be open to hearing an appeal.
Now, that’s funny right there. The country club issue also allows me to resurrect this old golf joke:
An old man, who played golf with his wife through their entire marriage, is on his death bed. He calls his wife over and says, “Honey, I have something that I need to get off my chest before I go to the great beyond. I cheated on you a little while after we first got married; it was only one time, and I’ve been faithful ever since.” The wife sits back, hems and haws a bit and then says, “Well, I have a confession, too. A few years before we got married, I had a sex change operation. I used to be a man.” The old man is seething. He finally spits the words: …AND FOR ALL OF THESE YEARS, YOU’VE BEEN HITTING FROM THE RED TEES?”
>>you can’t have it both ways. You can’t condemn transgender behavior, then claim to not be a hater.
The word condemn says to express complete disapproval of…where’s the hate?>>this operation isn’t required for one to be a transgender man or woman
Call for just a little confusion here…even take out all the visuals…it just does not make good human sense…and for all of us to put it all on a life pedestal is very worry-some. Say massive confusion.
Actually this is topic that does not warrant any more discussion.Yes, it does. When should discussion, i.e. free speech ever be shut down? You are just putting yourself in a deeper hole.
Read and learn:
The following is not meant as lecturing, snarkiness, or rhetorical questioning.
It is my understanding, from various Christian sources that I have heard over the years, that it is not up to humans to make judgements on people or on whether any person has acted in a sinful way. God has the final say.
It is my understanding, primarily from Evangelical Protestant sources, that if a person believes that Jesus Christ atoned for all of humanity’s collective sins, then that person will go to heaven. If Caitlyn Jenner believes in this Christian doctrine, as Bruce professed to, then Caitlyn will go to heaven when she dies.
When lay Christians criticize Jenner as being “perverted” or worthy of condemnation, how do they reconcile their criticisms with the above two points?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.