Vatican calls “Gender Ideology” as a bid to “annihilate nature”

[PSOL]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-vatican-gender/vatican-condemns-gender-theory-as-bid-to-destroy-nature-idUSKCN1TB20E

The Vatican condemned gender theory on Monday as part of a “confused concept of freedom”, saying in a new document that the idea of gender being determined by personal feeling rather than biology was an attempt to “annihilate nature”.

LGBT rights advocates denounced the 30-page document, called “Male and Female He Created Them”, as harmful and confusing, saying it would encourage hatred and bigotry.

The document, the Vatican’s first on gender theory, was written by the Congregation for Catholic Education as an “instruction” to Catholic educators on how to address the topic of gender theory in line with Church teaching.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Anyway, as usual, the Congregation for Catholic Education has it only half-right. There's definitely an extreme tendency in certain trans circles towards denigration of the body that Christians should be on guard against as a form of neo-Gnosticism, but to conclude from that that all self-concepts that aren't aligned with one's biological sex constitute an "ideology" that's adopted as some sort of nefarious That Hideous Strength-esque plot against incarnate humanity is ludicrous. Also offensive and, yes, bigoted.

[afleitch]

Having just read it, it's...a bit of a mess. It's not signed by Francis, so worth noting that.

My favourite part is about how the paper describes women and femininity (in relation to education) in a manner that someone who had no understanding of the concept they're trying to defend, would write. Meat for the tradcaths in it to.

They also call the third gender a 'ficticious constract' (sic); 'This oscillation between male and female becomes, at the end of the day, only a ‘provocative’ display against so-called ‘traditional frameworks’, and one which, in fact, ignores the suffering of those who have to live situations of sexual indeterminacy.'

Which is actually quite 'catty' and shows a blatant disregard for non-western notions of the 'third gender' and is loaded with assumptions about the intend of those who express non-binary notions of gender.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Having just read it, it's...a bit of a mess. It's not signed by Francis, so worth noting that.

Indeed. While I don't doubt that Francis does have some views that would be considered pretty strongly transphobic in a setting other than the Catholic Church, I do doubt he has any interest in putting his name on this kind of smash-mouth culture warrior red meat about the subject.

[John Dule]

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

[Antonio the Sixth]

This is just pathetic.

I know there are some constraints the Church has to operate within (constraints that are themselves very much "ideological", since all theology is by definition ideology) and I certainly don't expect it to endorse the most progressive perspectives of gender. But it's possible to seriously disagree with these perspectives in a way that shows intellectual curiosity for the framework these ideas are based on and respect for the reasons why they speak to real people's experiences. This is the kind of culture-war scaremongering tripe (complete with the meaningless buzzwords that serve no intellectual purpose beyond signaling that you're on the Right SideTM) I expect from f**king Breitbart, not serious religious thinkers detached from the everyday back-and-forth of politics. It does everything to reinforce the idea that the Church hierarchy is a bunch of out-of-touch old guys ranting about things they don't understand.

Francis, who so far has done an impressive job of articulating the orthodox position of the Church in a way that avoids coming across that way, would do well to sack or at least silence these bozos. He's been far too tolerant of sh*t like this, if anything.

[afleitch]

This is just pathetic.

I know there are some constraints the Church has to operate within (constraints that are themselves very much "ideological", since all theology is by definition ideology) and I certainly don't expect it to endorse the most progressive perspectives of gender. But it's possible to seriously disagree with these perspectives in a way that shows intellectual curiosity for the framework these ideas are based on and respect for the reasons why they speak to real people's experiences. This is the kind of culture-war scaremongering tripe (complete with the meaningless buzzwords that serve no intellectual purpose beyond signaling that you're on the Right SideTM) I expect from f**king Breitbart, not serious religious thinkers detached from the everyday back-and-forth of politics. It does everything to reinforce the idea that the Church hierarchy is a bunch of out-of-touch old guys ranting about things they don't understand.

Francis, who so far has done an impressive job of articulating the orthodox position of the Church in a way that avoids coming across that way, would do well to sack or at least silence these bozos. He's been far too tolerant of sh*t like this, if anything.

I agree it's a signal piece produced by a relatively obscure department simply because the LGB side, which the Church rarely passes up the opportunity to pass comment on when discussing gender norms, is conspicuously absent from this tract. It's written for an audience generally unreceptive to the Church due to it's position on women and the gays but seem very receptive to conservative signalling on trans issues. Especially in schools.

[7,052,770]

Yet another thing for the Church to be embarrassed by in the future.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I agree it's a signal piece produced by a relatively obscure department simply because the LGB side, which the Church rarely passes up the opportunity to pass comment on when discussing gender norms, is conspicuously absent from this tract. It's written for an audience generally unreceptive to the Church due to it's position on women and the gays but seem very receptive to conservative signalling on trans issues. Especially in schools.

...huh, you're right. I hadn't noticed that. It is sort of surprising to see even a such a small and hackish group target their audience so narrowly. I guess it would make sense if it's intended specifically for the US and a few other countries where transphobia is still mainstream while overt homophobia is more or less on its way out of public discourse, but I'm still not sure what the end goal is here.

[Ban my account ffs!]

"The gender benders are trying to annihilate nature!"  Said the childless, celibate group of priests whose genetic lines are soon to end.

[Kool-Aid]

Just ask any archaeologist

[afleitch]

Just ask any archaeologist

'Sir, this is a Wendy's'

[President of the great nation of 🏳️‍⚧️]

Why is it that people trying to make trans people sound like a problem just make us sound badass instead?

For God's sake, this is my lock screen: