12 votes

Vatican condemns gender theory as bid to destroy nature

11 comments

  1. [3]
    NaraVara Link
    My God it's like they haven't actually spoken with any trans people or consulted any of the scholarship in Gender Studies or Neurology at all. This 100% reads like old curmudgeons dismissing...

    It says gender theories are “often founded on nothing more than a confused concept of freedom in the realm of feelings and wants, or momentary desires provoked by emotional impulses and the will of the individual, as opposed to anything based on the truths of existence”.

    My God it's like they haven't actually spoken with any trans people or consulted any of the scholarship in Gender Studies or Neurology at all. This 100% reads like old curmudgeons dismissing things they don't understand.

    20 votes
    1. [2]
      alyaza Link Parent
      i'm sure they have and i'm sure that deep down the Holy See is more than aware that their beliefs have really no standing outside of what the word of god; of course, since their whole thing is...

      i'm sure they have and i'm sure that deep down the Holy See is more than aware that their beliefs have really no standing outside of what the word of god; of course, since their whole thing is kinda putting emphasis on the word of god given that the Holy See and the Pope are the de facto interpreters of the catholic faith and its views on most things, it really shouldn't come as a surprise they're about to fly in the face of the established medical canon on this. if they didn't, the catholic church would probably have a massive schism within hours--some catholics already think that pope francis is essentially a heretic.

      8 votes
      1. NaraVara Link Parent
        The thing is, there are reasonable arguments one could make that hit the same conclusion but actually acknowledge the arguments being made by the other side rather than this weird straw man...

        The thing is, there are reasonable arguments one could make that hit the same conclusion but actually acknowledge the arguments being made by the other side rather than this weird straw man they've gone with. There's lots of constructivist assumptions built into gender theory that you can argue against from a philosophical point of view and it doesn't sound like they delved into any of it. They just fell back on trying to frame this as adolescent rebellion or something, which is beyond insulting and tone-deaf to these people.

        4 votes
  2. the_walrus (edited ) Link
    Anyone know where to read the document? I can't find it anywhere online. I would really like to see the original text. Edit: Finally found it. There is a link to the document in this article. Here...

    Anyone know where to read the document? I can't find it anywhere online. I would really like to see the original text.

    Edit: Finally found it. There is a link to the document in this article. Here is a direct link as well as an archived link.

    9 votes
  3. mftrhu Link
    This really, really grinds my gears. There are five six main reasons for this: the sheer gall they have in calling these "Rational arguments"; the very superficial understanding of biology they...

    This really, really grinds my gears.

    Rational Arguments

    1. Taking into account our historical overview, together with certain points of agreement identified, and the critique that has been made of gender theory, we can now move to some considerations on the issue based on the light of reason. In fact, there are rational arguments to support the centrality of the body as an integrating element of personal identity and family relationships. The body is subjectivity that communicates identity of being. In the light of this reality, we can understand why the data of biological and medical science shows that ‘sexual dimorphism’ (that is, the sexual difference between men and women) can be demonstrated scientifically by such fields as genetics, endocrinology and neurology. From the point of view of genetics, male cells (which contain XY chromosomes) differ, from the very moment of conception, from female cells (with their XX chromosomes). That said, in cases where a person’s sex is not clearly defined, it is medical professionals who can make a therapeutic intervention. In such situations, parents cannot make an arbitrary choice on the issue, let alone society. Instead, medical science should act with purely therapeutic ends, and intervene in the least invasive fashion, on the basis of objective parameters and with a view to establishing the person’s constitutive identity.
    2. The process of identifying sexual identity is made more difficult by the fictitious constract known as “gender neuter” or “third gender”, which has the effect of obscuring the fact that a person’s sex is a structural determinant of male or female identity. Efforts to go beyond the constitutive male-female sexual difference, such as the ideas of “intersex” or “transgender”, lead to a masculinity or feminity that is ambiguous, even though (in a self-contradictory way), these concepts themselves actually presuppose the very sexual difference that they propose to negate or supersede.

    There are five six main reasons for this:

    1. the sheer gall they have in calling these "Rational arguments";
    2. the very superficial understanding of biology they demonstrate;
    3. the fact that they argue for operating on intersex children to "establish the person's [...] identity";
    4. the fact that they then go on to call "intersex" an "idea";
    5. the fact that they say that "these concepts [intersex or transgender] themselves actually presuppose the very sexual difference that they propose to negate or supersede";
    6. the fact that they claim that "identifying sexual identity" (incidentally, confusing sexuality and gender) would be made more difficult by the idea of a "third gender" - wont' anyone think of the poor cisgender children, who might suffer the horror of spending five minutes wondering whether their assignment was right for them?

    For all their pearl clutching over "gender ideology", the idea of being transgender - the concept of being transgender, let alone intersex - does not "propose to negate or supersede" their oh-so-precious gender roles.

    Even if I could understand how they can consider being transgender "an idea" - like for gay people, they don't really understand how we are still trans and gay without performing our gender or sexuality, without transitioning or having sex - only someone without two brain cells to rub together could say the same for intersex.

    And only someone without two brain cells to rub together could go from calling for medical intervention on intersex children, to calling intersex "an idea". How should doctors intervene on ideas?

    I could go on and call them out as monstrous and thoughtless for this, but, really, we are speaking about the Vatican here. The bodily autonomy ship already sailed with them, and it would be just wasted breath keypresses.

    5 votes
  4. [6]
    Hypersapien Link
    What these people don't get is that gender (as opposed to biological sex) is entirely a social construct and has nothing to do with nature.

    What these people don't get is that gender (as opposed to biological sex) is entirely a social construct and has nothing to do with nature.

    3 votes
    1. the_walrus Link Parent
      That's not what's going on in this document. On page 8 of the document, The problem does not come from naivete, but from a dismissal of the belief that they are two separate concepts.

      That's not what's going on in this document.

      On page 8 of the document,

      In this cultural context, it is clear that sex and gender are no longer synonyms or interchangeable concepts, since they are used to describe two different realities. Sex is seen as defining which of the two biological categories (deriving from the original feminine-masculine dyad) one belonged to. Gender, on the other hand, would be the way in which the differences between the sexes are lived in each culture. The problem here does not lie in the distinction between the two terms, which can be interpreted correctly, but in the separation of sex from gender.

      The problem does not come from naivete, but from a dismissal of the belief that they are two separate concepts.

      6 votes
    2. [4]
      Arthur Link Parent
      At the risk of seeming ignorant, what evidence do you have to support that claim? I used to think that gender was an entirely made up social construct, until I started talking about it with my...

      At the risk of seeming ignorant, what evidence do you have to support that claim? I used to think that gender was an entirely made up social construct, until I started talking about it with my trans friend.

      He didn't agree that gender was entirely a social construct, and that it was at least to some extent biological. Which I can see actually, if gender is a social construct then it doesn't make sense for him to feel like a male trapped in a female body. Both his brother and sister are cis gender. Why is he trans and his siblings aren't? What was it about society specifically that constructed within him feelings of being a man rather than a woman? His argument is that there is something biologically within him that helps him know that he's a man not a woman.

      I know that debates around gender, and especially how trans people fit into that are very controversial, and especially since it's difficult to assess public opinion with the lack of votes currently, I want to be clear that my question is purely out of wanting to understand, rather than being provocative in nature.

      4 votes
      1. [2]
        mftrhu Link Parent
        Gender is a social construct. It's also not a social construct. And these two statements don't contradict each other, because gender is also one of the most overloaded words around. When people...

        Which I can see actually, if gender is a social construct then it doesn't make sense for him to feel like a male trapped in a female body. Both his brother and sister are cis gender. Why is he trans and his siblings aren't? [...]

        Gender is a social construct. It's also not a social construct. And these two statements don't contradict each other, because gender is also one of the most overloaded words around.

        When people say "gender is a social construct" they are referring to gender roles, and gender expression. "Women are lovers, men are fighters", "men shouldn't show emotions", "boys wear blue, girl wear pink" are socially constructed.

        When people say "gender is not a social construct" they are referring to gender identity. Gender identity refers to the innate "I'm a man/I'm a woman/I'm not a man or a woman", and it's frankly poorly named.

        For one thing, it doesn't really distinguish between the visceral "I should [not] have breasts/a beard", and what one considers themselves to be ("[thus,] I am a woman/man").

        The latter could be considered socially constructed - "I'm a woman/man/neither" can be rewritten as "I belong to the group of women/men/neither".

        The former is very much not, and I'd rather see it called "unconscious sex" or something to that effect. Some people I know use "gender orientation", to mirror the "sexual orientation" (attracted to) and "sexual identity" (considers oneself gay/hetero) split, but I don't like it very much.

        For another, despite people understanding that "identity" is not chosen, or created, in most other contexts - "I identified the bug", "Halt! Identify yourself!" - "identify as" opened us to a slew of "hurr durr I identify as an attack helicopter".

        5 votes
        1. Arthur Link Parent
          Thank you for that, you explained it well. I guess in my head I had made a distinction between gender roles and gender identity because I didn't think they were the same thing, but linguisticly I...

          Thank you for that, you explained it well. I guess in my head I had made a distinction between gender roles and gender identity because I didn't think they were the same thing, but linguisticly I hadn't separated the two concepts. With so many different ways that people use words, especially in cases like this, it doesn't surprise me that there's so much confusion on the topic.

          1 vote
      2. mike10010100 Link Parent
        Why not? His ideas of what "male" and "female" represent come from a cultural context, don't they? That's what people mean when they identify it as a social construct. Obviously the biological...

        if gender is a social construct then it doesn't make sense for him to feel like a male trapped in a female body.

        Why not? His ideas of what "male" and "female" represent come from a cultural context, don't they?

        That's what people mean when they identify it as a social construct. Obviously the biological underpinning of being trans exists, otherwise it would be a choice rather than an inherent property of the person, so in that sense I agree with you.

        1 vote