Skip to main content

Libido Redux: On Transgerderism



What Christianity shares with Judaism (and Islam, 
for that matter) is a belief that God created all things (though all three religions understand God differently). We are creatures. We owe our being, our existence, to Him. We are stewards of His creation, stewards, even, of our own bodies. Acknowledgement of God’s creative power leads to religious awe, a sense of the sacred.
This means that each creature/creation has a nature, a manufacturer’s (God’s) instruction manual. Masculinity and femininity are aspects of that nature for human beings. When belief in God becomes irrelevant, we can throw away this instruction manual and refuse to see ourselves as a creature who has responsibilities to God and to society.
To understand ourselves, we need to start at the beginning. What kind of being are we? The traditional answer–originating with the Greeks, continuing in the Middle Ages, and persisting into our own time -- and the answer given by common sense intuition -- is this: we are a union of both material and immaterial, both body and soul, two realities inseparably united and mysteriously intertwined, interconnected, and interrelated.
That humans are a union of both body and soul, inseparably united was challenged in the 17th Century with the work of the French philosopher René Descartes, (who famously wrote, “Cogito, ergo sum, I think, therefore I am”).  Descartes undid this mysterious but evident union by arguing that that the human person was made up of opposing essences, i.e., mind and body, spirit and flesh.  This philosophy, referred to as Modernism, was born with Descartes, and, with the writings of his successors had reduced the human person to “ghost in a machine”. The real person is the ghost, i.e., our will or our consciousness, making our bodies into instruments to be used and modified at the owner’s preference. Thus Modernism, which accompanied the birth of science, in effect tried to account only for realities we can see, touch, think and feel.

With the coming of the German thinker Friedrich Nietzsche originated the philosophy of “post-modernism.” Modernism (which accompanied the birth of science) tried to account for realities we experience – what we can see, touch, think and feel. But modernist philosophy, Nietzsche professed, was unable to account for itself. What actually justified the Enlightenment’s exaltation of reason and its categorical statements of what was right and wrong, true and false, real and unreal? Nietzsche claimed that reason was just a cloak for a “will to power”. In other words, there is no such thing as truth, just politically enforced versions of the truth – my truth, your truth, his truth, her truth ... To assert that my words are true and yours are false is an act of aggression. Pope Benedict XVI labeled this “the dictatorship of relativism.”
Another post-modernist thinker was Michel Foucault, a French philosopher and homosexual (who, sadly, died of AIDS in 1984), associated with what has been called the structuralist and post-structuralist movements, which questioned the distinction between health and disease, rationality and madness. Foucault said humans are unaware of to what extent our values define what is regarded as a disease. There is no such thing as “normal”, especially in sexuality. Normality is defined and imposed by a hegemony – or redefined. Homosexuality used to be listed in the psychiatrists’ Bible, the DSM Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, as a paraphilia, then as a sexual orientation disturbance, then as ego-dystonic homosexuality, and in 1987 it was dropped completely by a minority vote of American Psychiatric Association members.
The post-modernist rejection of truth is the philosophy of our own time – and therefore of most journalists. And not just morality is relative, but reality. The typical post-modernist project is not to learn from reality, but to create a new reality, a new vision of things. This explains the dizzying subtlety of transgender philosophy and science. The more detached from reality it is, the more complex it becomes. Let us listen for a moment to Leah Juliett, an American non-binary, queer, anti-revenge-porn activist, on the lived experience of her gender fluidity:
I see gender as a solar system; it’s so vast and wide with so many options that you can’t really contain it to a small binary scale. Some days, I may feel more male; some days, more female; and some days, I may feel completely neutral and existing in that grey area.
Post-modernism at its contemporary finest.
In my book on modernist influence of the Catholic Church I outlined how “The Pill” made possible the separation of sex from reproduction, along with Pope Paul VI’s forecast of four evils that would result from a disobedience to Church teaching set down in his encyclical Humanae vitae:
·         widespread contraceptive practice would lead to “conjugal infidelity and the general lowering of morality.”
·         Men… would “lose respect” for women and no longer care for their physical and psychological enjoyment.
·         The contraceptive mentality would “place a dangerous weapon…in the hands of those public authorities who take no heed of moral exigencies.”
·         Contraception would lead humans into thinking they have unrestricted authority over their bodies.

For our purpose here, on point four, here is Letty Cottin Pogrebin, a founding editor of Ms. Magazine:
The impact of The Pill was even more radical. It meant sex need not lead to pregnancy. But it wasn’t just another form of contraception, it was an equalizer, a liberator, and easy to take. For the first time in human history, a woman could control her sexuality and determine her readiness for reproduction by swallowing a pill smaller than an aspirin. …  The Pill bore revolutionary results. It allowed women to become autonomous decision-makers rather than captives of our biology…
No doubt feminist Pogrebin wasn’t thinking of the link to transgender issues in uttering “Captives of our biology,” but that a derivation conveyed by the contraceptive mentality. If sex is not centrally about reproduction, what is it about? Pleasure, perhaps. Is it about self-definition? Who knows? Artificial contraception has indoctrinated the last three generations in the belief that sex has no essential purpose, no nature. But think about the ramifications of not knowing what the human libido is for. Ignorance of the purpose of one’s sexuality must be a terrible burden, especially for a teen. He or she has never known a world which does not include the pill, one in which sex has a clear purpose. Thus, from his or her point of view, feeling transgender appears as one point on the spectrum of post-modern human sexuality, not an extreme deviation from what is normal. Traditional marriage, with its life-long commitment and a definitive role for sex (the antithesis of post-modernity) might seem countercultural.
So we are proposing that the Transgender Moment is the offspring of new philosophies and technology, Christianity’s decline, Cartesian philosophical dualism, post-modernism and the Pill. As a consequence, transgenderism it is argued that it’s normal and natural. Why shouldn’t people – of any age – solve their psychological problems with mastectomies and castration? Why is transgenderism is being normalized? Here are proposals:
§  Radical feminism.
§  Reproductive rights.
§  Changing family structures.
§  Infiltration of the education bureaucracy.
§  Experience gained from gay activism.
§  The rise of identity politics.
§  The impact of social media like YouTube and Facebook.
§  Corporate bullying.

But even more fundamental are the subjective philosophical ideas which have become deeply embedded in our culture, which help to explain why transgenderism is argued as both plausible and righteous in today’s world.



x

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

This video of a young boy twerking at Pride has homophobes outraged | Gay Star News

DANCING WITH MR. D:   This video of a young boy twerking at Pride has homophobes outraged | Gay Star News : 'via Blog this'

On the Smoke of Modernism

A S is well known to all but those who choose not to see, the broken or irregular home has gone from being the exception to the rule.  The family is the building block upon which all secular and Christian civilization is built. Marriage is a divine and natural institution perfectly portrayed by Christ the bridegroom and His Church, the bride. Though the world has been trying to change both, we find ourselves with a gap between how the world sees family and marriage and what the Church knows about them. The Fourteenth General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops took place from October 4 to October 25, 2015, in Vatican City. While it is inspiring that the Church fathers are attempting to develop pastoral solutions to the overwhelming problems we face as a global society concerning marriage and family, it is rewarding to know the roots of the problems that we face. If we untangle the modernism on both topics we will discover that the problem lies in the contraceptive mindset. ...

On Marriage

Marriage comes to us from nature.  In Catholic teaching Jesus sanctifies marriage as a sacrament for the baptized, giving it significance beyond its natural reality. Traditionally the state has safeguarded marriage because it is indispensable to family and thus to the common good of society.  But neither Church nor State instituted marriage, and neither can change its nature. God created two mutually complementary sexes, able to transmit life through marital union.  Consummated sexual intercourse between a man and a woman is ideally based on mutual love and must always be based on mutual consent, if they are genuinely human actions.  No matter how strong a friendship or deep a love between persons of the same sex might be, it is physically impossible for two men, or two women, to consummate a marital union.  (In civil law, non-consummation of a marriage constitutes grounds for annulment). It is easy to see that sexual intercourse between a man and a w...

Our Lord Refuses to Dance With Mr. D

During his weekly Angelus address on Sunday, Pope Francis spoke about the day’s Gospel reading, which focused on the temptation of Jesus in the desert.  Satan, the Pope said, tried “to divert Jesus from the Father’s plan” by tempting Him “to take an easy path,” a path “of success and power.” Jesus definitively rejects these temptations, reaffirming His “firm intention to follow the path established by the Father, without any compromise with sin or with the logic of the world.” This commitment to follow the plan of the Father is realized in Jesus actions; “His absolute fidelity to the Father's plan of love will lead Him, after about three years, to the final confrontation with the “prince of this world” (Jn 16:11), in the hour of the Passion and of the Cross, and there Jesus will achieve His final victory, the victory of love!” The Holy Father encouraged all of us to take the opportunity afforded by Lent to renew our Baptismal promises, renouncing Satan and his seductions, “i...

On Prideful, Utopian Thought

( Continued  from   September  13 )  T he Church believes that we can change. She teachs that all sacraments, but most importantly the Eucharist, can and do change our lives. This belief in the power of the Eucharist is manifest in Thomas Merton, the great twentieth-century Catholic mystic: “the grace of the Eucharist is not confined to the moments of thanksgiving after Mass and communion, but reaches out into our whole day and into all the affairs of our life, in order to sanctify and transform them in Christ.” Change, conversion through the Eucharist does not happen overnight. But the Church believes at her core that Her sacramental life, over time, leads us towards holiness, the call of Vatican II. At the same time, we as Catholics scrap the idea that as a society we will ever arrive at a Morean utopia. To cite only one example, Jesus said: “you always will have the poor with you” (Mark 14:7). Pope Paul VI, about whom I wrote my book, stated in his 1971 en...

Signs of These Times, or "Life Under the Relativist Dictatorship"

  While reading Ralph Martin’s A Church in Crisis I encontered an endnote reference to a blog post by Fr. Longenecker, which sheds light on the roots of contemporary secular befuddlement:   RELATIVISM, IRRATIONAL RAGE AND REVOLUTION One of the most disturbing aspects of the troubles of 2020 has been the confusion and bewilderment caused by so much uncertainty. When it comes to the COVID-19 pandemic every other news report or social media link or comment has been contradictory. “Masks are useless. Everybody must wear a mask! Only sick old people will get this disease. My friend knows a guy in his forties who is an athlete and very fit and he nearly died! You can get it just from touching your groceries. The virus doesn’t transmit that way. The threat is global. Only New York City is being hit. Not us.” We’ve seen the most amazing contradictions over the last week with the massive demonstrations. We’re supposed to observe social distancing, but thousands are encouraged ...

Divide et Impera

Mr. Patrick Boyden has penned a reflection   worth noting. In 2013 I wrote: Lest we forget, there were indeed reform-minded Council Fathers who responded to Pope John’s vision of the Church growing in spiritual riches as a fruit of the Council under the guidance of the Holy Spirit in the hope that the faithful might through grace be aided in turning hearts and minds toward heavenly things.  Given what has been said thus far, it should not surprise the reader that many “liberal Catholics” view the pontificate of John Paul II as too “conservative,” and out of touch with the modern world, while the traditionalists view the writings and teachings of the Holy Father as modernist! Thus the schema of “liberal” (progressive, left) vs. conservative (traditional, right) which followed upon the close of Vatican II is wholly inadequate for explaining the present-day crisis of faith within the Church of Jesus Christ, though it is most unfortunate that usage of these terms persist...

Homosexual Marriage

The urgency of the issue of gay marriage at this time and the compelling arguments raised against it here, make this paper an important resource: Answering Advocates of Gay Marriage KATHERINE YOUNG AND PAUL NATHANSON Claim 1 : Marriage is an institution designed to foster the love between two people. Gay people can love each other just as straight people can. Ergo, marriage should be open to gay people. Claim 2 : Not all straight couples have children, but no one argues that their marriages are unacceptable Claim 3 : Some gay couples do have children and therefore need marriage to provide the appropriate context. Claim 4 : Marriage and the family are always changing anyway, so why not allow this change? Claim 5 : Marriage and the family have already changed, so why not acknowledge the reality? Claim 6 : Children would be no worse off with happily married gay parents than they are with unhappily married straight ones. Claim 7 : Given global overpopulation, why w...

Archangels

On Monday’s feast of the archangels, Pope Francis spoke of the ongoing battle between the devil and mankind, encouraging attendees to pray to the angels, who have been charged to defend us. “He presents things as if they were good, but his intention is destruction. And the angels defend us,” the Holy Father told those gathered for his Sept. 29 Mass in the Vatican’s Saint Martha residence. Francis began by pointing to the day’s readings, taken from Daniel Chapter 7, in which the prophet has a vision of God the Father on a throne of fire giving Jesus dominion over the world, and Revelation Chapter 12, which recounts the battle in which Satan, as a large dragon, is cast out of heaven by St. Michael. Noting how these are strong images portraying “the great dragon, the ancient serpent,” who “seduces all of inhabited earth,” the Pope also drew attention to Jesus’ words to the prophet Nathanael in the day’s Gospel from John, when he tells him: “You will see heaven opened and the ange...

A Good Shepherd....

Bottom of Form Indianapolis archbishop revokes Jesuit prep school's Catholic identity 7.4K1313 Top of Form Bottom of Form Indianapolis, Ind., Jun 20, 2019 / 01:49 pm ( CNA ).- The Archdiocese of Indianapolis announced Thursday that a local Jesuit high school will no longer be recognized as a Catholic school, due to a disagreement about the employment of a teacher who attempted to contract a same-sex marriage. “All those who minister in Catholic educational institutions carry out an important ministry in communicating the fullness of Catholic teaching to students both by word and action inside and outside the classroom,” the archdiocese said in a statement Thursday. “In the Archdiocese of Indianapolis, every archdiocesan Catholic school and private Catholic school has been instructed to clearly state in its contracts and ministerial job descriptions that all ministers must convey and be supportive of all teachings of the Catholic Church.” Teachers, the ar...