Dennis Prager wrote an article on TownHall.com prescribing his god’s judgment upon the transgendered. Well… most of them, assuming you’re able to follow his bizarre logic. Exodus of course is promoting the story without question. For an organization with the motto “question homosexuality” they sure don’t question much or produce original thoughts themselves. Let’s take a quick tour of Prager’s assertions:
T is more “troubling” than GL or B
Ok now that’s just insulting.
“Transgendered is not the same as transsexual”
Wow, someone has a modern dictionary.
“In theory, Judeo-Christian values have no problem with a transsexual — someone who has undergone a sex change — if that person then behaves in ways associated with his or her new sex.”
We’ll call this Assertion A. Apparently sex change operations fool this guy’s god.
“transgendered individual is a person of one sex who dresses (or otherwise behaves) as a member of the other sex “
Big ole SIN, he says. I hope all the trannies reading TownHall.com are paying attention.
“What, after all, do the transgendered, who are usually heterosexual men, have to do with gays and lesbians?”
Well… No not really. There are M->F who like M and M->F who like F and F->M who like M and F->M who like F. So no, the world is not as cut and dry as Prager’s little dominionist construction of it is.
“The change on application forms, for example, from “Sex: M or F” to “Gender: M or F” has gone unnoticed. But it is a huge change. In the sexual activists’ world, “sex” is fixed and objective; “gender” is fluid and subjective.”
Dennis is unclear on this one. He doesn’t say that changing “sex” to “gender” is a sin. It’s probably considered more of a sneaky trick.
“Democrats in California passed a law that forbids employers from firing a man who cross-dresses at work.”
This is also probably classified as a sneaky trick.
“What God has created distinct, man shall not tamper with.”
We’ll call this Assertion B. Of course he doesn’t bother to explain what tampering is. Notice when he brandished LGBT earlier he left out the I. Oversimplified dominionist world-view strikes again.
“the Torah bans men from wearing women’s clothing”
Even though they don’t believe in Jesus, I’m thinking this one still counts as sin.
“However, when a man does this in public, he has publicly blurred the man-woman distinction, and society has the right — and the duty, if it cares about Judeo-Christian values or simply cares about not confusing children as to sexual identity — to say this violates a norm that society does not wish violated.”
So about this M->F appearing in public… Is she pre-op or post-op? Because under Assertion A it’s only a sin if she’s pre-op. But under Assertion B it’s a sin if she’s post-op. Well not the appearing in public part, the “op” part that’s the sin. So in order to repent the sin of having a sex-change operation would she need to have reverse surgery to return to the male sex? It appears the only sin was the operation itself since Assertion A made it sound like once you’ve had the operation god issues you a new drivers license.
It looks like your best hope is to have the surgery, repent for the surgery but live in your new gender anyways. If you die before the surgery is complete, (like just hormones or breast augmentation) it’s sort of a gray area if you’ll get into heaven or not.
What can be learned from this train wreck of logic?
1) God’s absolute truth, as handed down to us through Dennis Prager and TownHall.com is clear, concise and easy to follow.
2) Dominionists live in their own idealized magical happy land. (Somehow achieving this WITHOUT the aid of drugs.)
3) Sex change operations fool god.
4) My brain hurts from writing this.
I have a headache.
Are you saying that this is worse than most theology? It strikes me as being pretty much in the train of reasonings that theology usually takes. The particular topic here may be a bit extreme, but otherwise this sounds like standard theology.
THANK YOU for pointing this piece of cr*p article out – I nearly laughed out loud when I read it, particularly the part about transgendered being heterosexual men – that’s transvestites Mr. Prager. Transgendered and transsexuals are very closely linked, at least in my understanding of the current thinking, and transsexuals begin as transgendered, but go all the way to having surgery.
Even better is the fact that Prager is apparently calling Stan Laurel, Milton Berle, Flip Wilson, the entire cast of Kids in the Hall, and any other male comic who dresses in drag sinners. After all, they all appeared in public dressed in the “wrong” clothing for their gender (and where do kilts figure in, I have to wonder). Prager obviously doesn’t understand that most drag, both Queens and Kings, is done for entertainment. The drag Queens I know are performers, who do not walk around in drag all the time – it takes too long and is too uncomfortable to do so.
But I do like that Prager is finally admitting the basic problem most fundies seem to have with gays and lesbians – the failure to conform to gender norms (sexual activity being the most egregious example). Once again homophobia has been exposed for its true nature – sexism.
Hoo- where to begin?
Well, this seems to sort of affirm my earlier point about “transgendered” being a political term with no objective definition. Apparently Prager only chooses to define transgendered as transvestite.
It’s interesting that he chooses to define the sin as basically being how other people react to someone’s gender presentation. Apparently he’d have no problem with me being trans because I fit into society’s expectations for the female gender much better than I did for the male gender, but someone who transitions later in life and doesn’t get enough effects out of hormone therapy to be able to integrate into society as a woman is just SOL. (but I still go to hell for being a dyke, that’s comforting)
So my question is, was it a sin when women began demanding the vote since at the time doing so was transgressing cultural gender boundaries, even if voting is okay now because cultural gender boundaries have shifted? Was it a sin for a woman to wear pants in 1920 even if it’s ok now? To what extent do cultural judgements about what are considered proper male/female boundaries determine sin?
I wonder what he’d make of someone who behaves and appears as a normative member of the sex opposite to which they were born, but doesn’t have genital surgery? (i.e. the majority of female-to-male transsexuals) In theory, he’d have to be ok with it since your genital configuration has no bearing on how you’re perceived socially from day to day.
I guess somebody better go tell the intersexed they have no place in Pragerland.
Somebody also better tell Prager that if all this goes back to the Mosaic purity code then Christians don’t need to worry about it since we believe that Jesus did away with all that.
One teeny tiny kernel of truth buried in his big ol’ pile tho- there are a lot of self-described “transgendered” folk who refuse to admit that sex or gender or whatever you want to call it has a social component. If you look like a guy, talk like a guy, act like a guy, but call yourself a girl, people are gonna treat you like a guy.
Wow, Boo I had no idea we had a regular transgender reader. It’s great to have that diversity of viewpoint.
Dan-
I was “anon” in an earlier thread that got onto this topic.
Please do not refer to me as “transgendered.” I’m a woman who happens to be lesbian and also happens to be transsexual. I believe that since “transgendered” has no clear definition and is usually used to lump widely disparate groups together, it should be laid to rest. If other people want to use it for themselves, fine, but imho it just causes confusion.
I don’t have the “benefits” of both the “male” and “female” perspective.
I can’t give amazing insights about “the riddle of gender.”
I’m not magical.
I’m not exotic.
I’m just me.
(not that I’m saying you implied I was any of those things Dan, just pre-emptively heading off anyone who might 😉
PS- Please excuse the above Patented Tranny Defensiveness (PTD), but you wouldn’t believe the kind of garbage that people I know who are out about being trans regularly put up with.
Hey Boo!
Please elighten us on what your tranny friends put up with. We in the queer community could use that perspective. Maybe, just maybe, it’ll make others think twice before labeling and compartmentalizing the varied forms of gender that really exist.
So my question is, was it a sin when women began demanding the vote since at the time doing so was transgressing cultural gender boundaries, even if voting is okay now because cultural gender boundaries have shifted?
Yes.
erik-
The transsexual population is extremely stratified by age, looks, social class, etc., so my *friends* who are transsexual tend to be like me- young women of varying sexual orientations who are integrated into society as women and so don’t have to put up with crap for being trans. “Transsexual community” is something of an oxymoron.
Now for acquaintances who are out as trans, the following is semi tongue in cheek, but I’ve seen more than one item acted out in real life:
21 Things You DON’T Say to a Transexual
By Riki Anne Wilchins
DON’T #1 – “I was just talking to A CHANGE the other day and…”
To me, this suggests that you are having strange conversations with your pocket money. No one IS a change. One can ask for change, own change, ex-change, change tires, change clothes, change sides, change to a minor key and change of life, but one cannot BE a change.
DON’T #2 – “You look just as good as I do.”
Of course I do. And this is precisely the state of grace to which we all aspire. But more than likely you do both of us an injustice.
DON’T #3 – “Well I want you to know I certainly consider you a woman.”
It is a never-ending source of wonderment that well-intentioned, and otherwise very well brought-up people say this to me, with a light of total sincerity shining from their eyes for which any self-respecting cocker spaniel would kill. Unfortunately, this assurance turns on at least four assumptions which, upon closer inspection, prove to be entirely unfounded: a) my gender is a subject about which reasonable people might be expected to reasonably differ; b) my gender is a topic that is currently open for discussion; c) my gender and your perception of it, is something about which I suffer rather a great deal of anxiety and about which I am seeking some reassurance; d) you, since you are a nontransexual, are in just the providential position of providing me with this reassurance I so desperately seek.
DON’T #4 – “I consider you as much a woman as ANY of my friends.”
What a treat for them; especially your male friends.
DON’T #5 – “I would NEVER have guessed you were a transexual.”
This phrase is usually accompanied by a look of the utmost incredulity, followed closely by a searching, penetrating, and largely sotto voice reappraisal of all the things you thought you knew about me (or perhaps only all the times we slept together). Unfortunately, this utterance assumes that your credulity, no doubt a topic of endless fascination to you, is of equal interest to me. Since there are tens of thousands of us (perhaps in your building alone!), the fact that some of us can “pass” (a nasty concept if ever there was one) as nontransexuals only prophesies that, wedded to the entirely fragile notion that you should be capable of identifying all of us on sight, you are destined for a life of more or less unending private humiliations.
DON’T #6 – “When did you decide to become a woman?”
Well, when did you decide to become a woman? Oh…I see; with you it is normal. Um-HMMMM.
DON’T #7 – “Can you have an orgasm?”
Yes, but only when I’m asked this question.
DON’T #8 – “Can you have an orgasm?”
DON’T #9 – “Can you have an orgasm?”
DON’T #10 – “Can you have an orgasm?”
DON’T #11 – “You must have had a lot of courage to face surgery.”
To have the actual surgery, I just had to be able to breathe deeply, count at least partway backwards from 100, and fall asleep with some semblance of dignity. In all of these tasks I was reliably aided by enough I.V. anesthetic to subdue a small water buffalo. It would also have helped, had I $10-20,000 in spare change (See #1 above) about my person. Unfortunately, while I was thus drifting majestically off to sleep, I found I also had to be able to watch my friends, most of my lovers, all of my family, and any lesbian who used the term “politically correct” in any context other than a Lily Tomlin joke, fade out of my existence forever. Also, I found that I woke up to endless refrains of DON’Ts #1 – 7, above. That is the hard part; the surgery I could probably do again before breakfast.
DON’T #12 – “I don’t think it’s anyone’s concern what’s between your legs, unless they’re sleeping with you.”
Well, yes. But you, like me, might be surprised at the profound lack of fastidiousness some people display to even this tender area, as my weekly trips to the accoutrement racks at The Pleasure Chest and Eve’s Garden confirm. In any case, I’m quite certain that whatever is between your legs, even during those hot, sticky, yucky days of summer, is totally above reproach and perfectly charming, while what’s between mine, even on the very best of days, is, well, let’s just not talk about it.
DON’T #13 – “No one needs to know…”
Of course they don’t. We all have our little secrets, the small indiscretions we would prefer no one know. The thirty- five or so years of my life just happen to be mine.
DON’T #14 – “This is women-only space”
This is usually said to me by a rather red-faced lesbian, who probably believes she is confronting the live penis-monster (moi) as it approaches her very doorstep. But then, these things are so difficult today; perhaps she is really a straight woman complaining bitterly about a lack of men. The only correct response I can ever think of is, “Well, I certainly feel better knowing that.”
DON’T #15 – “How did you know you’re a woman?”
Well, how did you know you were a woman? Ah-humm: breasts and vagina. Well, I can introduce you to some very handsome, bearded, muscular young men of my acquaintance who began life with the very same equipment, so that’s not particularly compelling evidence, is it?. . . I see, inside YOU just know. . . Call me sometime, we’ll have lunch.
DON’T #16 – “When you were a man…”
Unless this phrase refers to a prior life of mine (something I have yet to explore), it’s always difficult to respond to, because it assumes I ever was a man. I think this sentence is meant to begin with, “When you lived socially as a man…” or “When people thought you were a man…”; small, but nonetheless, like lapels or pleats, highly significant differences.
DON’T #17 – “I think transexuals are just men in drag.”
Of course you do, and you’re entitled, even justifiably proud, to think so. Do not, however, voice this sentiment while surrounded by a full room of men who really are in drag, (for instance, the next Fantasy Ball). Also, be certain to note the exception to this rule, which is, of course, female-to-male transexuals, who are really, well, just women in drag. We all know how naturally distasteful it is when men wear dresses or women wear pants. Do not, however, voice this sentiment while surrounded by a room of S/M dykes in full leather and studs.
DON’T #18 – “Well, I want you to know I respect your choices.”
And I yours, particularly in transcendent matters, such as whether to register your pattern at Bloomingdale’s or Saks, or whether a bright, robust yet tart, Almanden can properly accompany sushi. However, in more pedestrian spheres, such as gender identity, it profits us immensely to recall that none of us exercises much choice.
DON’T #19 – “You look just like a REAL woman.”
How splendid, especially when you recall I’m composed almost entirely of compressed soy by-products. And you look just like a REAL transexual. Oh, I’m so sorry, I didn’t realize that was an insult.
DON’T #20 – “Isn’t it AMAZING you’re the ONLY transexual I know.”
Yes, and isn’t it amazing, when you came out to your mother, you were the only homosexual she knew. Ho-hum. The fact that I am the only transexual you know only emphasizes that: a) you probably know a few hundred of us, but you don’t know you know us, and we won’t tell you that you do; b) there are tens of thousands of us, and more all the time; c) we are secretly plotting to take over the planet earth, and infiltrating your prevailing nontransexual culture is just the first step; and d) while we are waiting to take over your planet, we are amusing ourselves at your expense by seeing just how much we can fuck with your heads.
DON’T #21 – “This may be a really dumb question but…”
No question is dumb, especially yours, and particularly those you feel must be ushered in by a disclaimer. It is wonderful when someone cares enough to ask questions, and to add to their information. However, I do confess to problems with certain kinds of inquiries which (for reasons which continue to elude me completely) I still cannot seem to answer properly. These include questions such as, “Have you stopped biting your lover yet?” and “Have you always looked this bad in sunlight?”
Boo,
Thanks. I got a big chuckle.
Some years ago I found myself out of town at a gay conference where I knew no one and was just sure that everyone there would be hostile to my politics. This big brash woman (Debby Novatny from Queer as Folk kinda reminds me of her) took me under her wing, introduced me around, and was made certain that I felt welcome.
Somehow we become unlikely allies in the internal squabbles of the group. Although her politics did not often mirror mine, as someone who was a bit of an outsider, she always made sure the group wasn’t dismissing my more conservative viewpoint without consideration. I hope I did the same.
I’m sure I probably asked or said all the wrong things (all 21) but she never let me know it.
She was the self-proclaimed “AIDS Diva” who worked tirelessly in the early 90’s (she has since left us) and I’m pleased when the LA Pride Parade entry honoree her name goes by. Our paths didn’t cross much outside of our activism but sometimes I do find myself stopping and realizing that at that moment I miss my friend, Connie Norman.
I probably know other people who have fixed the plumbing and have just never had any reason to tell me. But all that I know about transexuals is based on one genuinely good woman with an open and generous spirit.
Prager is, of course, a hourse’s hind end, as are most of the posters on the townhall.com web site,
It really isn’t worth the time of day dissecting the articles that are posted on there. One of the problems with the Internet is that it has given another forum from which idiots can bloviate. At minimal cost to them.
Unfortunately those particular idiots have a great deal of influence on the country’s current power structure. It’s sort of the same reason this whole site exists. If the ex-gay movement was just about doing its own thing, then they’d be hurting no one but themselves, but like Prager, they are trying their utmost to influence public policy to make life harder than it needs to be for the rest of us.
And btw all, the above list encapsulates the very nicest of the crap out trannies have to put up with. There’s also the whole “I’m gonna fg kill you!” and stuff like that. Or for the more bizarro yet still dangerous side, check out Janice Raymond’s paranoid rant The Transsexual Empire. (In a nutshell, transsexuals are an evil plot by male doctors to infiltrate and destroy the women’s movement. This book is still used in some women’s studies classes.)