Transgender Man Here! Ask Me Anything! :)

[Lilllabettt]

29 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

 

The path you are going down, whether or not it actually constitutes mental illness, will only lead you to hell.  That is what the Church teaches.  If you disagree, you can't in good conscience call yourself Catholic.

The Church's teaching on trans identity is very thin. There is a lot that has been taught against "gender ideology" which trans identity is somewhat mixed up in. But not necessarily so. In some ways trans identitycan be framed to reinforce the sex binary.

 There is nothing inherently sinful about a man putting on a dress and lipstick.

There is some question of whether chromosomes are the true definition of biological femaleness and maleness (or if rather there are biologically  "female" brains and biologically  "male" brains and whether this, if it is proven to exist, trumps the biological marker of chromosomes).

As for body modification associated with trans identity, this might be acceptable if it is therapeutic, rather than mutilation -  like a life saving treatment for mental illness (dysphoria). 

All that being said. The Church does not have much settled official teaching on trans issues. Just being trans or living as trans is not a sin in any official book we have. It's a less than optimal situation for a number of reasons as I've stated. But the Church doesn't officially teach that performing gender stereotypes aren't what make one a woman or a man. Morally and ethically speaking I believe that's true, and it's an opinion informed by my Christianity but it's not an official teaching of the Church. As of yet. 

Edited February 10, 2021 by Lilllabettt

[fides' Jack]

17 minutes ago, Ash Wednesday said:

There was no need to prematurely assume the worst of all of us in this regard before letting the thread take its course. I remain faithful to every teaching of the Catholic Church, felt that a warm welcome was prudent, and trusted the thread would have its way as it sees fit. Keep in mind that some may want to take the time and space to give it some thought before asking any questions. It's not a subject meant to be treated rashly or lightly.

I figured we'd all know by now that phatmass has threads that literally last for over 10 years around here, so.... 

I didn't assume anything of anybody.  Like I said, it's a new thread, so it remains to be seen.

[Ash Wednesday]

1 minute ago, fides' Jack said:

I didn't assume anything of anybody.  Like I said, it's a new thread, so it remains to be seen.

Cool -- to be fair this is a very grey area of familiarity as far as my knowledge goes. I'm very careful about the things that I discuss if I'm not well informed on the topic. I'll probably have some questions later.

[fides' Jack]

6 minutes ago, Lilllabettt said:

There is nothing inherently sinful about a man putting on a dress and lipstick.

Yes, it is mortally sinful.

 

7 minutes ago, Lilllabettt said:

like a life saving treatment for mental illness (dysphoria). 

How on earth is promoting it or accepting it going to save anyone's life in the case of dysphoria?

Are you talking about suicide?

9 minutes ago, Lilllabettt said:

Just being trans or living as trans is not a sin in any official book we have.

Anything that's against the natural law is sinful. 

[chrysostom]

Sterilization and mutilation of perfectly healthy body parts is deeply wrong on many levels.

[Lilllabettt]

28 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

Yes, it is mortally sinful.

 

How on earth is promoting it or accepting it going to save anyone's life in the case of dysphoria?

Are you talking about suicide?

Anything that's against the natural law is sinful. 

A man wearing lipstick and a dress isn't mortally sinful per se because those are gender roles, and gender roles arent part of natural law. They vary by culture, and are a mental thing. There was a time in Europe when men were expected to wear heels and makeup. It's in some ways in the same category as modesty. Immodesty is sinful but what it is varies by context. A swimsuit would be immodest at church but not the beach. A below the knee skirt would be immodest in Victorian England but not in contemporary America.  Similarly if a man wears lipstick and a skirt as part of an embrace of "gender ideology", or to provoke or scandalize or get attention, that could potentially be a sin. If he does it as part of kinky sex with his wife that's more likely not a sin. Weird sure but the lanes for married sex are wiiiiiiide. Tldr it depends on context. There was a time when people were astonished to see women wearing trousers. Context matters.

Yes I'm referring to suicide, or just, disabling mental illness. There is not a lot of effective treatment for dysphoria. If body modification more effectively treats it (big "if") it could be categorized as therapeutic vs mutilation. Could be. This is not accepting or promoting dysphoria as some great thing. (Promoting and accepting dysphoria as "normal" is an alternative approach some people want to take to reduce disability and suicide rates. But that's not the same thing as a surgical intervention intended to lessen the severity and disabling effects of symptomatic pathology.) Think about lobotomy. Now we know this is mostly ineffective, but for a period of time, this type of surgery was routinely performed to alleviate severe behavioral and mental illness and there was nothing sinful about it per se. 

25 minutes ago, chrysostom said:

Sterilization and mutilation of perfectly healthy body parts is deeply wrong on many levels.

Well, yes, but if you accept dysphoria is pathological, then there is in fact disease. The body is not healthy, it is in fact sick with a potentially fatal illness. Jesus says if your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. Obviously He didn't mean literally but the concept is what I'm referring to. The principle of double effect comes into play. 

Edited February 10, 2021 by Lilllabettt

[fides' Jack]

1 minute ago, Lilllabettt said:

If he does it as part of kinky sex with his wife that's more likely not a sin.

This is a false statement.  The general attitude that "as long as it happens in the context of marriage, it's fine", is wrong.  There are many sexual things you can do with your spouse that are sinful.  Dressing up specifically as a member of the opposite sex would be one.

3 minutes ago, Lilllabettt said:

Context matters.

I will agree with this statement.  Still, my claim was not wrong.  Dressing up specifically as a member of the opposite sex is mortally sinful, as it is contrary to the natural law.  That's the context we're discussing here.

There are times, as you say, that lipstick on a man might be appropriate (i.e. an acting role to make the facial features more distinct).  To do it in order to look like a woman in general society is not appropriate, and is gravely disordered and sinful.

7 minutes ago, Lilllabettt said:

Promoting and accepting dysphoria as "normal" is an alternative approach some people want to take to reduce [...] suicide rates.

Some people would be morally wrong in this case.  You don't treat a mental illness by playing into it, and those who do so are guilty of grave matter.  If the person is truly mentally ill, then it is better for them to die by suicide than for society to pretend they are not mentally ill, specifically because they are not entirely culpable for the sin of suicide.  Truth matters more than peoples' lives.

[CuriositasEtFidem]

1 hour ago, fides' Jack said:

Absolutely you are part of that moral attack, whether or not it is intentional.

I'm really, truly sorry that you suffer from gender dysphoria.

But for all the faithful Catholics here: you should know that to not condemn this general attitude, to be silent about the sins that cry to heaven for vengeance, and not to proclaim the Church's teachings, especially on a Catholic site, is mortally sinful.  Granted, this thread is young.  I hope the responses that are yet to come truly show that this site is indeed Catholic.  We will see.

The path you are going down, whether or not it actually constitutes mental illness, will only lead you to hell.  That is what the Church teaches.  If you disagree, you can't in good conscience call yourself Catholic.

Not the first time I've been told I'm going to Hell lol. I believe that God created me transgender, and it's taken a very long time to crawl out of the pit of self-hatred and anxiety that religious guilt had trapped me in. I'm not going back. 

[chrysostom]

17 minutes ago, Lilllabettt said:

Well, yes, but if you accept dysphoria is pathological, then there is in fact disease. The body is not healthy, it is in fact sick with a potentially fatal illness. Jesus says if your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. Obviously He didn't mean literally but the concept is what I'm referring to. The principle of double effect comes into play. 

You say "double effect", but I hear "the end justifies the means". What the surgeon does in these circumstance is permanent mutilation to allow someone to tell a lie with their own body.

I heard the story of someone who had developed the idea that she ought to be blind. The psychiatrist decided that it was best for her mental state that she be blinded, and did so. The end result is neither acceptable for her mental state or for her body. The same goes with trans surgeries and therapies.

[Ash Wednesday]

@CuriositasEtFidem

My first question -- what has your pastoral guidance been when navigating through your situation? For example, do you have a regular confessor or priest that you talk to? Also, what is your parish or church life like? Traditional? Local parish? 

 

[Lilllabettt]

1 minute ago, fides' Jack said:

 

I will agree with this statement.  Still, my claim was not wrong.  Dressing up specifically as a member of the opposite sex is mortally sinful, as it is contrary to the natural law.  That's the context we're discussing 

I'm sorry but this is nonsense. Gender stereotypes do not feature in natural law.  Did I skip over this in Aquinas? Can you quote me the Church's teaching on this?

4 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

 

Some people would be morally wrong in this case.  You don't treat a mental illness by playing into it, and those who do so are guilty of grave matter.  If the person is truly mentally ill, then it is better for them to die by suicide than for society to pretend they are not mentally ill, specifically because they are not entirely culpable for the sin of suicide.  Truth matters more than peoples' lives.

I agree with you that promoting dysphoria as normal is probably part of the gender ideology we are forbidden to embrace as Catholics. However, yikes to: "truth matters more than people's lives." Yes I guess but also no. I mean, you can allow someone to live as they wish without harassment and still reject their version of reality as upside down. You can do both. Are you a psychiatrist, because your statement that "you don't treat mental illness by playing into it" isn't exactly true in every case. If mental illness is refractory to treatment, harm reduction is a viable option. I'm thinking specifically of dementia. When demented elderly people come up with nonsense, the best practice is to not argue with or correct them.  A lot of dementia patients benefit from having a doll or stuffed animal to care for as if it were real. Just 2 examples.

[CuriositasEtFidem]

1 hour ago, Lilllabettt said:

This is probably why the idea of having a Trans child is kind of a nightmare to me. By all means I support people who want to perform whatever gender stereotypes they wish, especially if it's the best chance for them to not kill themselves.  

But, the existence of Trans identity represents a profound failure of our society imo. Of parenting. Or of something. I want my child to love his/her body as perfect the way it is. Whereas Trans identity often involves a rejection or loathing of normal healthy body parts. I want my child to have the courage to live standing up with a certain profound indifference to how society treats and perceives them - whereas Trans identity (like all gender based identity) is performance and thirst to have the performance perceived and accepted by society. Where a transperson feels uncomfortable and fake breaking sex based gender stereotypes - I want my child to feel happy and brave and liberated doing so. 

And then lastly and maybe most profoundly you say "I'm a man" but what you mean is, you dress and act and present yourself in the ways our society expects men to.  Let's flip it. If you were Trans and said "I'm a woman" you would mean, you dress behave and present yourself the way society expects women to. I can feel the hair standing up on my neck as I type ... and not to be aggressive, as I fully support your freedom to live any way you want without persecution or harassment... but No: Performing women's gender stereotypes, whether "assigned" or preferred, is not what makes one a woman.  This is a bedrock value of mine; to me it would almost be like a child rejecting religion. Not quite at that level, but very disappointing and making me question where I went wrong. 

You mentioned your parents didn't take your transition well. I wonder if you could share what their attitude towards gender in general. Are they from the "dolls for girls trucks for boys" mindset or ...? 

Yes, they're "traditional" in that respect. She/her pronouns are grating on my ears, even if I'm a "tough, strong, masculine woman." If I were in the middle of nowhere with not a person within a ten-mile radius, I would still be transgender. Respectfully, I don't think it's performative, but I find your perspective interesting.

2 minutes ago, Ash Wednesday said:

@CuriositasEtFidem

My first question -- what has your pastoral guidance been when navigating through your situation? For example, do you have a regular confessor or priest that you talk to? Also, what is your parish or church life like? Traditional? Local parish? 

 

Unfortunately I'm in a difficult situation now---I won't get into specifics---where I can't have a regular confessor. I consider myself a traditional Catholic (wild, right?) and adore the Latin Mass. Sadly, I'm only able to go to a Novus Ordo parish for Sunday Mass every week

[Lilllabettt]

1 minute ago, CuriositasEtFidem said:

Yes, they're "traditional" in that respect. She/her pronouns are grating on my ears, even if I'm a "tough, strong, masculine woman." If I were in the middle of nowhere with not a person within a ten-mile radius, I would still be transgender. Respectfully, I don't think it's performative, but I find your perspective interesting.

I guess my question is, when you drill down to it - what about she/her is so offensive? I mean, what have you internalized about the meaning of being a "she" that you find so out of sync with who you are?

"It's" not you- "it" feels fake - but what is "it" in your mind? 

[CuriositasEtFidem]

Just now, Lilllabettt said:

I guess my question is, when you drill down to it - what about she/her is so offensive? I mean, what have you internalized about the meaning of being a "she" that you find so out of sync with who you are?

"It's" not you- "it" feels fake - but what is "it" in your mind? 

It has a direct connection to womanhood, and when I'm referred to as "she" or "her," I always feel disconnected, or dissociated for some reason, like I'm a passenger in my own body, if that makes any sense lol. Whereas being addressed as "he" feels like it's "me proper" that's being spoken to. 

[Lilllabettt]

6 minutes ago, chrysostom said:

You say "double effect", but I hear "the end justifies the means". What the surgeon does in these circumstance is permanent mutilation to allow someone to tell a lie with their own body.

I heard the story of someone who had developed the idea that she ought to be blind. The psychiatrist decided that it was best for her mental state that she be blinded, and did so. The end result is neither acceptable for her mental state or for her body. The same goes with trans surgeries and therapies.

That's fine, but this isn't the Church's teaching. The Church hasn't commented on sex reassignment and there are important reasons for that. I know of another case where a woman identified as an amputee and hunted around for a surgeon to remove her perfectly healthy leg. Most surgeons consider this type of thing unethical. I do as well. But, things aren't as cut and dried with our religion as many assume. 

[CuriositasEtFidem]

49 minutes ago, chrysostom said:

Sterilization and mutilation of perfectly healthy body parts is deeply wrong on many levels.

I don't intend to be sterilized, I agree with you, willful sterilization without sufficient medical reason is sinful. Plus, "bottom surgery" as it is called is pretty risky for ftm individuals such as myself. I'd rather not risk serious injury. I do, however, intend to get top surgery, which is safer by miles. My chest is a major source of my dysphoria. I slouch, bind it, and dress in layers to hide it. To put it bluntly, if I may, it smells of elderberries a whole lot. I don't recognize myself in the mirror when I see it. It's not "me."

I'd like to present an idea: God gave us wheat and grapes, not bread and wine. We participate in creating by transforming what God has given us. It's the same (sort of) with trans folks, if you get what I mean.

[Lilllabettt]

1 minute ago, CuriositasEtFidem said:

It has a direct connection to womanhood, and when I'm referred to as "she" or "her," I always feel disconnected, or dissociated for some reason, like I'm a passenger in my own body, if that makes any sense lol. Whereas being addressed as "he" feels like it's "me proper" that's being spoken to. 

So what are your thoughts on the roots of this dissassociation with womanhood. I mean, you say if you were alone in the world you would still be transgender but you frame your discomfort as some other addressing/referring to you. Which goes back to trans identity as primarily a social performance. I mean ultimately the dissassociation has to do with a lack of congruence between who you feel yourself to be and the mental model of womanhood right? So what is your mental model of womanhood then, and who gave it to you? 

Side note; are you on the spectrum at all? Don't answer if you're not comfortable.  

[CuriositasEtFidem]

Just now, Lilllabettt said:

So what are your thoughts on the roots of this dissassociation with womanhood. I mean, you say if you were alone in the world you would still be transgender but you frame your discomfort as some other addressing/referring to you. Which goes back to trans identity as primarily a social performance. I mean ultimately the dissassociation has to do with a lack of congruence between who you feel yourself to be and the mental model of womanhood right? So what is your mental model of womanhood then, and who gave it to you? 

Side note; are you on the spectrum at all? Don't answer if you're not comfortable.  

That's a very good question, and one I find many "gender theorists" dodging. "What does it mean to be a woman?" Well, I suppose you're right, that gender is partly performative, and really just a social construct based on sexual differences. Honestly I'm not totally sure why I feel dissociated from womanhood. It is what it is, I suppose. There's something about womanhood that's on the tip of my tongue that I can't quite identify, but whatever it is, it doesn't sit right with me, regardless of how many gender stereotypes I break "as a woman." I think that it's valid enough to say that saying "I'm a man," (as an expression of identity, not "pretending" to be one) and being perceived as such feels much better, and gives me more peace of mind.

[little2add]

1 hour ago, Lilllabettt said:

This is probably why the idea of having a Trans child is kind of a nightmare to me. By all means I support people who want to perform whatever gender stereotypes they wish, especially if it's the best chance for them to not kill themselves.  

What if the child is prepubescent, is it fair or prudent to entertain the whimsical mind of a (trans)child and alter his or her body or hormones.

Didn’t  Johns Hopkins Hospital (who pioneered transgender surgery) discontinue the practice because of the high rate of suicide soon after the patients reached puberty?

see: Transgender is ‘Mental Disorder;' Sex Change ‘Biologically Impossible’

https://www.cnsnews.com/article/national/michael-w-chapman/johns-hopkins-psychiatrist-transgender-mental-disorder-sex

He also reported on a new study showing that the suicide rate among transgendered people who had reassignment surgery is 20 times higher than the suicide rate among non-transgender people. 

Edited February 10, 2021 by little2add

[CuriositasEtFidem]

8 minutes ago, Lilllabettt said:

 

Side note; are you on the spectrum at all? Don't answer if you're not comfortable.  

It's funny that you mention that, actually. I have ADD, and my brother has Asperger's and ADHD, we suspect my dad has Asperger's as well, so I wouldn't be totally surprised if I were to be somewhere on the spectrum too

1 minute ago, little2add said:

What if the child is prepubescent, is it fair or prudent to entertain the whimsical mind of a (trans)child and alter his or her body or hormones.

Didn’t  Johns Hopkins Hospital (who pioneered transgender surgery) discontinue the practice because of the high rate of suicide soon after the patients reached puberty?

see: Transgender is ‘Mental Disorder;' Sex Change ‘Biologically Impossible’

https://www.cnsnews.com/article/national/michael-w-chapman/johns-hopkins-psychiatrist-transgender-mental-disorder-sex

 

I agree that young children shouldn't medically transition, as their minds are often subject to change. They should be helped with exploring this, but certainly not with making permeant changes until they're adults. Calling Sally Sam and "he" for a year or two does less damage than putting Sally on puberty blockers and hormones, only to have Sally realize she's made a terrible mistake