Presence in dialogue
Is it possible to discuss something of importance to two people, where their views are opposed? I could talk to Christians who believe gay lovemaking is sinful, but I have questions for them first.
Gay people tell you we cannot change our orientation. Do you accept our testimony, that it is true at least of the people who say that, if not of others who claim otherwise for themselves?
Second, if it were not “clearly God’s will as revealed in the Bible” that gay sex is wrong, is there any independent moral argument that two people who so swear that they cannot change their orientation should not form an exclusive loving and sexual relationship?
Is it possible for this other to see my point of view? If the other says that I tell myself comforting falsehoods so that I may continue in my sin, he has me neatly boxed. But then, I say that he has a false idea of the nature of God, so I have him categorised too, in a particular idea of the basics of his Christianity.
Why those questions? The first, because we cannot change, and if you do not accept that you cannot see us- but more, because the idea that with only a little more self-control I could be a married man with children gnaws at me even now. I know that is not true, and if I sense an echo of it in another’s judgment, the anger and fear of it grasp me again from within. I have unhealed pain from before.
Um. I have no respect for them. They cling to something worthless because of their stupidity.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What of the “radfem”, who 
can’t stand my kind? I might enter imaginatively into her perspective. She grows up with a constraining ideal of femininity which she does not fit and which restricts her life choices and chances, and by great strength and some luck overcomes it. Then she finds men, the privileged ones, who pretend to be women, and caricature the worst aspects of the femininity she despises.
A tool of her rebellion and self-acceptance is the knowledge that gender is a social construct and that femininity is defined by patriarchy. Her loyalty is to women, that is, people born with female sexual characteristics, because that is the only thing in which, for her, differentiating male and female is not an oppressive lie. She cannot hear me say “I am born feminine” without derision.
That rebellion I can respect. The “Christian” who does not rebel but becomes an oppressor himself, I despise, but the feminist whose rebellion cannot take account of me-
Oh! I despise the Christian because I did not want to rebel, I wanted to fit in and be normal. I rebelled because I could not do otherwise. It still feels in part like the slippery slope down, not climbing a mountain. I despise in him what I despise in myself.
I could say that if one of them speaks of me, it is her stuff not mine. And vice versa. It shows me what my baggage is.
Can I sympathise with a person-
aged 46!
-who still has baggage?
I am a Christain and I am sorry for those who have mistreated you. That is not the way of Christ.
I am a Christian too, oddly enough. I have had a lot of acceptance from Christians. It is a particular subset of Christians I am picking on here. And- thank you for your reassurance, sister.
I’m afraid in my ignorance I haven’t heard of ‘radfem’s. I assume they’re radical feminists, but I can’t quite get my head round why they would take issue with a female presence in a male body. One would assume that people who struggle against any form of the many oppressive societal ‘norms’, would be open to understanding what others go through. I’ll go google them.
And now I’ll say something that’s none of my business. I’ve read quite a few of your posts and I don’t understand how your religious belief persists in the face of the pain it brings you time and again. I realise your interpretation of it is different from the current mainstream, but I’m sure you’ve considered that the Christian god does not actually exist and that you have no need to search for comfort in inconsistent ramblings from thousands of years ago or the people who still follow them. Sorry for the evangelic atheism but it seems to me that at some point being able to extract yourself from these beliefs will ease your load ….
I expressed the radfem view as well as I could. The restriction of women was based on reproductive differences, and they believe that all gender differences arise from patriarchy and are oppressive. So they do not see me as a woman, because I did not have the female primary sex characteristics, and my “femininity” is simply patriarchal.
For me, my femininity is innate, though its expression is in part cultural. When I manifest femme with a butch woman that is as innate as I can imagine- completely contrary to my upbringing and indoctrination. But I can see the resentment of patriarchy, and if one feels completely separate from “normal femininity” it can look like an oppressive lie.
They would say because only reproductive organs are what makes you a woman, and this random characteristic causes wrongful indoctrination and oppression, and femininity is a result of indoctrination, having no basis in human biology only the culture which oppresses women, and males benefit from the oppression- then I am their oppressor.
I divide out my own religion. I go on these Evangelical blogs, but theirs is not my Christianity, which I explain here and here. I think them wrong about God, the Bible, morality, salvation, everything. I justify some of what I say by the words of Jesus which I think have value whether or not he was God. So I am grateful for your evangelic atheism, I see the goodwill behind it, but I think I have got rid of all religion which might cause me pain now. It is being socialised male which has lasting effects on me, and I am dealing with those effects. I use my religion for my emancipation not my oppression. This is heterodox, but I am comfortable with it.
On radfem, have a look at Cathy Brennan. Unfortunately, though there are so few of us, she seems to think of trans folk rather a lot- proving that religious bon mot that what we resist, persists. I read this stuff, not all the time, to inoculate myself: other people disapprove of my way of being, the very way of being I fought so long but could not resist. And- that is OK, I can still survive and build self-respect.
Thanks for the link, it’s an interesting subject. I used to believe (in a passing, non-radical way) that gender stereotypes were pretty much imposed by society. That was before I had much contact with babies – I couldn’t believe how wrong I was. They sound like a blinkered lot, even simply for the lack of acceptance that people are what they feel they are. Anyway, I’ll have to work on my evangelical atheism, it’s clearly not effective …
The answer to that one is that people talk differently to babies, depending what sex they think they are. The socialisation into gender starts as soon as the child is born. Though, I am the challenge to that answer: my socialisation was as male. You would have to be a brilliant proselytiser for atheism to get everyone.
I think @ the end of it all, we must remember to respect everyone
Absolutely. And- here are people who find me either an oppressor or a sinner. The Evangelicals find you a sinner too. My question is how to hear that and not get triggered, either withdrawing weeping or going off on one.
Oh, go off on one, now and then! It is fine. Anger is healthy sometimes, and acknowledging it is, too, as you know!