Are transgendered people allowed to get married or be in relationships?

[Viviphilia]

Originally Posted by TheRealJuliane

or maybe you are going to argue the point with your father. Good luck with that one.

Thank you for your kind words of encouragement. I will certainly need luck with my Father, who can be quite stubborn. And luckily, I have the support from the rest of my family to rely on. I am confident that we will be able to help my Father understand that this is a medical condition which is justified by Christ and permitted under the Catechism, even thought it is frowned up by many individuals. If I may suggest to those latter individuals that they focus on Christ's New Commandment, that we love one another as He loved us, perhaps they might end up feeling a little less angry and a little more charitable.

[Cherry5]

Originally Posted by Viviphilia

And luckily, I have the support from the rest of my family to rely on. I am confident that we will be able to help my Father understand that this is a medical condition which is justified by Christ and permitted under the Catechism, even thought it is frowned up by many individuals. If I may suggest to those latter individuals that they focus on Christ's New Commandment, that we love one another as He loved us, perhaps they might end up feeling a little less angry and a little more charitable.

Glad to hear that you have the support of the rest of your family, I do hope your Father is able to come to accept you for whom you are, you obviously love your Father and your relationship with him means a lot to you.

I have been following this thread for a couple of weeks and do appreciate your position, you raise a very important point, in that the cause of the high suicide rate in the transgender population is because people who matter most to them ( the Church community, family, close friends) are unable to accept them. The good news is that things are getting better, our kids are being taught tolerance and acceptance and I can already see the difference in their disposition, with that more people will be able to live more fulfilled lives with dignity and love. I too have much to learn about acceptance and love. Discrimination on the basis of Gender identity and Gender expression will be illegal sooner than later.

[TheRealJuliane]

Originally Posted by Cherry5

Very, very sad.... a parent that cannot accept their child and love them at a crucial and painful time! fortunately there are many parents that can in fact look past this and love their kids and accept them the way they are.
God bless you both.

I would not stop loving my son if something like this happened. Nothing can make me stop loving my sons. But, I do not have to accept everything they do as being equally good. You say "accept them the way they are," but this to me is not normal and it is not healthy. Society has gone too far in telling these people that their minds, which tell them they are "in the wrong body," are completely right and it's true. I believe it is mental illness and needs treatment, not hormones and not surgery. And nothing society says will change my mind. It is an offense against God to mutilate the body he granted you because of mental illness. It's like suicide.

[Cherry5]

Originally Posted by TheRealJuliane

I would not stop loving my son if something like this happened. Nothing can make me stop loving my sons. But, I do not have to accept everything they do as being equally good. You say "accept them the way they are," but this to me is not normal and it is not healthy. Society has gone too far in telling these people that their minds, which tell them they are "in the wrong body," are completely right and it's true. I believe it is mental illness and needs treatment, not hormones and not surgery. And nothing society says will change my mind. It is an offense against God to mutilate the body he granted you because of mental illness. It's like suicide.

. And it would be very difficult for me to go forward with any kind of relationship. What you are proposing to do is like eliminating yourself as his son.

Glad to hear you would not stop loving your son, I stand corrected if I misunderstood you, however I guess in my mind if you could not go forward with "any kind of relationship" and eliminating your son as being your child did seem at odds with continuing to love him.

Just so you know in many cases transgender folk go the transition route only after they reach a point when they see only two options, suicide or transition. This after they have tried to cope with and adjust to societal norms.

No one chooses to be transgendered. I hope if this condition hits close to home for you, that you are able to be more charitable in your disposition.

[SwizzleStick]

Originally Posted by Viviphilia

I haven't given any indication as to whether I'm Catholic or not, I just wanted to point out how you keep making assumptions about me. Thanks for proving my point once again. ...

Yes, a point was certainly proven.

By the way, assuming you are Catholic after reading some of your postings was an honest mistake, but I was wrong to do that. I admit that I was wrong. Please indicate other assumptions that I have made about you.

Originally Posted by Viviphilia

...And let me add another point, I haven't given any indication as to my sexual orientation or relationship status either. So think about that for a moment as you reflect on your claims not to have seen any hatred here. ...

I should probably review the thread, but you indicate you are a man who feels like a woman and that you are taking hormones and considering surgical mutilation, if I recall correctly. I wasn't aware that knowing your orientation or relationship status is really pertinent. It would be more information, sure, but the conversation can continue without having that information.

Originally Posted by Viviphilia

...Exactly which Church teaching requires that transgender people not take what is a scientifically validated medical therapy for our condition? That's the kind of thing I'm here to learn, so please, fill me in on all the details. ...

It is grave sin to mutilate a perfectly healthy body. If one is born with some question as to gender, than corrective surgery is a valid medical therapy after testing to determine one's actual gender. I think I already said as much. I'll search for that post and repost it if I can find it.

[SwizzleStick]

Originally Posted by SwizzleStick

...It is grave sin to mutilate a perfectly healthy body. If one is born with some question as to gender, than corrective surgery is a valid medical therapy after testing to determine one's actual gender. I think I already said as much. I'll search for that post and repost it if I can find it.

Here we go. This post is from another discussion. If one is interested in that discussion, one may just click on the arrow within the post below to be taken to that discussion.

Originally Posted by SwizzleStick

Yes.

Surgery is sometimes necessary. Sometimes a baby is born with a birth issue so that it is hard to determine what sex he or she is at birth. Testing would determine the answer so that surgery could be performed to correct the issue and go on from there. But, some want to mutilate a perfectly healthy body and pump it full of hormones so that some can live as the opposite sex. I think that that is a mental health issue and needs to be addressed as such.

[Mintaka]

Christ accepted people who had been subjected to the eunuch operation, like the eunuch of Ethiopia, or those who had made a mistake. He didn't accept the operation. He advocated that some men and women become celibate for the kingdom of heaven, and the way he described this was to say "eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven."

Tradition was very solid on how this was to be interpreted, because Jewish tradition forbade anyone with a serious injury or birth defect from being offered by Israel as a priest. The analogy was to requiring a perfect animal without spots, blemishes, or injuries. It was forbidden beyond doubt to offer a sterile animal (ie, to get rid of it without financial hardship to the owner, or to offer a gelding instead of breeding stock). The apostles followed the same rule. This was nothing against people with disabilities, who could have pretty much any other job in the Church.

Now, there were plenty of eunuch priests in plenty of Mideast religions, notably the religion of the Great Mother, whose would-be priests would cut off the relevant parts while dancing along in procession. (And hence, whose would-be priests frequently died horribly.) This is one of the reasons why even the pagan Roman Empire banned the religion for many years. Other religions featuring eunuch priests were the religion of Phrygian Attis [another religion banned even by pagans], Syrian Astarte, the Artemis of Ephesus, and so on. Many of these religions including "sacred prostitution" of eunuchs, even.

Israel and the Church did not want to copy this stuff.

The other place where eunuchs were big in the East was as officials or guards who were unable to make babies with a king's wives and concubines (although frequently, they were having sex of some kind or other with them), or as bureaucrats who were unable to have heirs and would thus be disinterested servants (although eunuchs frequently took heirs from the rest of their family, or adopted). Eunuchs of this kind were castrated by their families for gain. They were frequently rich and socially mobile people, but all the sources say that they were not very happy people. (Which is in accordance with everything we know about the lives of castrati, too.) Since they had to make their mark in their own lifetime, and since they had few career opportunities beyond the bureaucracy, most eunuchs were totally consumed with office politics. (And with keeping non-eunuchs out of the bureaucracy.)

Israel never adopted this expedient - not even Solomon did. The Roman Empire did adopt it when it went east, despite warnings from the bureaucracy. The Church did not want to copy this stuff, either, although there was a lot of pressure from Byzantine bureaucracy to make the priesthood all-eunuch (and thus open up a lot more bureaucratic civil service jobs).

Now, let's go back to early Christianity. In Alexandria, there were always a lot of young men wanting to castrate themselves, often doing it themselves messily. So the pagan Roman governors banned getting castration without permission from them, and just never gave permission. It was clear to them that it was some kind of sexual insanity driving people, because they never had prepubescent boys asking them for permission to be castrated.

When Christianity came along, the same people started showing up, quoting "eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven" instead. So the Church banned castration also, and yet there were still people trying it and dying messily, or living through it and then not really having much in the way of prospects.

Now, there has always been a story that the theologian Origen was one of these guys who tried castrating himself without permission -- his "rash act." If so, it was the last time he ever took a literalist take on a Bible passage; he was all about the allegories and mystical sense. (Which says something about how that whole castrating thing worked out.) He probably didn't do a completely thorough job of it, because late in life he was allowed to be ordained a priest. But even so, there was tons of controversy about it until he died, and after.

The whole eunuch bureaucrat thing is basically a variation on other bad stuff that Indo-European civilizations did to powerful people -- cripple or kill them. If you wanted to keep your skilled smith around, break his leg and don't let it heal right. If you don't want your architect to build something this glorious for somebody else, kill him when the building is finished. And if you want to have male sex slaves working for a female deity with lots of female worshippers, castrate 'em to keep the men from being jealous.

God doesn't go for easy "solutions" like that. Christianity is about the circumcised heart, not the circumcised body. Men and women must live celibacy by choice, not by trying to remove their choices with a knife. (Which wouldn't keep them from sexual sin anyway.)

And yes, the whole "cut it off" thing is totally Jesus giving an analogy, because obviously (as Jesus himself said, "Repent your sins," to at least one man who he healed) being blind or crippled doesn't mean you can't sin.

There were plenty of people who misread Jesus' words about martyrs to mean that they should kill themselves. They didn't misread them that way because they listened to the Church; they misread them because they wanted to kill themselves. Again, this isn't a trap that I choose to fall into, because it is false.

Look, your surgeon can cut and sew as much as he wants, and you'll still have your DNA. You can take hormones as much as you want, and you'll still have your DNA. Even if someone were to invent some kind of genetic re-write surgery tomorrow, and every vestige of your original chromosomes were to vanish, you would just be sweeping the basic facts of your life under the rug.

You can't kill off the sex you were born with; so it's a waste of time and money as well as a horrible insult to God who made you. Why not spend time and money on something that's actually fun and useful, like world travel?

[SwizzleStick]

Originally Posted by Viviphilia

That study compared post-op transsexuals to the normal population. It failed to compare post-op transsexuals to pre-op transsexuals, which would be the appropriate control group to test for reduction in suicidality. Each time that study suggests the suicide rate is high after sex corrective surgery, it is saying that it is higher than the normal population, not higher than the pre-op population.

The paper you cited mentions:

Previous reports [6], [8], [10], [11] suggest that transsexualism is a strong risk factor for suicide, also after sex reassignment,

This makes clear that the transsexual population was already at an astronomically high rate, even before surgery. Therefore it comes as no surprise that the rate was still high after the surgery. No one claims that sex corrective surgery is a magical bullet that solves the social intolerance that drives trans women to suicide.

If you look into the discussion you will find this:

In accordance, the overall mortality rate was only significantly increased for the group operated before 1989. However, the latter might also be explained by improved health care for transsexual persons during 1990s, along with altered societal attitudes towards persons with different gender expressions.

Read that again - "the overall mortality rate was only significantly increased for the group operated before 1989." After 1989, when Western society began tolerating transsexuals, the mortality was no longer significantly increased. What that tells us is that suicidality of post-op transsexuals was due to social intolerance of transsexuals, not the surgery itself.

"Results

The overall mortality for sex-reassigned persons was higher during follow-up (aHR 2.8; 95% CI 1.8–4.3) than for controls of the same birth sex, particularly death from suicide (aHR 19.1; 95% CI 5.8–62.9). Sex-reassigned persons also had an increased risk for suicide attempts (aHR 4.9; 95% CI 2.9–8.5) and psychiatric inpatient care (aHR 2.8; 95% CI 2.0–3.9). Comparisons with controls matched on reassigned sex yielded similar results. Female-to-males, but not male-to-females, had a higher risk for criminal convictions than their respective birth sex controls.

Conclusions

Persons with transsexualism, after sex reassignment, have considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behaviour, and psychiatric morbidity than the general population. Our findings suggest that sex reassignment, although alleviating gender dysphoria, may not suffice as treatment for transsexualism, and should inspire improved psychiatric and somatic care after sex reassignment for this patient group."

[InSearchofGrace]

Originally Posted by Mintaka

Christ accepted people who had been subjected to the eunuch operation, like the eunuch of Ethiopia, or those who had made a mistake. He didn't accept the operation. He advocated that some men and women become celibate for the kingdom of heaven, and the way he described this was to say "eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven."
...

You can't kill off the sex you were born with; so it's a waste of time and money as well as a horrible insult to God who made you. Why not spend time and money on something that's actually fun and useful, like world travel?

That is a very informative post providing understanding of eunuchs from a biblical and historical perspective.

Your counsel at the end is good, although in reading the track the poster Vivi is on, the interest for travel might be limited to places like Trinidad, Colorado or Bangkok, Thailand.
,

[TheRealJuliane]

Originally Posted by Cherry5

Glad to hear you would not stop loving your son, I stand corrected if I misunderstood you, however I guess in my mind if you could not go forward with "any kind of relationship" and eliminating your son as being your child did seem at odds with continuing to love him.

Just so you know in many cases transgender folk go the transition route only after they reach a point when they see only two options, suicide or transition. This after they have tried to cope with and adjust to societal norms.

No one chooses to be transgendered. I hope if this condition hits close to home for you, that you are able to be more charitable in your disposition.

Don't worry about my disposition. I'm just fine, thank you.



And suicidal motivations argue once again, for mental illness treatment. If someone sees 2 options, either mutilation of their God-given body or suicide, then they are not in their right mind and no surgeon should be operating on them.

[InSearchofGrace]

Originally Posted by Viviphilia

...
This makes clear that the transsexual population was already at an astronomically high rate, even before surgery. Therefore it comes as no surprise that the rate was still high after the surgery. No one claims that sex corrective surgery is a magical bullet that solves the social intolerance that drives trans women to suicide.
...
["the overall mortality rate was only significantly increased for the group operated before 1989." After 1989, when Western society began tolerating transsexuals, the mortality was no longer significantly increased. What that tells us is that suicidality of post-op transsexuals was due to social intolerance of transsexuals, not the surgery itself.

Your self-justifying opinion, of course. The conclusion of the study is that surgery does not solve the suicide risk of trans individuals. Not surprising that what you take away is that social intolerance is to blame for suicides by post-op trans patients. Among other preoperative requirements, SRS patients have to live in the gender to which they are transitioning for a period of time. The study is suggesting that the next focus for SRS patients is post-op care to address continuing morbid and mortal suicide ideation not erased by surgically mutilating solution.

What would be the next demand by post-op trans patients, that surgeons find a surgical solution to another burning wish like construction of a neouterus so trans women can conceive and give birth? Else, they will commit suicide? In the trans mind, nothing is wrong with his/her mind. What is wrong is the social and world order. The social and world order better change, so that post-SRS patients don't commit suicide. Utter madness.

That is why Dr. Paul McHugh, whom you say is disparaged by the trans community, believe doctors should not be collaborators to madness!

Another study that says

Sex changes are not effective, say researchers

David Batty
Society Guardian, 29 July 2004

There is no conclusive evidence that sex change operations improve the lives of transsexuals, with many people remaining severely distressed and even suicidal after the operation, according to a medical review conducted exclusively for Guardian Weekend tomorrow.

The review of more than 100 international medical studies of post-operative transsexuals by the University of Birmingham's aggressive research intelligence facility (Arif) found no robust scientific evidence that gender reassignment surgery is clinically effective

...

[Corki]

Originally Posted by Viviphilia

The Catechism permits sterilization when it is medically therapeutic.

Please provide the CCC paragraph number that supports this claim. Direct sterilization is never permitted. Sterilization is tolerated only as an unintended side effect of another therapy or procedure. For example, radiation treatments for cancer may rend a man sterile; the removal of diseased ovaries would have the same result for a woman.

[Jimmygill88]

The Vatican employed Castrati until 1903. If body changing surgery is irreligious for Transgender folks now, why was it acceptable then?

[CopticChristian]

Originally Posted by Jimmygill88

The Vatican employed Castrati until 1903. If body changing surgery is irreligious for Transgender folks now, why was it acceptable then?

Jimmy,

The answer lies in why were the Catrati rendered Castrati and by whom.