Is Transgenderism Wrong?

Printer-friendly version

Is Transgenderism Wrong?

by Lauren Renée

 

 © 2010 by Lauren Renée Hotchkiss

During the course of our lives many of us in the transgender community have experienced some degree of guilt around the issue of our transgenderism. Beyond the usual fears most of us had growing up, wondering if it meant we were gay or wanted a sex change, we have also had to confront our feelings regarding whether it was morally “right.”

The Bible actually says very little on the subject other than a brief reference in Deuteronomy 22:5 which states: “No woman shall wear an article of man's clothing nor shall a man put on a woman's dress; for those that do these things are abominable to the Lord your God.” It is a quotation, however, that has been mistranslated and taken out of context from the original Aramaic text of the Torah, which in more literal translation reads: “No man shall put on a dress to enter the women's tent (fear of rape), nor shall a woman wear an article of man's clothing for the purposes of entering the holy temple (from which women were prohibited by ancient Judaic law).” It's change from a conditional to an absolute is reflective of both the political and moral climate of the times and of the biases of the translating body–take a bow, King James.

Some Biblical scholars believe that early Hebrew scripture passages such as this and a similar one which appears in Leviticus may were a response to the Jewish people's experience during their exile into Babylonia in the sixth century B.C. Throughout the Near East at that time, priests in so-called “pagan” religions tried to emulate the preeminent mother-goddess figures by becoming effeminate and often dressing as women. Judaism, which depicted a God who was indisputably and exclusively male, had no place for such mother-goddess worship. The priests of Jehovah, therefore, outlawed the practice of men dressing as women to keep the captive Jews from participating in these “heathen” rituals.

During the course of the last three or four thousand years the whole subject of transgenderism was blown out of proportion and transformed into a societal taboo. The issue is not really one of what clothing we choose to wear upon our bodies, however, nor of the gender role we adopt – I mean c'mon, God could care less, – but of how we have been taught to feel about it. Objectively, then, it must be as “right” for us to express ourselves in one gender presentation as in another.

The societal separation of male and female is an interesting phenomenon, as it was very much an act of humanity rather than of God. The Almighty never decreed, as far as I'm aware, that things in life be segregated from each other as being either male OR female behaviors? The fact that we accord certain rights and respect only to one “sex” while denying it the expression of emotion and the display of the more gentle behavior that we allow in the other seems of little value in any real sense.

On the plus side, however, in appreciating spirituality we often develop an understanding of the connection between spiritual faith and gender journey. And in our experience of living psychologically, spiritually, and for some of us physically as both a man and woman, we come to realize that our path is to accept and integrate both within ourselves and to be a teacher and learner concerning inner balance.

Human history is full of examples of those who chose to live in the opposite gender to the one in which they were born, but perhaps the spiritual aspect of transgenderism is best typified by the Native American transgenderists known by a variety of names in different tribes but collectively known as two-spirit individuals. Such people were often respected spiritual leaders and healers thought to possess supernatural powers. They were revered for their two-gender status, and had the unique permission by tribal society to adopt the social roles of women, men, or both, by their own choice. Their greatest contribution to their culture, however, came from utilizing their special cross-gender insights to mediate disputes between men and women of the tribe. Similar traditions can also be found in the Shamanistic cultures of the Ural-Altic peoples of northern Asia and Europe.

There is no one definitive reason why transgenderism occurs. Opinion is divided in the medical and psychological communities as to whether the cause is hereditary, environmental, or due to physiological or psychological factors. Most tend to agree, however, that there is nothing psychiatry can do to “cure” transgendered behavior as it is not a mental illness. Studies have shown that it is not something that will generally go away with time, nor are efforts to give it up usually successful.

In our culture, we are all brought up to believe that there are only two gender presentations allowed to us, and that they are inextricably tied to the genetic sex into which we are born. We come into this world as either “little boys” or “little girls” and are expected to live the rest of our lives in strict accordance to the narrowly defined gender roles that society has “assigned” to each sex. This is fine, in theory, were it not for the reality that for some of us it just doesn't work.

The realization for some of us that we are not like others of our sex often begins very early in life, manifesting as a sense of innate inappropriateness of being grouped with others of our so-called gender and not allowed behaviors which seem natural to us. Many of us at this age begin “borrowing” parent's or sibling's clothes and dressing up as often as opportunity permitted.

A few medical facts about human reproduction are revealing:

A new fetus has no sex characteristics during the first eight weeks of a pregnancy. Following this, we go through a stage where we are all essentially female, producing both male and female hormones. It is the predominance of estrogen or testosterone that make us male or female in anatomical structure. Chemically the difference between these two compounds is very slight; a matter of four atoms of hydrogen and one of carbon. The difference then between “male” and “female” is far more delicate than we have been conditioned to believe.

Sexual development in the fetus is always biased toward female unless an extremely complex process of gender differentiation is imposed on the growth process. This gender differentiation process will normally be initiated only if the fetal cells have Y chromosomes with fully functioning SRY segments.

Perhaps the clearest proof of this female bias is that both males and females have breast nipples. During and after puberty, elevated levels of estrogen will cause breast and nipple growth in men as well as in women. Similarly, elevated levels of testosterone will cause beard and body hair growth and a lowering of the voice pitch in females as well as in males.

Fetal development reverts to female during any period when the gender differentiation process is interrupted. These interruptions can be caused by stress, poor nutrition, drugs, and even by deficiencies or abnormalities present within the mother's body. It is this gender differentiation process that produces, within all of us, physiological and psychological characteristics that are a blend of male and female traits. If the androgen push of this differentiation process is not sufficiently strong to be completely accomplished, physical and/or psychological transgenderism or ambigenderism results.

The Bible also contains a couple of interesting passages that seems to address this from a spiritual perspective: In Genesis 1:27-31 we find “God created humanity in God's own image; in the image of God they were each created male and female. And God blessed them...And God saw that everything God had made was very good.” Galatians, also speaking to this in 3:28 (KJV) relates "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female [italics mine]: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

When a child is born, the first question usually asked is “Is it a boy or a girl.” If the answer is not clear, as in the case of physically intersexed individuals, surgery is often performed so that they can be “assigned” to one sex or the other so as not to upset the dualistic paradigm. Sometimes this is done without the knowledge of the parents

From birth, this paradigm is continually reinforced through a complex yet largely subliminal program of gender socialization. Although in the case of transgendered individuals, the gender role conditioning didn't quite “take,” it was nonetheless assimilated at a deep enough level that many of us feel we need to dress in the clothing of the opposite sex in order to give ourselves permission to display what we have compartmentalized as “feminine” or “masculine” qualities. This indicates that in addition to the biological element, we have the psychological and emotional aspects of both the feminine and the masculine within us. This being so, the concepts of male and female are not the “opposites” that we have been taught, but are, rather, compliments; two parts of one complete whole.

If one grants that we have both the feminine and the masculine within us, it follows that there must be a vast blending ground between the diametrically opposed concepts of man and woman; and yet the myth persists that there is not. No wonder that the two “sexes” often have such difficulty understanding each other when society has cast them into the role of “opposites.” Perhaps its time we question the whole male/female relationship construct. Obviously it is not working when our language, our social and behavioral mores, our entire society with all its movies, books, and television programs is full of instances of the “opposite” sexes unable to relate to one another. Interestingly, even when someone changes gender, there is still the expectation that they are supposed to trade in one set of behavioral and dress standards for another, rather than in any way integrating masculine and feminine qualities.

On a slightly different tack, one might consider whether a part of our motivation in crossing genders is the result of subconsciously trying to transform ourselves into the part of our inner being from which we have separated ourselves. Being conditioned to believe that we must look outside of ourselves in order to find someone with whom we can become complete – though frequently frustrated in the attempt –may well contribute to a forgotten awareness that wholeness comes from within. Because of this misperception, perhaps we have found it necessary to create a second person within ourselves, and manifest them externally, in order to fill an only partially recognized void.

Beyond the challenge of living a lifestyle for which we have not been trained or conditioned, there comes the further difficulty of integrating a relationship with a significant other into our lives and reconciling it with our transgendered lifestyle.

The desire to be in a relationship with someone with whom we can share our life is a basic human need, and not one which can be repressed without effect. Its lack can often contribute to feelings of loneliness and depression. Along with this often comes a fear of judgment and rejection by prospective partners due to our transgender issues. This fear can be particularly intimidating when it involves a person or persons for whom we care a great deal.

Although some of us are fortunate enough to find understanding, even accepting partners, many of us fear anticipated expectations and reactions. As a result, we experience the dilemma of either choosing loneliness or being in a relationship where we must pretend to be something that we are not. This often develops into a sense of low self-esteem in regard to relationships and, feeling that another could not be attracted to us, we keep ourselves from attracting a mate.

Though afraid of not being able to eventually find a relationship, we often come to a time in our lives when we can no longer pretend, realizing that whoever we one day might become involved with will have to be able to love us for who we are. Though we often feel very lonely, many of us feel that it is preferable to living a lie, and that it is better to wait for the right relationship, than to get involved in one that is not.

Perhaps aggravating the situation, is the popular misconception of all transgendered people as gay. Most people don't realize that there is a difference between sex and gender–the former being a biologic fact of birth, while the latter is an orientation of presentation. According to a poll taken by the International Foundation for Gender Education, 2/3 to 3/4 of us are heterosexual with the remaining percentile fairly evenly split between gay, bisexual, and asexual orientations. Interestingly, although the percentages are somewhat different, with a more even division between gay and straight orientations, this is also true for post-operative transsexuals

Although there are periods when being alone can be a very enriching opportunity for growth and awareness by encouraging inner discovery of self, there are times when the loneliness seems almost too much to bear, and we would just like to have someone to be close to. It is painful for most of us to consider the possibility that we may never again hear a partner say “I love you”.

As important as a relationship is to most of us, it is a fallacy to think that it, of itself, will bring us happiness or a sense of completion. A relationship, to be healthy and a positive expression of love, needs to not only be with someone with whom we genuinely love, but who loves us for who we truly are, not in spite of who we are. Both parties need to be complete unto themselves, seeking further growth through their commitment to one another rather than “needing” or seeking “completion” from each other.

One thing that often shifts in us as we get older is the desperate “need” we once felt around having to be in a relationship in order to be happy. Though we may continue to feel lonely, we realize that we don't ever again want to be in a situation of having a partner with whom we must pretend to be something that we are not, nor to get into a relationship that is not right, out of desperation.

We grow and learn to love through the acceptance of who we are. We are much less at peace when we do not allow ourselves to express the true spirit of who we are. It interferes with our ability to connect with others from the heart. Once we begin to open ourselves up to the totality of our being, however, we feel ourselves becoming more complete and open, and perhaps ready to attract the wonderful, loving life partner with whom we wish to share our lives.

And yet sometimes it seems that it would be so much easier if we could just forget all this transgender stuff, and just be “normal” (if one grants “normality's” existence beyond a societal consensus). Certainly it would remove a barrier that seems to exist between ourselves and others. As many times as we try to suppress our transgenderism, however, it keeps coming back. Most of us eventually realize that it is not something we can “give up” anymore than we can give up breathing, and that a part of our learning and growth process lies in the exploration, acceptance and integration of both the yin and yang of our being.

Although it's true that the gender presentation that many of us in the transgender community adopt may not be consistent with the accepted role for our anatomical sex, it is equally true that the role that we have been conditioned to accept for ourselves is often not in harmony with our spiritual truth. As paradoxical as it may seem, it is a situation in which one must live a lie, as others would term it, in order to live our own personal truth. What this suggests is that rather than being considered a losing proposition, transgenderism can be seen in the more positive light of expanding the entire gamut of gender and sexual identity and opening the door to the forward path of spiritual growth through the integration and balancing of the masculine and the feminine within us.

Following this line of reasoning, it becomes clear that it takes as much rationalization, albeit on a more subliminal or unconscious level, to decide to live according to the dictates of one's biological gender, as it does to transition from one gender to the other. It just appears easier to do so because it is condoned and continually reinforced by society, and so never questioned.

There is a tendency with the labels we use to separate from each other, to see things in terms of black and white. The reality, however, is that there is a wide continuum that exists between such polarized extremes of gay and straight; transsexual and transvestite; or masculine and feminine. Within each such label there is so much diversity and individuality, so many individuals that do not neatly fit the constructs of the definition, as to render it useless. Even among the non-transgendered there is such variety of supposedly gender-specific behavior that there is little validity to the viewpoint that “real women” or “real men” don't do this or that.

Beyond whatever stereotypes we use to separate from one another, we are all one, and neither the clothes we wear, our gender or sexual preferences, nor the color of our skin, are really of any importance. What is important is that we are all here for a purpose; to discover the underlying unity and oneness of all people, and realize the connectedness we share.

Transgendered labels are a particularly powerful button for some people, even inciting certain individuals to acts of aggression or violence. Though it's convenient for such individuals to place the cause of the problem outside of themselves, until they are willing to see how much has to do with personal responsibility, in deciding to make the conscious decision to examine their own biases and judgments and putting energy into eliminating them, the situation will not alter.

On the broader scale, the existence of aggression, violence, and war may have much to do with the sublimation of the full gamut of the feminine/masculine balance within each of us. Perhaps the evolution of the human race lies in our bringing to peaceful co-existence the male and female within ourselves. As we learn to accept that we are both and begin to integrate rather than divide the two, possibly we will find the peace and unity that is our birthright and no longer feel the need to strive against one another.

It is often said that members of the gender community are not like other women and men, as they have neither the socialization, physiognomy, or conditioning of the one, nor the psychological compatibility of the other, but such is often the way of change. Whether this involves, as it does for many of us, wearing the clothing of the opposite sex, or in just learning to see from others’ perspectives, it is all a part of our growth and personal evolution. Possibly, in time, the whole concept of masculine and feminine will no longer be necessary. As we develop in spirit, perhaps we will get closer and closer to the unity of ourselves and a schism will no longer exist between the male and female essences of our being.

We are now entering a changing age; a time when long venerated sex roles are being challenged. For the first time in recorded history we are afforded the rare opportunity to integrate our hitherto separate halves into a cohesive oneness; to explore, man and woman, the balancing of our male and female energy and to experience, what has, up until now, been considered the exclusive domain of the “opposite” sex. Perhaps, for those of us who live a transgendered or androgynous existence, there is a reason why we were born as we were: to explore gender integration on both an outer and inner manifestational level. In the process of doing this, we learn to become true to who we are, more at peace with ourselves, and more able to be of service to others.

Transgenderism is not always an easy path to follow. It is fraught with challenges of self-acceptance and the judgments of others, as well as difficulties in finding and maintaining relationships. Though some may regard it as a choice of loneliness, for those of us who feel guided to this path, it may more rightly be considered a choice of freedom. Perhaps, one day, the time will come when anatomy is no longer the arbiter of permissible dress and behavior, and it will no longer matter what we choose to wear, nor how we wish to behave, as long as we do no harm to others, when we will no longer have to think in terms of transgenderism or of expressing the appropriate gender, but of just being ourselves.

Whether we believe in God, the power of the universe, or the Great Goombah is of little importance. It is faith that is important. Faith in ourselves, our path, and our purpose. Isn't it time that we accepted ourselves and respected each other for whatever personal spiritual truth we are called upon to follow?

up
72 users have voted.
If you liked this post, you can leave a comment and/or a kudos! Click the "Thumbs Up!" button above to leave a Kudos

Comments

Is this a story?

This doesn't look like a story to me... If anything, it looks like a blog.

Was this posted here - intentionally to get angry responses?

Anne

It's not a story

As stated in the genre listing, the submission is a non-fiction essay, not a story. It is never my intention to anger, merely to inform or entertain.

Lauren Renee

Okay...

Okay, not that "my" approval means anything. LOL

Some info that may help your essay - if you need (Provided via Zoe Brain). Not contradictory or confirmative... Just some of the professional publications. Hope at least one's helpful to you.

----- Quoting Begins -----
Some more evidence, since we've shown that neither genitalia at birth nor chromosomes are reliable indicators of what sex someone is. So what *is* a reliable indicator? Is there something that is invariant from birth, that no amount of external intervention can change? Something objectively measurable? The evidence is that there is.

Male-to-female transsexuals show sex-atypical hypothalamus activation when smelling odorous steroids by Berglund et al Cerebral Cortex 2008 18(8):1900-1908;

Male–to–female transsexuals have female neuron numbers in a limbic nucleus. Kruiver et al J Clin Endocrinol Metab (2000) 85:2034–2041

Sexual differentiation of the human brain: relevance for gender identity, transsexualism and sexual orientation. Swaab Gynecol Endocrinol (2004) 19:301–312.

A sex difference in the human brain and its relation to transsexuality. by Zhou et al Nature (1995) 378:68–70.

A sex difference in the hypothalamic uncinate nucleus: relationship to gender identity by Garcia-Falgueras et al Brain. 2008 Dec;131(Pt 12):3132-46.

The neuro-anatomy of the brain. Visible to objective measurements, during autopsies or (recently) fMRI scans.

See seminar S10 at last year's American Psychiatric Association conference:
S10. The Neurobiological Evidence for Transgenderism
1. Brain Gender Identity Prof. Sidney W. Ecker, M.D.
2. Transsexuality as an Intersex Condition Prof Milton Diamond, Ph.D.

----- Quoting Ends -----

Regards,
Anne

And, having re-read...

And, having re-read your essay several times now. (The first time as a result of your reply.) I see what got my goat initially - and triggered my gut reaction.

The title initially set me off. It got my attention, as it was probably expected to. Then, I saw some biblical references with analysis, but no references as to where the analysis came from - and no listing of the author's credentials to speak with authority. Having a spouse in academia and having to listen to her comments on masters papers and such... I guess I'm "spring loaded" to "assume" the worst when I see something that looks like it might be explaining something - but doesn't indicate where the information comes from and such.

I've read your essay, several times now. I still think that the title rubs me the wrong way. (But, I'm not in a large company I guess... Which, is fine.) I think that much of what you say I have no problem with. However, I still find I can't accept all of your statements as fact, as it's (for me) missing those references (where I could go look stuff up and perhaps learn more? Nah.) and such. Some of it seems like speculation on your part while others "feels" (to me) like you're reporting on things you've read read or experienced (I'm guessing). But, there's no clear mark as to which is which.

You also hit one of my triggers. I HATE the term "lifestyle" when applied to transgendered, lesbians, gays or bisexuals. It really bugs me, even though it's popularly used - a LOT.

From the Random House Dictionary, Lifestyle is defined as "the habits, attitudes, tastes, moral standards, economic level, etc., that together constitute the mode of living of an individual or group."

Other dictionaries have similar or related definitions. All of those items, are subject to a person's choice (okay, economic level may be an exception).

I don't see how WHO the person is and who they love has any direct relationship with a lifestyle. I didn't CHOSE to fall in love with my spouse, and given my druthers, I'd NOT be transgendered! I spent a LONG TIME trying to act as if I weren't too - much to the detriment of my health.

Perhaps this - combined with the other points I mumbled over up there lead me to my initial reaction. I publically apologize.

Anne

Is Transgenderism Wrong?

Why I respect and admire my friends here.

    Stanman
May Your Light Forever Shine
    Stanman
May Your Light Forever Shine

The Bible

Hi

Be careful about quoting the Bible and taking literal meanings. Don't forget also that this is a translation and is based on the translators view of what the words mean.

Deuteronomy 22:5 is often taken out of context for the time it was written. It wasn't about transgendered or even cross-dressers per se. If you look at the verse in relationship to the whole chapter, a very different meaning comes out.

Try reading this: http://www.gendertree.com/Deuteronomy.htm which shows how it can be interpretted by many different scholars or interpretters.

Karen

No transgenderisim is not

No transgenderisim is not wrong what god made let no man put asunder ..
Do not judge others that is GOD,s way of takeing care of things ...
GOD will do what is need when the time comes.. not us.. Rone Welles

I rarely read essays and poetry

but I read this.

Would that something so concise and clear could have been available to me in my youth.

I suffered, as did many, from the intereference of a medical profession and a church that had, but didn't deserve, the respect of everyone. I was told that marriage was a definite cure and, being very naive, I believed. It wasn't.

After nearly 65 years of celibacy, I am now alone but not lonely but I know that it is most unlikely that I will ever have a real relationship with anyone.

Still, I'm reasonably happy, and content to live out my days as the person I always knew I was, but was frightened/ashamed to ever admit.

I suffered, as many do, from the 'real men do this; only pansies do that' mentality. It would have been fatal not to have hidden behind a stereotype.

This is another of those essays that should be required reading for anyone aspiring to professional couselling.

S.

Deuteronomy

Puddintane's picture

Although the situation in Deuteronomy seems simple, it's been known for thousands of years that it's actually not simple. The body of Jewish law is filled with extensive discussions of the problems faced by the intersexed and their parents. As might be expected, the law is both uncertain and changing, and the historical discussion is surprisingly compassionate and practical.

There's an historical religious vocabulary, and you can find many discussions of the issue on the Web, or in printed literature, if you know the vocabulary.

A "tumtum" is a person without specifically male or female genitalia, which is fairly rare, since the default path of foetal development usually tends toward a female appearance.

An "androgynous" or "androgynos" (preserving the Greek spelling) is a person who has the outward characteristics of both sexes, although one appearance or the other may predominate.

One modern discussion of the problems of the "tumtum" and the "androgynous"

Another such discussion, marginally stricter

A discussion from Ha'aretz, a generally liberal Israeli newspaper

Ha'aretz Home Page

From a Jewish feminist perspective

Some Rabbis these days are persuaded by "brain sex" theories, and some are not, because Jewish law evolves, however slowly. Some are, because people are compassionate, as a general rule. Some are not, because people are people, and may find difficult concepts difficult.

In general, however, "Biblical Literalists" are outside the long traditions of Biblical scholarship and interpretation, which goes all the way back to Sinai, if the opinions of the people who brought that tradition forward from what is largely prehistory are to be considered.

Cheers,

Puddin'

A tender heart is an asset to an editor: it helps us be ruthless in a tactful way.
--- The Chicago Manual of Style

-

Cheers,

Puddin'

A tender heart is an asset to an editor: it helps us be ruthless in a tactful way.
--- The Chicago Manual of Style

cross-dressing and the Bible

I thought this was well said. I had a chance on Sunday to talk with another TS girl, and she told me of meeting with conservative Christian and Jewish leaders to help her understand her desires, and both told her variations of what you presented here.

DogSig.png

Thank you, Lauren Renée

This is a thoughtful and interesting essay.

When I celebrate the various rites as an Anglican deacon, I usually wear a cassock and/or alb. Some anthropologists and liturgists have deemed wearing such garments as a form of "ritual crossdressing." So, if that makes me a "crossdresser," then I accept the appellation. It puts me in good company, including many brothers and sisters at BCTS.

By the way, the same chapter of Deuteronomy also condemns the wearing of linen and wool together. So wearing a linen alb over a woolen cassock ought to be a "no-no." We wear it all the time! (If we can afford it, that is. Polyester is cheaper and more durable.)

I'd like to address this issue from Deuteronomy later on this website in a fictional setting.

And while the Bible does not address transgenders or transsexuals as a category, there's at least one precedent of someone who was an ex-male: the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8:26-39. And let's not forget the verse that I think is the most important remark about this issue:

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female [italics mine]: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."—Galatians 3:28 (KJV)

Thanks again for a thoughtful essay and thoughtful commentary.

The Rev. Anam Chara+

Anam Chara

Thank you, Rev. Chara

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female [italics mine]: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."—Galatians 3:28 (KJV)

Gosh, darn. I could have sworn I'd included this quote in an earlier draft. It was certainly in my research notes. I may have inadvertently deleted it as I revised.

And BTW, I'm an ordained reverend myself (Course in Miracles), with an honorary doctorate in theology.

Lauren Renee

Religion

Lauren Renée:
"The Almighty never decreed, as far as I'm aware, that things in life be segregated from each other as being either male OR female behaviors?"
But the followers of this patriarchial insanity did:

"every woman should be filled with shame by the thought that she is a woman". Clement of Alexandria

“Blessed be God, King of the Universe that Thou has not made me a woman.” an Orthodox Jewish Prayer for Jewish males

"I know this is painful for the ladies to hear, but if you get married, you have accepted the headship of a man, your husband. Christ is the head of the household and the husband is the head of the wife, and that's the way it is, period." Pat Robertson

"girls begin to talk and to stand on their feet sooner than boys because weeds always grow up more quickly than good crops". Martin Luther

Ephesians 5:22, wives are instructed to submit to their husbands.
1Cor11:9, women were made for man.

Timothy 2:11-15, "Let a woman learn in silence with all submissiveness. I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over men; she is to keep silent.

Peter 3:1-6 exhorts wives to "be submissive to your husbands"

Col 3:18 and Titus 2:11-12, let women learn in silence and be completely submissive; for no woman shall be permitted to teach or have authority over men.

BTW...I loved ACIM. I was a theist before reading it, and realized that there is no God by the time I was finished. That is the punch line of ACIM,...there is no god.

ACIM taught me to be honest.

, Osho said, “Start knowing what you really know, and stop believing what you really don’t know. Somebody asks you. “Is there a God?” and you say, “Yes, God is.” Remember: Do you really know? If you don’t know, please don’t say that you do. Say, “I don’t know.”. . . False knowing is the enemy of true knowledge. All beliefs are false knowledge.”

EZ

Is the Prayer anti-woman or maybe something else.

RAMI

EZ includes as one of the anti-woman religious prayers or statements, "Blessed art thou L-rd G-d, King of the Universe that has not made me a woman.” an Orthodox Jewish Prayer for Jewish males

If anyone is interested in the meaning of this prayer from an Orthodox Jewish viewpoint, and it not being "anti-woman", the following link will lead to an excellent article from an Orthodox Jewish Women.

http://www.torah.org/learning/women/class31.html

Rami

RAMI

Anti-Woman?

Puddintane's picture

I agree, and I disagree. The prayer has nothing to do with whether men are "better" than men in any way, and indeed the Orthodox view is that women are inherently closer to God than men are, and that men have more rules they have to follow because they *need* them. While ten men are required to offer up a communal prayer -- because it's harder for men to concentrate -- the prayer of a single woman is of equal worth. Jewish women are the centre of family and religious life, and Jewish women have the responsibility and privilege of keeping track of and complying with most of the religious laws governing daily life.

Like the traditional Chinese symbol for "Peace," the ideal Jewish household has a woman at the centre of it.

Peace - Woman in one's House

While the very important prayer that marks the beginning of the Sabbath can be offered by anyone, if a woman is present, that honour is almost always hers. Generally, Jewish tradition is that it's the presence and contribution of a woman that transforms a house into a home, and in the Bible the first Jewish household, and the first lighting of candles, was performed by Sarah, our spiritual foremother, even if not a direct ancestress. Being given one's own set of candle holders is an important moment in a girl's life, and often celebrated with a special family ritual or celebration, often at the age of Bat Mitvah, although when I was young there were no special Bat Mitvah ceremonies, only Bar Mitzvahs for boys. What there was was the privilege and duty of initiating a special period of peace and good relations between all the members of a family, and any guests present, because of our natures as women. A Jewish girl first lights those candles assisted by her mother, often when very, very young.

This issue is somewhat fraught in Jewish feminist circles, because we can often be (and are) falsely held accountable if this ritual doesn't "take," and the promised peace and harmony doesn't prevail, but it's an image embedded in most of our imaginations (whether it sits comfortably there or not) and is so emblematic of Jewish women that one often sees Sabbath candlesticks portrayed on the headstones honouring women in old Jewish cemeteries. Likewise, a traditional wedding gift for a woman is a special set of candlesticks, marking the creation of her own household.

I disagree because men are at the heart of almost every story in every religion, not just Judaism, and the overall *scope* of attention paid to women's lives and voices is very scanty indeed. Just as it takes ten men to gather enough of their thoughts together to make a proper prayer, it takes a *lot* of men to come up with almost any coherent and sensible thought.

One finds the good bits about women scattered amongst simply loads of "scores" and the sort of stuff men find important, and hardly anything about what's really important.

Cheers,

Puddin'

A tender heart is an asset to an editor: it helps us be ruthless in a tactful way.
--- The Chicago Manual of Style

-

Cheers,

Puddin'

A tender heart is an asset to an editor: it helps us be ruthless in a tactful way.
--- The Chicago Manual of Style

The term is "shatnetz," and has several exceptions...

Puddintane's picture

The girdle of the Kohein Gadol, the High Priest, is shatnetz. Why? Nobody knows; it's a "chok," a law handed down without reason; it just is. Likewise, the fringes on a garment may be made of shatnetz, or the felt soles of boots worn in very cold climates. Some think that shatnetz is ok when used to cover furniture, as long as the cover isn't loose, so that one could be tempted to wrap it around the body as an improvised garment, some think not. Karaite Jews (Samaritans -- yes, they're still around*) are much more strict than Rabbinic Jews (everyone else), but there are many variations on this particular rule.

The actual Torah prohibition is against wearing garments made of fibres which have been carded, woven, and twisted, all three, but the Rabbis extended to law to include anything which might give that appearance, a fairly common practice called "putting a fence around Torah."

In English history, the combination was once so common that it had its own name, "linsey-woolsey," or in Scots English, "wincey." It combined strength (from the linen) and warmth (from the wool), and was often used in inexpensive clothing, just as polyester is mixed in with cotton or wool today to make cheap fabrics.

Cheers,

Puddin'

* This is my own opinion, shared by some and disputed by others. Both groups are as rare as hen's teeth on the ground, so the chances of running into one or the other are slim indeed, something like that "one-armed man" that the doctor was chasing on The Fugitive.

A tender heart is an asset to an editor: it helps us be ruthless in a tactful way.
--- The Chicago Manual of Style

-

Cheers,

Puddin'

A tender heart is an asset to an editor: it helps us be ruthless in a tactful way.
--- The Chicago Manual of Style

Quoting The Bible

RAMI

Quoting The Bible is a dangerous undertaking, unless one is familiar with Biblical Commentary. Rabbinic discussions of the Torah are ancient and are based on what is referred to in Judaism as both the Written Law and the Oral Law. Those laws are continually being discussed and debated to the present time. Even amongst Orthodox Jews (the strictest observers) there is diverging opinions.

The Jewish view of Laws found in the Torah differ remarkedly from the Catholic and Protestant views of issues. The Christian view point is of course influenced by the writings in the Christian Bible, which of course Jews do not accept.

Translation of course is a factor, but translators are influenced by religious doctrine. We in America, are often confronted by arguments about displaying the "Ten Commandments". One difficulty in doing so, unless only tablets numbered 1 - 10 appear is that, the Jewish Ten Commandments, the Catholic Ten Commandments and the Protestant Ten Commandments all differ. At the following website you can see a detailed explanation.

www.positiveatheism.org/hist/lewis/lewten02.htm

The author quoted a law appearing in both Leviticus and Deuteronomy concerning mixing of wool and linen called in Hebrew Shatnez. Puddintane, has an excellent comment regarding these laws. This law is often dismissed by individuals who wish to ridicule the Torah. In doing so, they fail to understand the nature of the laws found in the Torah. Torah laws fall into three groups Chukat/Ordinances, Eidot/Testimonies and Mishpatim/Laws.

Eidot/Testimonies are Ceremonial Laws such as eating Matzah on Passover. Mishpatim/Laws are civil and criminal laws that are both rational and similar to laws found in most societies.

Chukat /Ordinances are in a different category altogether. They are Commandments that are of a Divine origin that have no "rational" explanation. Shatnez is a Chukat. It is not rational, and exits because HaShem declared it.

If you do not believe in G-d, then the law is meaningless and perhaps ridiculous. If you are a Christian, this is likely one of the Torah Laws that you need not follow. If you are an observant Jew, the law has meaning. The most observant Jews, if there is a question about what fabrics a garment contains, will send the garment to a Shatnez lab for testing.

As to the laws concerning Cross-Dressing, a detailed analysis of various commentaries is required to get a better understanding of the meaning of the words.

RAMI

RAMI

>> Written Law and the Oral Law

Puddintane's picture

This may be a difficult concept for many Christians, although much more familiar to Muslims, who are generally closer to, and more familiar with, the roots of Judaism than are most Christians.

Torah is the first five "books" of the Bible (Tanackh in the usual Jewish formulation, an acronym for the Hebrew words Torah, Prophets, and Writings*) It's a remarkably slim bit of writing to contain even the "Reader's Digest" version of what God may, or may not, have imparted to humanity at Sinai.

The traditional explanation is the God spoke to everyone at Sinai, some of whom were literate, some not; some reflective, some not; but everyone (at least every Jew -- but possibly the whole world -- was there, including the souls of every human being who ever lived or will live and that of every convert to Judaism from now until eternity). We were all of us there, and all who were there grasped at least some small part of what God said to all the souls there gathered**.

What's the first thing we do when something important happens in our lives? We talk about it. We tell it to our friends, our children, everyone who wants to listen. Eventually, we may (or may not) write it down as a memoir, What Grandma Heard at Sinai, and send out copies to all the grandkids.

The sum total of this "unwritten" Torah is what's called the Oral Law in Judaism, and is an integral part of what Judaism is. That's not to say that at least some of it hasn't been written down, because it has, in many long books, and arguments about those books, one of which is the Talmud (and if you've never seen a complete edition of the Talmud, here's one example)

Babylonian Talmud

There are, of course, many books about the Talmud, and about every scrap of knowledge imparted by God at Sinai, because it's something like a game of "Telephone;" everyone who was there started thinking about what God said, and talking to his or her neighbours, until you had thousands, millions, billions of people talking -- and arguing -- about what God really said.

This is why Jews have never fretted about the "One True Religion," or gone in for converting people in any big way, because everyone has at least some knowledge of God -- whatever they call him -- and (mostly) the wit to understand what it means in their own life. God, in traditional Jewish thought, is bigger than *any* human religion, and *no one* understands everything, so we all of us are doing the best we can with what we know.

So Torah is something like the Constitution of the United States, a basic framework, a sort of mnemonic device that's meant to remind us at least of the fact that God spoke to us, that he spoke to all of us, and to try to capture some small part of what was said, but it's only the starting point.

There's a mitzvah, for example, a Jewish law, to feed one's animals before one feeds one's self when one gets up in the morning. This is an incredible bit of detail, so where is it in Torah? Well, it's a long story. In Deuteronomy 11:15 there's a passage that says: "And I will send grass in thy fields for thy cattle, that thou mayest eat and be full." The Talmud says -- and the Talmud consists of detailed arguments by many people, so there were differing opinions -- that the implication of putting the "cattle" before the people is that the animals, who were dependent on their owners, had to come first, because they didn't understand the human concept of "taking turns," but only hungered and suffered until their hunger was satisfied. So first we gather for the animals, and then we eat and are full.

Because this is a complex bit of reasoning, it was set down as a separate rule that people could easily remember. And because this is a simple rule as well, it has its own lengthy reasoning and explication of what it really means, so there's a long discussion about Noah and the Ark, and what the proper times for feeding are for different animals, the essence of which is that we have to pay close attention to what the animal needs, and provide for it with concern for its welfare.

Just like any set of rules, or laws, they have to be thought about before one can do anything with them, for the most part. There are laws against speeding in a car, but what if one's child is in the seat beside one choking on a bit of apple and you're speeding to the hospital; do the speeding laws apply?

Maimonides -- an important Jewish scholar -- writes (Laws of Foundations of Torah, Ch. 5) that the Law is something by which one is supposed to live, not die, so Jewish legal opinion says no***, because human life is more important than almost any given law. Almost every law can and must be set aside to save a human life. If the animals can't be fed before rushing to the hospital, that's ok, but try to take care of it as soon as possible. If you have to drive on the Sabbath, when you're supposed to be resting, enjoying family life, and maybe thinking a little about God and stuff, that's fine, because people are more important than "the rules." We're all doing the best we can; we'll get back to them later, after the emergency has passed.

Cheers,

Puddin'

* By strange coïncidence, in English, this acronym is remarkably similar to T'Pau, the Vulcan High Priestess and important figure in Vulcan religious history and politics. This isn't exegesis, just a factoid that may, or may not, be of interest to some Star Trek fans.

** A woman named Judith Plaskow wrote a lovely book called Standing Again at Sinai: Judaism from a Feminist Perspective that I highly recommend to any woman, because listening to women is at the heart of it, Kol Isha, the voice of woman, is different. We were there too.

*** Because of a fascinating bit of reasoning, only briefly summarised here.

Wiki on Halacha

A tender heart is an asset to an editor: it helps us be ruthless in a tactful way.
--- The Chicago Manual of Style

-

Cheers,

Puddin'

A tender heart is an asset to an editor: it helps us be ruthless in a tactful way.
--- The Chicago Manual of Style

Now You've Done It

Geez. I had to think while reading your essay. What's the deal?

Thanks.

Angela Rasch (Jill M I)

Angela Rasch (Jill M I)

nor shall a woman wear an

NoraAdrienne's picture

nor shall a woman wear an article of man's clothing for the purposes of entering the holy temple (from which women were prohibited by ancient Judaic law)

According to our Orthodox Rabbi (from a long line of European Rabbanim), men and women attended the Temple on the THREE main holidays... the NOT ENTERING part is in the Kodesh Kedoshim (the Holy of Holies) This is where the alter was. Only the High Priest (Cohen Gadol) was allowed.

As to the rest of your treatise I think it is better suited to a different venue. Maybe a scholarly journal.

Transgenderisim. An issue that God, G_d, or Allah SWT....

Does not care about.

I too was initially triggered by the title and did not read the essay, but then another member here more or less drug me by the ear over to read it.

At some time, unbeknownst to me, I must have gone round the bend on the issue, because I don't care if someone thinks it is wrong; I know it is not! Those who think it is will not listen to arguments that have good evidence, or compassionate reason in them. My process has gone like this:

  1. I knew that I loved God, and had been taught that if we asked he would answer our prayers.
  2. I had the drives, but I prayed with my entire heart and soul, but God did not heal it.
  3. So, if God answers prayers, and he did not heal me, then it must not be a problem.
  4. From there, they are on very dangerous ground, and I flee them because the "shatun" said, "I shall be like the most high God".
  5. Hopefully I have enough faith to believe if they kill me, then God can handle that.

Tribe in Southern Iraq Marsh Country.

There is a Tribe in the Southern Iraq marsh country whose view of transgderisim is that if a girl wants to live as a boy, or if a boy wants to live as a girl, they are allowed, but there is no going back. Saddam, being Sunni tried to wipe them out. Shia's because of The Iatollah Kuhmenni are supposed to allow it, but this phenomenon has supposedly gone on for thousands of years. Perhaps he had relatives from there?

Also, in the vicenity of the UAE, Transfolk are permitted but sit by themselves at the Mosque.

In parts of Northern India, there are Hijra, who are tolerated, but in my opinion do not live a very happy life.

Several years ago, I think in 2007, there were 800 SRS operations done in Saudi Arabia, and if you compare it with what is thought to be the norm, KSA has SRS surgeries at 40 times the normal rate. Apparently the majority of them were FtMs and the reason being was that they were sick of the treatment that women suffer there. Another issue with them is that in Saudi Arabia, there is a huge health problem because of intermarriage, so part of the T problem could be due to that.

Of interest is, I had gotten the information orginially in Arab News, and it was confirmed by a Pakistani guy that I knew. He has since gone to ground over several issues. Recently I tried to look the data up again and even got the name of the clinic in KSA who was doing them. Part of the web page is still up but the Docs there vigourously deny any knowlege of it. They do admit to doing some anatomical "corrections", however. :)

Gwendolyn

Pakistani guy gone to ground (Clarification)

At the advice of a friend of mine, I will clarify a statement I made in the "Is Transgenderisim Wrong" thread. The Pakistani guy I am speaking of is Gay. He has gone to ground because some people in his country and others simply kill gay people. I am sure that the FBI and Homeland Security have no interest in him at all. It has been over a year since I have heard of him myself.

I had no idea at all that someone on this site would even think of taking that and running to the "plod" with it. There are so many ways this is crazy that I can't even count them thar ways with my shoes off. :)

Gwendolyn