Francis gets it backwards

Pope Francis is totally confused about sex, which is no wonder considering the strange sexual rules of his faith. He can't get a handle on what's occurring in modern times so, like Fox News, he jumps in and spews nonsense.

Today's AP stream:

VATICAN CITY — Pope Francis has lamented that children, as he puts it, are being taught at school that gender can be a choice. Francis said: "Today, in schools they are teaching this to children -- to children! -- that everyone can choose their gender."

Of course, what's being "taught" -- largely through experience and media coverage in the US -- is that there is no choice regarding gender. You are what you are. And sometimes what you are is a person trapped in a body of the wrong sex. It's not surprising that this happens. Some people are physically intersex. They are born with both female and male sexual organs. It's not much of a stretch to think that sometimes the whole body is the wrong sex. The transgender person feels that he or she is in the wrong body. What a horrible fate that must be. But today they can have that little problem fixed.

Is this process about choosing whatever gender you want? In fact, the pope got it ass-backwards. It's about not being able to choose what gender you are. These people, young and old, don't choose a gender. They claim their appropriate gender, even at a young age. And if that doesn't align with the physical gender of their body, they tell us: I'm not a man, I'm a woman. There is no choice, no mystery. It's simply something they know as surely as they know their own names.

Sexual orientation and gender dysphoria aren't about choosing. They're about who you are. Choice plays no role. This is simply the reality of their bodies and minds. They are who god made them, including gay or transgender (if'n you want to think of it that way; there is no god, of course). 

The pope understands nothing about this. For this reason, he should stick to non-sexual topics when he speaks. Why share his ignorance?

Transgender employent struggles

At CNNMoney, of all places, there's an article about the difficulties transgender people have when looking for employment -- especially in this economy. The article itself is neither positive nor negative. It's simply a recounting of the experiences of several transgender people. I recommend it. And I was very pleased to see an article like this on a mainstream web site. Kudos to CNNMoney.

Transsexual v. transgender

Transgender symbol.

I noticed yesterday that several online newspapers referred to the first transgender lawmaker in Poland's parliament as a "transsexual".

I find this offensive and I imagine many transgender people do, too. The term "transgender" has been around for quite some time so why use an outdated term that has a shaky history? To me, the word transsexual reeks of early sensationalist headlines.

We don't call gay people "homosexuals" anymore. Only wingnuts do that. That's because "homosexual" is a clinical term. So is "transsexual". It is a term invented by doctors to describe a medical phenomenon they were seeing. Why go clinical? Doesn't it make sense to use the term most transgender people prefer?

(Mind you, I'm basing my judgement on comments made by the transgender people I've known. For all I know, there's a huge group who detest the term "transgender". I hope those concerned will chime in in the comments.)

This reminds me of the old days when we tried to convince the New York Times that "gay" wasn't a dirty word. They stuck with the homo terminology for so long! The change was way past its due date when they finally capitulated and went gay.

Transsexual indeed. The word is transgender. At least, I think so.