#Jesus said trans women are women

[bookwyrmsbuttons]

[ozymoron]

writhing in agony as i hear someone say "men and women are completely different" in an attempt to be progressive

[xxcalicofemmexx]

can you imagine if someone said something like "i believe white women experience a specific, targeted form of misogyny that intersects with anti-white sentiment"?

even if "anti-masculine sentiment" was a thing that mattered, it wouldn't be a specific kind of bigotry, and its intersection with transphobia doesn't demand new language in the same way transmisogyny does. it's just a tactic to redirect attention away from trans women getting removed from every online and offline support network. it's "all lives matter"ing transphobia

HELLO???? HELLO?????? IS ANYONE HEARING THIS????? IS THIS THING ON???????

THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF TRANSMASCULINE SUFFERING IS NOT THE SAME AS WHITE SUPREMACY

jesus fucking christ i can't believe that needs to be said.

do us all a favor and try LISTENING to the transmascs talking about this instead of playing the fucking oppression olympics. you're not helping anyone. you're not being an ally. all you're doing is proving to every transmasc around you that you're not a safe person.

you should be embarrassed to have sent me this. and on anon as well, bc you're too much of a coward to even take responsibility for your own actions.

[ratmans-notebooks]

everyone listen to me right now. trans men & transmascs are targets of misogyny. crazy idea i know but when youre seen as a woman and/or shoved into the woman category people will be misogynistic to you. it is fuckign crazy the amount of posts ive been seeing syaing stuff like "trans men think theyre exempt from being mras cause the dr said they were a girl once" or "having a pussy doesnt mean you cant be sexist" and its like. YEAH OBVIOUSLY having a pussy doesnt mean you cant be sexist but jesus christ the presumption that trans men are unaffected by their asab or that theyve never ever experienced anything like misogyny is wilddd!! not to mention why are we still referring to transmascs by their (assumed) genitals. like its obviously vile to reduce transfems & trans women to their genitals but the same people who realize this seem to have no problem doing it to transmascs

[blessedarethebinarybreakers]

I’m a transfem Christian, and sometimes I worry that I’m twisting Christianity to suit my politics and views rather than the reverse. I was raised as a Southern Baptist and left for the Episcopal Church, with the conservatism of the former church being a large reason for my departure. I really don’t want to have to chose between either being able to transition and being a good Christian, but I’m so worried that I’ll have to make that choice.

Hey there, I am so sorry for the delay in responding to this. I don't for a second believe you are "twisting" Christianity to suit your views by living into your true self:

Jesus tells us that we can know a thing by its fruit — if the fruit is good, the tree is good; if the fruit is bad, the tree is bad (Luke 6:43-45; Matthew 7:15-20).

What are the fruits of transition? Joy, community, reconnection with your own body? Life?

What are the fruits of the things preached by ultra conservative churches? Hatred, fear of difference, violence? Deportation instead of love of stranger, judgment instead of mercy, control via terror instead of liberation through God's love?

Near the end of this webpage of mine about a liberatory framework for reading scripture, I address the accusation that queer Christians are just "reading into" the Bible what we want to see. To sum it up, I agree that all people bring our biases to the text — heck, the biblical authors brought their own biases to the text!

“The truth is, you can bend Scripture to say just about anything you want it to say. You can bend it until it breaks. For those who count the Bible as sacred, interpretation is not a matter of whether to pick and choose, but how to pick and choose. We’re all selective. We all wrestle with how to interpret and apply the Bible in our lives. We all go to the text looking for something, and we all have a tendency to find it." - Rachel Held Evans

Many theologians say that when we accept both our own biases and the biases of the people who wrote, edited, and compiled the books of the Bible, the best way to determine what is Divine in scripture is to follow The Rule of Love:

"Any interpretation of scripture is wrong that shows indifference or contempt for any individual or group inside or outside the church. All right interpretations reflect the love of God...for all kinds of people everywhere, everyone included and no one excluded.”

- Shirley Guthrie

The webpage offers more details about this way of reading the Bible, if you are interested. But at the end of the day, the main thing I hope you can come to believe not only in your head but in your heart and your body is that you are beloved. That God created you exactly as you are with purpose and delight. That you have vital gifts to share with the world that the Body of Christ is not whole without.

If you need further assurance through theology, I invite you to check out Austen Hartke's Transgender and Christian YouTube series.

You may also find Rev. Nicole Garcia's story encouraging; she's a trans pastor who once said that she has experienced two vocations in life: one to ordained ministry, and one to being a woman.

God is calling you, too. I pray that you can feel Their presence and love in your life -- even when it's hard to believe in it yourself. <3

(For more, I have a trans tag and an affirmation tag and trans women tag and also an FAQ you might like to peruse through)

[bookwyrmsbuttons]

[fellshish]

Why do you think crowley is trans? I'm honestly curious. Not hate meant.

Oh it’s not really a matter of opinion it’s just canon fact. Neil has said time and time again that angels and demons are genderless / don’t fall into human-like binaries. But even on the surface level of the show we see crowley present femme multiple times, of which nanny ashtoreth is of course the most obvious example, but also when they’re watching jesus get crucified is one of those (confirmed) moments.

Also if you look at crowley’s costuming, a lot of his clothes have a “women’s cut”, the silver bolo he wears etc... The costuming department on the show makes sure to bring a certain genderfuck element to this character.

In short, crowley is trans and would miracle a permanent tiny rock in terfs’ shoes.

[ater-love]

Do not DARE to make Elain Archeron into a poster child for infertility.

Defending your headcanons of her in the name of women who struggle with infertility is infantilizing and appropriative in the extreme because (and this shouldn’t need to be said, but) Elain is not in any way now, nor has she ever been, infertile.

When did I ever say that lmao????

If you are talking about my response to an anon post in which I talk about the the article being lowkey transphobic… then you understood nothing (shocker I know)

Is Elain trans? Nope

But the post lowkey shames trans women because they can’t have children and therefore they aren’t likely to end up with a man

Is Elain infertile? Nope

But the post lowkey shames infertile women because they can’t have children and therefore they aren’t likely to end up with man

That article was not just degrading Elain, but also women in general and could be harmful to real people who actually struggle since the stereotypes STILL exist

Jesus… you only read what you want huh

[cerastes]

One month complaining about puppygirls and forcefem and the next complaining about people being hormy in boring ways is a new interesting way to pretend calling trans women cringe for being horny isn’t just transmisogyny. I give it a month before you go full megapope

What In Tarnation

Also, I said I didn’t understand puppygirl stuff but that it didn’t bother me at all, so I don’t think that’s a complaint (that post was playful in nature). “Forcefem” being put everywhere as the new meme funny answer like “cum” was for a while until like a year ago is what I complained about, not the concept itself, and finally, I’ve forever been a strong advocate for being free with your kinks and fetishes, not to mention I don’t exactly have a conservative blog, I just also don’t pretend interacting with armpits erotically makes me an elite freak that could make Baby Jesus become fireworks with my mere sinful presence, nor do I make it my daily mission to turn any mention of human anatomy into an opportunity to remind everyone I like me a sweaty pit the way some people will look at any two characters glaring at each other and declare they demolish entire apartment complexes with the insane megasex they have after a heated swordfight, or other very surface level, almost mass produced statements. This isn’t A Sin, I just find it grievously corny and I don’t think it’s a greater statement of any sort to say as much in my blog.

If anything of the above constitutes MK Ultra sleeper agent transmisogyny to you, that’s less me becoming catholic and more you needing to work out some stuff, perhaps expand the range of your netspaces beyond what I tentatively assume is an echo chamber.

[undaughtered]

I found your post on Christian antisemitism very enlightening, and it made me see more clearly how foundational antisemitism is to the faith. But I didnt understand this part: "what gentile chistians have done to jesus is the blueprint for all antisemitism and thus for all forms of oppression". Are you talking literally here? As in all forms of oppression (sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia etc) can be linked back to this?

ultimately yes, although i should have been more specific in my language and clarified that i meant in a western cultural context. the disposability of the body of christ renders all bodies also disposable. it the physical marker of flesh (of which judaism is said to be in excess), identity, culture, and women (since the body of flesh, born of woman, is a different beast than the body of spirit reborn through christ). by setting up christ's body as the centrepoint of necessary destruction to bring about the kingdom of god, christianity also renders all like bodies necessarily destructible: women's bodies, trans bodies, gay and lesbian bodies, enslaved bodies, black and brown bodies, indigenous bodies, disabled bodies. oppression is like to destruction. the opposite of liberation is death. the destruction of the flesh is central to both christian soteriology and eschatology (see the remaking of the world at the end of days), but this concept is enfleshed by the body of a jewish man being transformed from a political prisoner executed by colonizers for being too loud about judaism into an extension of the very human authority that killed him. there is a reason why christian dogma can be used for justice, mercy, oppression, and violence in equal measure.

[olderthannetfic]

https://www.tumblr.com/olderthannetfic/759992406521397248/im-sure-this-has-been-said-before-but-i-aroace?source=share

Repliers all up in arms against a straw-terf, jesus christ.

I didn't say men are naturally misogynistic, I said men are *SOCIALLY* conditioned not to see women as human (and I love the reply claiming I said both of those things as if they're complementary, not opposites).

I didn't say I feel like this *because* I'm aroace, much less that all aroace people feel like this, just figured it was relevant to say I'm not straight.

I didn't say *anything* about what men and/or women should do or how they should be treated in real life. If women are happy in het relationships that's their business (that's the big difference between me and Andrea Dworkin). The only real life-related thing you could glean from my ask is I personally don't trust men, which I don't, but that is my right just as it's black people's right not to trust white people (or date them, or read white/black romance) -- and it's insane that I can't say that without people thinking that I'm what, beating trans women (who are women btw, not men) out of bathrooms?

And finally, I didn't say anything about what people should write. If they wanna write and read het that's also their business.

I just talked about my reading preferences, the way a lot of anons come here just to express that they like or dislike reading something. It's a squick, not a moral crusade.

--

I agree with you that men are socially conditioned in stupidass ways. I've even said it often on here, particularly when discussing subtext and the normie gaze in media and so on.

It's not that assertion that people are reacting to: it's the tone and style in which you wrote it.

Nonnie... the vibes you give off are odd. People are responding accordingly.

[nerdygaymormon]

A Brief History of the LDS Church's Transgender Teachings and Policies

Gender identity and gender roles are important in LDS theology and practices. For most of the 1800s, church presidents Joseph Smith and Brigham Young had men, women, and children sit separately for all Sunday meetings. Nowadays, some of the Sundays church meetings are still divided by biological sex. Temple worship is also similarly divided.

For decades, the LDS Church believed that in the premortal life, when intelligences were organized into spirits that they may have chosen whether to live as male or female during mortality, and that poor choices during their time on earth could demote them back to a genderless condition. Joseph Fielding Smith, who was made an apostle in 1910 and became president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in 1970, was well known for teaching that those who do not reach the Celestial Kingdom will be neither man nor woman, merely immortal beings.

As a teenager in the 1980's, I remember being in Sunday School class and the teacher saying that when we're resurrected we can look down, and if we don't see a penis or vagina then we know we're not making it to the Celestial Kingdom.

Along with this, for many years the LDS Church seems to have viewed all queerness as a form of gender confusion, whether it was a man thinking he's a woman or a man who is attracted to other men.

As the fight over gay marriage ramped up, the teaching about genderless spiritual beings was replaced with the idea that gender is forever and this was incorporated into the 1995 Family Proclamation which states that "gender is an essential characteristic of individual pre-mortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose."

The idea is that each of us are a son or daughter of heterosexual & cisgender heavenly parents, and we are meant to become like them. There is a strict binary of spiritual gender identities and gender roles. Ideally, our bodies should be formed in a way that reflects our spiritual body, including our spiritual gender, but the reality of the physical world is that things often don't work as we'd expect them to, but that doesn't change our spiritual gender.

Let me take this moment to point out that the notion of gender being eternal does not exist in scripture, this is a fairly recent evolution.

And while the idea is that gender is an innate and unchangeable part of our souls, the Church has also felt that gender needs to be nurtured, protected, and defended. There have been many rules about what women may wear to BYU and to Sunday services. For many years the advice to leaders on how to counsel with young men experiencing same sex attraction was to have them spend time around manly men and participate in masculine activities, and to not wear androgynous or feminine styles.

For a long time, LDS Church leaders were more aware of homosexuality and focused on this, and their mentions of trans people remained pretty infrequent.

In 1980, Spencer W. Kimball was president of the LDS Church and was outspoken opponent of homosexuality, however he authorized the sealing of a trans woman to her husband in the Washington, D.C. temple. Perhaps in response to this, later that year LDS authorities updated the official General Handbook of Instructions to officially prohibit “transsexual operations.” The handbook stated that “members who have undergone transsexual operations must be excommunicated” and that “after excommunication such a person is not eligible for baptism.”

I first got access to Handbook 1 in 2016, and excommunication was still the standard, although it said "elective transsexual operations" (not sure when the word "elective" was added). Surgery was the boundary line which if crossed would result in excommunication. However, the phrase "elective transsexual operations" recognized there are some circumstances where such operations are required or aren't the choice of the individual. For example, a man whose genitals were injured and couldn't be kept, or an intersex person who had surgery performed on them as an infant or child.

Any individual who was considering "elective transsexual surgery" was not allowed to be baptized, but for an individual who had undergone "transsexual surgery" and now wanted to be baptized, it had to be approved by the First Presidency. If they were allowed to be baptized, they would not be allowed to receive the priesthood or participate in gender-separated temple rites (which limited them to doing baptisms).

There was some wiggle room on whether top surgery is considered "transsexual surgery" and depended on the local leader's interpretation. There was no policy on transitioning in ways that didn't involve surgery, such as hormone therapies, “cross dressing,” or other means of living out one’s gender.

In January 2015, Elder Dallin H. Oaks said, "I think we need to acknowledge that while we have been acquainted with lesbians and homosexuals for some time, being acquainted with the unique problems of a transgender situation is something we have not had so much experience with, and we have some unfinished business in teaching on that." This reflects the growing awareness of trans individuals and showed some humility on his part. Elder Oaks had often spoken out on homosexuality and gay marriage, but this statement was thoughtful and many took it as cautiously optimistic.

Some transgender Mormons in explaining that their bodies do not reflect their gender identity would point to the Family Proclamation which says "gender" is eternal but not necessarily their sex. In response, in 2019 Elder Oaks said that “the intended meaning of gender in the family proclamation and as used in Church statements and publications since that time is biological sex at birth.”

In 2020, a major revision of the Church's general Handbooks were made. Handbook 1 (which was only available to bishoprics, stake presidencies, and General Authorities) was combined with Handbook 2 and put on the Church's website for all to see. This revision included major changes for transgender members.

The term "elective transsexual surgery" was gone, and now any social, medical or surgical transitioning would bring restrictions. Many saw this as more restrictive, it took away the space to transition in ways other than surgery while remaining in good standing as a member. Some saw it as a step at being more accommodating as excommunication was not the de facto punishment for transitioning. A church member could decide if transitioning was important enough to them that they'd be willing to be without a temple recommend.

The 2024 Handbook update seems like they felt some local church leaders had taken things further than had been anticipated, and so they had to plug in the gaps from the 2020 Handbook that leaders had used to be inclusive and accommodating of their trans members. Now members who transitioned in any way were not allowed to be baptized, restricted from holding almost all callings, specified which meetings & activities they may attend, forbids trans youth and young single adults from overnight activities, and even has specific rules about under how a trans person may use the restroom.

[transfemme-shelterdog]

I figure when you’re involved in any discourse you’re more likely to see the best of the people you agree with and the worst of those you disagree with. So I’ve been trying to follow “both sides” of the discourse. Not because I actually agree with the anti-transmasc crowd, dear god no, but so I can have an easier time keeping an eye out for transmisogynists on our “side”

Buuuuut

I rarely see any actual transmisogyny?? Most of the time it’s strawman arguments accusing the entire transmasc community of something or other, or trying to police what words they can use.

The rest of the posts are stuff like “these vile transandrodorks HATE all trans women and think we should SHUT UP and DIE FOREVER” with no screenshots to back it up or show who said it.

Over and over: “transandrobros think trans women aren’t oppressed!” and “transandophobia-truthers are telling trans women they’re all lying about their experiences!” and “transandrodorks say transmisogyny isn’t real!”

WHO IS SAYING THIS!?

They can’t keep telling people this is what we believe without any proof! And if a substantial of people on our side are really saying this shit, I can’t find them!

I’ve blocked like, a handful of actual transmisogynists in the transandrophobia tag. Two of them were obvious cryptoterfs. One of them was cis. Please tell me where all the rest of these transphobic people are so we can report and deplatform them, jesus christ.

It’s also so much harder to find them when these assholes cry “transmisogyny” every time a trans man tries to talk about his own oppression. Or points out something they’re saying is hurting transmascs. Or breathes.

And for the record I’m not talking about the transmisogyny tag. Transmisogyny is absolutely real and a huge problem in queer circles. I’m looking at discourse blogs in particular.

It’s just… ugh. :/

The only transmisogyny I've seen from within the trans community has been from other trans women/fems, accusing trans women/fems who speak out against transandrophobia of being secretly men, or brainwashed.

Never seen a trans man act like that towards a trans woman/fem.

[genderkoolaid]

gonna repeat what I said in that's of another post: radfems act about misogyny the same way christian proselytizers act about jesus. "stupid TRAs dont you realize that you can't opt out of misogyny???" what the fuck do you think we talk about when it comes to trans oppression? trans men & nonbinary people are constantly talking about dealing with misogyny. often giving very in depth explanations of the way people treated them because of misogyny & how that has affected them & their relationship with their gender/s. you aren't telling anyone anything new you fucking dorks. it's like having someone knock on your door to tell you about jesus as if there is anyone in The United States of Christian Nationalism that hasn't heard of Jesus. you are not venturing into the uncivilized wilderness to spread the gospel of "People Hate Women". trans people understand how misogyny affects trans people better than you do

[am-i-the-asshole-official]

AITA for reiterating something to a coworker in order to shame them into not talking to me about their religious beliefs?

some context: me (26NB) and this new coworker (25M) got along great at first. he was queer, into the same things as me, and we had a similar sense of humor. i was pretty glad to have him around to talk to during shifts.

one day, we both were talking about previous jobs we’d had and funny stories from them. i mentioned to him i had worked at a place similar to the current one and had met the first coworker who i openly did not get along with…

this other coworker (28NB) who i will call M had been fun to talk to at first but as i got to know them i started to get uncomfortable. M was pagan, basically eclectic pagan but he didn’t know the term, his patrons being Loki and Lucifer. he was talkative about his beliefs and witchcraft with fellow coworkers, all besides us were catholic women over age 50.

i am a celtic pagan, so of course he found this out and talked to me about it constantly. i told him my beliefs are kind of a personal thing for me, that i’m fairly private about them. M would still push for answers or get confused when i didn’t want to talk about it.

there were other reasons i didn’t like M. he was dating a 21 year old who he had been with for 4 years apparently (you can do the math) and the two of them were hiding their relationship from M’s legal husband. his legal husband had no clue that M was trans and gay. M also believed very much in tulpas and said he was a system (aka someone with DID/OSDD) because he spiritually felt presences within himself. all of these things he told me freely while we were on shifts together.

i told my new coworker friend all this, in an off-handed way as an anecdote. he stuck on the pagan part and said paganism was definitely a private thing. he told me he was pagan. i was actually glad to know this because i had heard him mention bible verses and wrongly assumed his religious beliefs. as he continued, i found out he was also likely an eclectic pagan. patrons being Loki, Cernunnos, Hermes, and others. he said he tied a lot of his past christian beliefs into it and wished Jesus could be a patron. tbh i don’t understand eclectic pagans, but it’s not my business and i didn’t want to be rude so i politely listened. however, he spent the next 2 hours of our referencing Cernunnos (i said i was celtic pagan) and paganism. he even asked me questions like M did.

when we were near the end of our shift, he asked where my alter was which let me joke about what i said at the beginning where i felt that M was annoying and asked me about my pagan beliefs too much. he got a little deflated at that but didn’t say anything about it. i felt a little bad about it, but we parted ways to clock out and i was kinda glad i didn’t feel like i was around M the sequel anymore.

however, on our next shift he didn’t really talk to me at all and made a point to ignore me when i saw him on my day off.

i know it hurt his feelings that i joked about it but he definitely overstepped a boundary i had told him about before so… AITA?

What are these acronyms?

[queerstake]

I wrote my own email to the First Presidency, at the email nerdygaymormon provided, and I wanted to share it here:

To the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints:

Your new policies on transgender adults and children run counter to the most fundamental principles of the Gospel and of God's teachings: to love God and to love thy neighbor. Christ's teachings were given not to religious leaders but to women, to publicans, to sinners, to the poor and the needy--in sum, to the marginalized, the outcasts, the forgotten and abused. Today Christ would teach and minister to the queer, the gay, the trans, the people of color, the poor, the sex workers, the ex- and post-Mormons. When Alma and Amulek go to teach the Zoramites, the ones who are ready to receive the word of God are those who have been cast out of the synagogues, much like how you tried to bully gay members away and how you are now trying to bully trans members away.

But I promise you this: you will not bully me away. You cannot bully me away. My very existence is a beacon to my fellow trans Mormons. My visage exposes your hypocrisy and callousness to everyone with eyes to see. You cannot hide the blood on your hands for much longer; in the face of God, your earthly power will not allow you to escape the consequences of your actions. For remember what Christ said: Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

- A Transgender Mormon.

And remember: God loves the outcast.

What a beautiful and passionate letter! Thank you so, so much for sharing. <33 You're right--we uplift each other. Regardless of the institutional church, queer Mormons have a community amongst ourselves and your presence in it edifies us all. <33 Thank you again for sharing.