Skip to main content

religion, spirituality and weak minds

Because of my post on the Pope’s comments regarding transgender godparents some readers might get the idea that I am against the Catholic church when actually I am not. Religious organizations are run by people who, by their very nature, are flawed. All of us are.

Over the years I have witnessed the different types of relationships people have with religion.

There are those who are black and white in their thinking and want to have their dictates written down on a piece of paper. If they follow the rules set for them then they know they are going to the right place when they die. They eat what they are supposed to and wear what they are told and they are happy.

Next are the questioners who don’t follow organized religion at all. Some call themselves agnostics and they might go to church on special occasions but otherwise don’t set foot in the building. A friend of mine used to call these people “Cafeteria Catholics”. Some dogmatic Catholics would certainly accuse me of this.

Some follow their own type of mysticism or use an admiration of nature as their spiritual guide. Some use mediation or what we now call Mindfulness as a surrogate to following an organized religion.

Of course there are also the atheists.

I still go to Mass every Sunday but I possess a questioning mind and have always needed to examine something from different angles before I could adopt it. If I couldn’t explain it to myself how could I possibly explain it to others? unfortunately much about this issue requires pure faith.

My take is this: we can’t know everything. Therefore if we only use scientific forensics as a measuring stick we have got it wrong in my opinion. Humankind has innate limitations so the existence of a higher power cannot be proven strictly by scientific means. We are like the ant trying to imagine the existence of the human: it cannot because it is limited by its own structure.

If I look at the universe there is undeniable vast intelligence and unimaginable power and precision and, no matter what moment in its history you go back to (including the big bang), you must come to the decision that matter cannot come from nothing. It’s like looking at a building and saying that it created itself. You can go back the molecules that make up all the materials and still come up short of an explanation. Every time science opens a new door there are new wonderful riddles to solve: just look at quantum physics or string theory as proof. Its like those little Russian dolls that you open up only to find a smaller dupplicate in its place.

Therefore I stop at the point where I can go no further with the understanding that God is not a man in a white robe sitting on a cloud. I will leave that to the literalists who believe in the allegorical tales of the First Testament.

Organized religion has had to mentor to all kinds of people and some don’t like to overtax their brains but prefer the Coles notes version. It might make for a more comforting existence but I like to think it’s also limiting. I believe that to stop thinking and questioning is to atrophy.

I have taken the same approach to gender theory in that I needed to understand all of the variables at play. The same type of dynamics happen here in that different people require different narratives to find a level of understanding about what makes them tick and why they were born different from an accepted norm.

In both issues at some point we must sometimes realize that our limitations as human beings keep us from going further.

For proof of the aforementioned flawed individuals please go to the following story on how an Edmonton Alberta Catholic school trustee thinks that transgender students have a mental disorder. Somehow I don't think our creator would concur.

The link can be found here.


  1. Joanna
    Another excellent and well thought out post. Back in 1993 I had a business connection that resulted in my being able to purchase a low mileage 1986 Porsche 944. It was a steal. I drove the car for over 100K miles and traded it in for only $2K less than I bought it for when femily duties required that we have an SUV. I loved to drive the car and the kids loved it. My wife did not like the car and during the time I owned it only drove it for about 2 miles. She once quipped that she just did not see what I liked so much about the Porche. It was low to the ground... the ride, steering, brakes and transmission were very had no cup holders...etc. My response was "If I have to try to explain the why of the wonder of the car...I can't".

    I think the same applies to a large degree to both religion and to being TG or CD. I appreciate the efforts that you go to trying to to explain the TG issues and also to explain the complexities of religion. I think in both cases, however, if you have to explain can't.

    The scientific method is wonderful and necessary but, at least in my view and at least as of today, it is inadequate to explain either religion or being TG/CD.



Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"Oh please its 2016!"

I have mentioned before that I have a lovely young couple living above the unit next to mine. Well the other day as I was getting in the door, she and I overlapped for the first time with me dressed as a woman.

We had a nice conversation and at some point I mentioned the obvious which was that I had told her future husband that they might see me in a different guise from time to time so they wouldn't wonder about who the strange woman was. She just looked at me almost rolling her eyes while smiling from ear to ear and said:

"Oh Please it's 2016!"

For the record she was also very complementary regarding my choice of attire.

I could care less at this point in my life what people think but it is still lovely to see the millennial generation's freedom of spirit and acceptance so lacking in previous generations. Yes they have their own foibles, as does every generation, but this area certainly isn't one of them.

the pseudoscience behind gender dysphoria

The real science as to what causes gender dysphoria still awaits.

Harry Benjamin was on to something except he didn’t have the scientific evidence to back up his suspicions hence, like a true scientist, he negated to draw conclusions. His hunch, based on treating so many patients over his lifetime, was that one is born with a predisposition to be gender dysphoric.

However, with inconclusive brain scans and no DNA marker (as of yet) we are left with believing the word of people who need help and only want to lead happy and productive lives.

The best we have been able to muster since Benjamin's death in 1986 was to amass statistics on who gets a boner imagining themselves as a woman which is in equal parts pathetic and disappointing. For this is not really science at all but is instead playing with interview data that doesn't point to anything definitive or conclusive. I have dealt with this problem at great length in my blog.

The whole thing started with Kurt Freund's obses…

looking past cross gender arousal

Jack’s latest Crossdreamers post got me thinking about cross gender arousal and how it could be avoided; also whether it even matters. This with particular focus on the inability to relate of someone on the outside looking in.

You see, sexuality is a very complicated thing to begin with and when you then add gender identity ambiguity it becomes a recipe to really confuse someone.

So imagine that you are a little boy who identifies as a girl but then along comes puberty and short circuits everything by having the sex you identify with also be the sex you are attracted to. For in essence this is what happens to all all male to female gender dysphoric trans persons who are attracted to women.

So I ask myself: can I imagine a scenario where this inherent contradiction would not produce sexual confusion? The answer is that I cannot.

I am in the unique position, like many of you, to have experienced an early identification with the feminine become sexualized later on. This brought confusion…