Skip to main content

guilt and shame in the occidental world

For western churches, any behaviour falling outside the framework of traditional Judeo-Christian values has always been viewed as suspect and any aberration, whether it formed part of the natural selection of human behavior or not, would be subject to be labeled as sin. Homosexuality certainly fit this criteria as well as any gender behavior that strayed from a model built exclusively to support the family structure.

The reality is that human beings form part of an imperfect fabric that is touched by variations which has never formed part of the accepted teachings of these institutions. Instead, what most interested Western European religious leaders was adherence to fundamental teachings as they embedded themselves in the political structures of their nations to serve as moral advisors to their respective monarchs. Hence critical errors, such as excommunicating Galileo for postulating a scientific fact, were made in favor of upholding dogmatic truth.

In essence, organized religion became a method to subjugate the population and where certainly not every dictate was aligned with science or the natural law and most arguably with the will of a higher power.

The colonization of the Americas brought with it people of European stock from Quaker, Anglican, Lutheran or Catholic faiths; all austere and unyielding in their respective doctrines. Ironically, the United States founding fathers themselves were aiming for a secular state as per Voltaire's Age of Enlightenment (which advocated the separation of church and state) and the principles of the French Revolution which sought to escape monarchial tyranny; a fact conveniently forgotten by today's God-fearing and flag-waving conservatives.

These European settlers would have arrived in the Americas with a regimental education in what was expected of them. New England began with superstition mixed with religious doctrine which helped to stir up the panics and unfortunate results of the Salem witch hunts. So you can imagine how anyone with a penchant for same sex love or who thought themselves best suited to be another gender would be received. Being a candidate of what we now call the LGBT community was something best kept to yourself.

All the while, native American as well as other world native cultures respected two-spirited people with some even considering them endowed with special graces.

This mindset of institutionalized culpability lasted well into the late 20th century and many of us who are older grew up with no information with what little being available only reinforcing our suspicions that we were abominations. Guilt and shame filled a void that should have been occupied with knowledge.

I heard recently of a case illustrating the power of misplaced guilt and shame on an Irish radio podcast. In the deeply Catholic rural Ireland of the early 1960's, a young boy was brought to a hospital for an operation. He was intellectually challenged and after a successful surgery no one came to claim him. Finally the mother was brought in and she pleaded with the hospital to allow her to go home without her son who had been kept for most of his life in a darkened room and was completely rejected by his father due to the stigma of shame. For this poor couple the birth of this boy was a sign that they were not in God's favor.

Little Jimmy died two years after his operation despite the support of the hospital outreach who tried to assist this poor mother look after her son who, much to the dismay of his parents, would at times shriek at the top of his lungs.

Such was the power of guilt and shame in our culture.


Popular posts from this blog

prejudice disguised as objective rectitude

So here is Professor Jordan Peterson perhaps justly calling out the excesses of political correctness gone mad. But then he extends it to not indulging transgender people the basic dignity of being addressed in their preferred pronoun. To do so for him would cost nothing and to stand on literal principle seems to serve little use other than to send a message of disdain.

If you have transitioned or even live as the opposite gender is costs me nothing to address you in your preferred pronouns. What difference does it make to me and what am I trying to tell you when I don't?

Peterson wants to stand on his rights to call reality what it is except that in this case the exact objective escapes me. But of course the right wing Federalist is in love with him because he calls a spade a spade.

If I see a rock I can call it that but then the rock doesn’t have any feelings. To address a transgender woman "her" and "she" is not undermining my rights as a person in any way b…

"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…