Quote:

---

Yes, which is why I think it's dangerous to generalize about "feminism".

---

Yet another reason these discussion hurt my head. Gender, aside from sex, is really a meaningless concept in our society. Maybe in the 1950s America or somewhere like Saudi Arabia gender is more defined, but in modern America it really isn't. So I find it difficult to understand how the meaningless concept of "male" is somehow less appropriate for someone than the meaningless concept of "female".

Presenting as a woman = already answered.

Living as a woman = already answered. Reassignment surgery not necessary to "live as a woman".

Being a woman = this is the one where we are probably going to get bogged down on, and this is really the only question, IMO, that is core to your OP. What does it mean to "be a woman"? Was reading the NatGeo issue last night about Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (CAIS). They used the case of this woman who was born with XY chromosomes, but the testes were internal and everything else developed as one would expect a woman to develop. Her doctors didn't discover this until she was 12. Up to then, she appeared to be a standard girl. Her doctors set her up for surgery at 17 to remove the undescended testes, but her parents had them tell her they were removing precancerous ovaries. At 20, while looking at her medical file, she found all of this out. Now, she has XY chromosomes, but is she a man or a woman? Intersex issues create a whole slew of gray area. They also found in one village in the Dominican Republic, there's a condition found where some children, born w/ XY chromosomes, were missing an enzyme that turns the tubercle into a *****. So, they produce normal amounts of testosterone as children, but without the enzyme, they develop vaginas and everyone (doctors and parents) just assume they are girls. When they hit puberty, however, the enzyme isn't needed and so the rush of testosterone leads to these 12-13 yr olds developing *****es.

It's an extremely complex issue that science is working to unravel.

Wow. The word for male genitalia is censored, but not for women. Sexism!!

RetiredAg said:

---

Presenting as a woman = already answered.

Living as a woman = already answered. Reassignment surgery not necessary to "live as a woman".

---

Your answer to "presenting" was - something done at a moment in time. What do you mean by "something done"? What is done?

Your answer to "living" was - someone who has transitioned. What do you mean by "transitioned"?

I'm sorry if I keep asking the same questions, but your answers are rather short and lead to more confusion.

RetiredAg said:

---

Being a woman = this is the one where we are probably going to get bogged down on, and this is really the only question, IMO, that is core to your OP. What does it mean to "be a woman"? Was reading the NatGeo issue last night about Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (CAIS). They used the case of this woman who was born with XY chromosomes, but the testes were internal and everything else developed as one would expect a woman to develop. Her doctors didn't discover this until she was 12. Up to then, she appeared to be a standard girl. Her doctors set her up for surgery at 17 to remove the undescended testes, but her parents had them tell her they were removing precancerous ovaries. At 20, while looking at her medical file, she found all of this out. Now, she has XY chromosomes, but is she a man or a woman? Intersex issues create a whole slew of gray area. They also found in one village in the Dominican Republic, there's a condition found where some children, born w/ XY chromosomes, were missing an enzyme that turns the tubercle into a *****. So, they produce normal amounts of testosterone as children, but without the enzyme, they develop vaginas and everyone (doctors and parents) just assume they are girls. When they hit puberty, however, the enzyme isn't needed and so the rush of testosterone leads to these 12-13 yr olds developing *****es.

It's an extremely complex issue that science is working to unravel.

---

I think you are right that intersex or chomosome abnormalities are a complex issue. I'd like to focus on "normal" male and female people. All the right chromosomes and all the right organs are in place. What does "being a woman" mean in this context?

What does the Christianity say on the subject? Does it divide sex and gender? Does it divide presenting, living, and being?

Quote:

---

Your answer to "presenting" was - something done at a moment in time. What do you mean by "something done"? What is done?

Your answer to "living" was - someone who has transitioned. What do you mean by "transitioned"?

I'm sorry if I keep asking the same questions, but your answers are rather short and lead to more confusion.

---

This will be the last time I answer these. I don't see how they are leading to confusion, and answering the same questions over and over and over is quite tiresome. Not trying to be snarky, but I'm not sure where our disconnect is.

Presenting - I'll use my friend as an example. I would consider any time she gets dressed and presents herself as female, then she's "presenting". It's what you are showing to others. What you are presenting to others. This is primarily related to dress, mannerisms, voice, name. If you walked by someone presenting as female, your initial reaction would be "oh, that's a woman" (although passability is irrelevant to this).

Living - take presenting, but make it 24/7. Often includes hormone replacement therapy.

Quote:

---

I think you are right that intersex or chomosome abnormalities are a complex issue. I'd like to focus on "normal" male and female people. All the right chromosomes and all the right organs are in place. What does "being a woman" mean in this context?

---

Are you asking with regards to sex or gender?

Quote:

---

What does the Christianity say on the subject? Does it divide sex and gender? Does it divide presenting, living, and being?

---

I don't know, which is why I had started the other thread asking for a theological perspective on this issue. The Scriptures don't touch upon the issue of gender identity/dysphoria. Nobody really pointed to any particular scripture on the subject. Researching it from that perspective, I have seen many refer to Galatians 3:28, but I'm not sure I agree with that because I think it's being taken out of context.

I would say the creation of Eve and the curses given after the fall are two big ones. There are many verses about being a woman/being a man...temptations and hardships. Another would be the story of Jael.

RetiredAg said:

---

This is primarily related to dress, mannerisms, voice, name.

---

Yes, I said exactly this earlier and you didn't confirm I was right. Do you feel women should only present as women and men as men?

RetiredAg said:

---

Quote:

---

I think you are right that intersex or chomosome abnormalities are a complex issue. I'd like to focus on "normal" male and female people. All the right chromosomes and all the right organs are in place. What does "being a woman" mean in this context?

---

Are you asking with regards to sex or gender?

---

You said that depends on how you divide those words (or not). So I'd like you to answer how you view the subject.

RetiredAg said:

---

Quote:

---

What does the Christianity say on the subject? Does it divide sex and gender? Does it divide presenting, living, and being?

---

I don't know, which is why I had started the other thread asking for a theological perspective on this issue. The Scriptures don't touch upon the issue of gender identity/dysphoria. Nobody really pointed to any particular scripture on the subject. Researching it from that perspective, I have seen many refer to Galatians 3:28, but I'm not sure I agree with that because I think it's being taken out of context.

---

If the Bible doesn't divide sex and gender, should we? As far as I can tell, "God made them male and female." Not one person in the Bible thought to do anything other than embrace that. Not one example of someone questioning their sex/gender. In fact, the only time it even addresses it is with respect to what you call "presenting" in which it is condemned to "transition."

Another good question (I think), when you say "I am a man", are you referring to presenting, living, or being? When you say "that is a woman", are you referring to presenting, living, or being?

It kills both masculinity and femininity, because it demands us to pretend there are no differences. So we see man's masculinity under attack, and woman's femininity under attack. You can't make something that is unequal, equal. Men and women aren't the same (viva la difference!).

k2aggie07 said:

---

It kills both masculinity and femininity, because it demands us to pretend there are no differences. So we see man's masculinity under attack, and woman's femininity under attack. You can't make something that is unequal, equal. Men and women aren't the same (viva la difference!).

---

First off, there is a difference between "the same" and "equal".

I suspect when you said "You can't make something that is unequal, equal." you were not implying that one gender is better or more important, they are just different, right?

There is no difference between same and equal without a further qualifier. Equal in worth? Ok, sure. But equal? Nah.

Egalitarian is the word we should probably use.

"Equal" should not mean interchangeable

RetiredAg said:

---

I don't know, which is why I had started the other thread asking for a theological perspective on this issue. The Scriptures don't touch upon the issue of gender identity/dysphoria. Nobody really pointed to any particular scripture on the subject. Researching it from that perspective, I have seen many refer to Galatians 3:28, but I'm not sure I agree with that because I think it's being taken out of context.

---

I'm not sure that this is entirely correct.

There are plenty of passages that give separate instructions to husbands versus wives, and men of God separate from Women of God.

That is because men and women are different biologically, and I believe that the Bible teaches very specifically that the nuclear family is the best and correct way to relate to each other in terms of sexuality and procreation.

In the end, what does gender even mean if it doesn't have to do with sex and procreation. If we were all asexual, and could reproduce without partners, I suspect that gender would not even be a concept.

So, IMO, the instructions to wives and to husbands are specific instructions to men versus women. Those instructions do lay out separate roles for each gender as part of a family unit.

From a Christian perspective, I can completely relate with the feeling that "there is something fundamentally wrong about who I am". I think everyone feels that way sometimes, if not most of the time. The feeling that "I am not as I am supposed to be" is incrediby pervasive and powerful, and I think it manifests itself in many different ways. I think people find all sorts of things to try and "fix" this feeling.

As Christians, we believe this feeling comes from the Fall. We are meant to be perfect, loving beings in full fellowship with our God. Instead we are flawed, selfish creatures separated from Him. Some part of us knows what we should be, and that part of us grieves. We know we are all "wrong" somehow.

The parallels between the way people describe themselves when lost, and the way people who are transgender describe themselves is hard for me to ignore.

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

Quote:

---

Yes, which is why I think it's dangerous to generalize about "feminism".

---

Yet another reason these discussion hurt my head. Gender, aside from sex, is really a meaningless concept in our society. Maybe in the 1950s America or somewhere like Saudi Arabia gender is more defined, but in modern America it really isn't. So I find it difficult to understand how the meaningless concept of "male" is somehow less appropriate for someone than the meaningless concept of "female".

---

I also disagree here.

There may no longer be a "correct" definition of gender in our society, meaning, in contrast, that there is no "incorrect" definition of gender either.

However, that does not mean that the typical or traditional definition no longer has any meaning.

Put me in the camp that desires women to unapologetically and proudly embody a more traditional female role. That doesn't mean barefoot and pregnant, to use a derogatory phrase. I want (and have) a woman who partners with me in my endeavors, provides that foundation of comfort and support, but is still confident in her personhood and her individuality.

My favorite movie character wife that embodies this is the wife of Cuba Gooding Jr.s character in Jerry MacGuire. She has very few lines, but he character comes through so well anyways.

She smacks her nephew brutally upside the head (I think with her shoe, right), when he makes a negative comment about her husband's abilities, scolds her kid for using improper language, and encourages her husband to work hard and be brave when it comes to his job and contract negotiations. To me, that is all woman right there; 100% grade A wife.

However, that dynamic doens't bleed over into economic roles. I help my wife with her job a ton, not by giving her encouragement so much as letting her vent daily. She always feels better when I let her talk to me about what crappy happened that day, and doesn't really help her much if I tell her to shake it off, and that tomorrow will be another day (which is exactly what she tells me). If my wife became a famous lecturer on child development, for example (something she studies a lot, and we talk about a lot), I would have no problem quitting my job and supporting her career. I can provide more logistical support for her career, continue to sooth her during rants, and she could become my pillar of strength as I work on developing a lower golf handicap. That would be awesome.

tl;dr

I think that there is a difference between "gender is meaningless" and "gender is rigidly defined." I prefer to work inside a more traditional definition of gender. YMMV.

swimmerbabe11 said:

---

Egalitarian is the word we should probably use.

"Equal" should not mean interchangeable

---

Agreed. Egalitarian is a better word, at least when describing the Christian feminists I know. Heck, I hold the egalitarian perspective when it comes to women and the church.

Quote:

---

If the Bible doesn't divide sex and gender, should we? As far as I can tell, "God made them male and female."

---

And in Christ, there is neither male or female. Not saying that there is literally no difference between male and female, but verses can be used for either positron. And does He not also make intersex people? There's a lot of interesting studies being done on the issue of transgenderism that is perhaps finding biological aspects to it.

RetiredAg said:

---

Quote:

---

If the Bible doesn't divide sex and gender, should we? As far as I can tell, "God made them male and female."

---

And in Christ, there is neither male or female. Not saying that there is literally no difference between male and female, but verses can be used for either positron. And does He not also make intersex people? There's a lot of interesting studies being done on the issue of transgenderism that is perhaps finding biological aspects to it.

---

I think there's only one Biblical "position." Unless you think the Bible contradicts itself.

In Christ doesn't mean right now. That verse is commonly interpreted as in perfection, in the final state, with regard to righteousness, in the event of deification, etc.

Obviously there are scriptural differences between men and women. The same Apostle Paul taught to men, and to women; husbands and wives.

k2aggie07 said:

---

In Christ doesn't mean right now. That verse is commonly interpreted as in perfection, in the final state, with regard to righteousness, in the event of deification, etc.

Obviously there are scriptural differences between men and women. The same Apostle Paul taught to men, and to women; husbands and wives.

---

Oh, I don't think that Galatians 3:28 actually means there is no such thing as male or female. I was simply using it to point to how people can point to verses to support their position. I agree. There are obviously differences been men and women. The issue is, if I understand the OP, how do we define what is male and what is female. To me, it's not so simple because I don't see biological sex and gender to be the same thing.

RetiredAg said:

---

k2aggie07 said:

---

In Christ doesn't mean right now. That verse is commonly interpreted as in perfection, in the final state, with regard to righteousness, in the event of deification, etc.

Obviously there are scriptural differences between men and women. The same Apostle Paul taught to men, and to women; husbands and wives.

---

Oh, I don't think that Galatians 3:28 actually means there is no such thing as male or female. I was simply using it to point to how people can point to verses to support their position. I agree. There are obviously differences been men and women. The issue is, if I understand the OP, how do we define what is male and what is female. To me, it's not so simple because I don't see biological sex and gender to be the same thing.

---

Is it your view that what the writer meant by "there is no male and female" is that sex and gender are not the same thing? I just don't see a Biblical case in which the two terms should be divorced. Is there any person or teaching in the Bible in which their sex and gender are opposite?

Also, what is the difference between sex and gender in your view? Does it have to do with the presenting, living, and being categories?

RetiredAg said:

---

To me, it's not so simple because I don't see biological sex and gender to be the same thing.

---

As for how male and female, husband and wife, is used in the Bible, I just can't get on the same page with you here.

1) There is just no mention of ambiguity here. There are no instances where the Bible refers to a biological man in the feminine or as a woman, and vice-versa.

2) The rules and teaching for men vs women, husbands vs wives, have a lot of wisdom in them that come from the biological differences between man and woman.

3) God made the universe in a certain way. He made men and women in a certain way. There was a plan. That plan included the nuclear family. Too much scripture supporting the sanctity of the nuclear family to make changes to it.

So, again, if you want to be trans-gendered, I am not going to make a fuss over it. But, I don't think you can support being a trans-gendered person as something that Christ said is OK.

Absolutely. I recently read a book by a Christian gay man and it was really helpful as to how the church can help them (mostly their loneliness). The church can help homosexuals and transgender people, but enabling their dysphoria would be very hurtful, in my opinion.

Here is the book, by the way.
https://www.amazon.com/Washed-Waiting-Reflections-Faithfulness-Homosexuality/dp/1501223534

I kinda want to watch this

http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2017/01/you-should-watch-the-bbcs-kenneth-zucker-documentary.html?mid=twitter-share-scienceofus

swimmerbabe11 said:

---

I kinda want to watch this

http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2017/01/you-should-watch-the-bbcs-kenneth-zucker-documentary.html?mid=twitter-share-scienceofus

---

Definitely looks interesting, and from what that article says, it sounds like a fairly well-balanced program. Thanks for sharing this.