- Feb 5, 2002
- 177,831
- 63,559
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Recently, Dr. Brett Salkeld wrote an important and thoughtful piece for Our Sunday Visitor asking if Catholics must accept third genders. Lest there be an ambiguity at the outset, I wholly endorse the article. I write this column to commend Dr. Salkeld’s piece and to elaborate on its central thesis. (Of course, he is not responsible for the content of this column, nor my possible misreading of his.)
Dr. Salkeld’s article is in response to the transgender movement, which peddles the pseudo-scientific ideology that a plurality of genders exists, and none of them has anything to do with a person’s genetics, reproductive biology or sexual physiology. Dr. Salkeld suggests that this ideology effectively eliminates the category of “tomboy,” for example, because it asserts that girls who exhibit behaviors typically associated with boys are obviously “transgender boys.” If this is true, Salkeld implicitly concludes, it implies that only boys play with cars and only girls play with dolls.
Or, to put it another way, if a child plays with cars, the child is a boy; if a child plays with dolls, the child is a girl. If the former has female genitalia or the latter has male, they must be put on puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones. This is to save a child from experiencing the “wrong puberty,” so the pseudo-science goes. Later, these children must have mutilating surgery so that their genitalia and secondary sex characteristics (e.g., body hair, Adam’s apple and voice timbre) match their true “gender.”
Continued below.
www.oursundayvisitor.com
Dr. Salkeld’s article is in response to the transgender movement, which peddles the pseudo-scientific ideology that a plurality of genders exists, and none of them has anything to do with a person’s genetics, reproductive biology or sexual physiology. Dr. Salkeld suggests that this ideology effectively eliminates the category of “tomboy,” for example, because it asserts that girls who exhibit behaviors typically associated with boys are obviously “transgender boys.” If this is true, Salkeld implicitly concludes, it implies that only boys play with cars and only girls play with dolls.
Or, to put it another way, if a child plays with cars, the child is a boy; if a child plays with dolls, the child is a girl. If the former has female genitalia or the latter has male, they must be put on puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones. This is to save a child from experiencing the “wrong puberty,” so the pseudo-science goes. Later, these children must have mutilating surgery so that their genitalia and secondary sex characteristics (e.g., body hair, Adam’s apple and voice timbre) match their true “gender.”
Continued below.
It's impossible to argue with irrational transgender ideologues
Ken Craycraft critiques the contradictions in transgender ideology, highlighting its dangers and rejection of science.
www.oursundayvisitor.com
