Bruce Jenner is a courageous idiot

By Michael J.W. Stickings

There isn't much about the Kardashians and their bubble of cultural degradation and egomaniacal excess that I respect, but I do respect Bruce Jenner's decision, if one can even call it that, to come out as a woman (he is still a "he" for now, but he says that he is a woman, and the "he" may soon become "she"), that is, his courageous coming to terms with, and acceptance of, his sexual identity. Even now, in 2015, it is not an easy thing to do, in private let alone in public, where you subject yourself to speculation and ridicule, if not worse, as much as to admiration and respect.

Now, I don't know Bruce Jenner. I watched part of his interview with Diane Sawyer on ABC as it's been a story on CNN this afternoon and I caught it flipping through the channels, and I can only take him at his word, and I can only give him the benefit of the doubt. That is, I can only assume that he is being sincere, that he has spent the better part of his life struggling with his sexual identity, and that his coming out as a woman -- cosmetic surgery and hormone treatment but not yet, and perhaps not, full conversion -- isn't yet another publicity stunt on the part of the Kardashian Klan, of which is, of course, a central member. Needless to say, the Kardashians, Jenner included, are long-time publicity whores, and it wouldn't be a stretch for Jenner to use his transgendered status to get some attention, not least with another reality show coming up.

But again, let's give him the benefit of the doubt. I do not know what it's like to be transgendered, nor to struggle with one's sexual identity, and he does seem genuine.

But if I credit him with courage, I must also debit him for his idiocy. Because there is so much of it:

After months of speculation that he was transitioning into a woman, Bruce Jenner confirmed the news in an interview with Diane Sawyer that aired on ABC Friday night, clarifying that he is also a Republican and a Christian.

When asked about Barack Obama addressing LGBT rights in his State of the Union, the 65-year-old former Olympic athlete said that didn't affect him much.

"I've always been more on the conservative side," Jenner said.

*****

Jenner said he is a Christian as well.

"I would sit in church and always wonder, 'In God's eyes, how does he see me?'"

But now, he said, he's realized that maybe this is part of his purpose.

"Maybe this is my cause in life."

"This is why God put me on this earth... to deal with this issue."

That's from The Daily Caller, Tucker Carlson's right-wing toilet paper, and the tone of the piece suggests that it is rather gleeful that this famous transgendered person is Republican and Christian, as if that somehow sticks it to the left. In any event, let's address the idiocy here:

Read more »

Big Top

By Capt. Fogg

The Republicans sometimes like to talk about their big tent. Others, in consideration of the exploits and shenanigans of the party of values and families and apple pie may think it's more like a freak show tent, but we shall see soon enough which kind of tent the Donna Milo show winds up in.

Cuban born, 48 year old "Conservative" Republican Ms. Milo is running to unseat rather liberal Broward County Florida U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Yes, Miami Cuban Republicans are pretty numerous and at first glance one who didn't know that Ms. Milo used to be a Mr. Milo, whose friends called him Ed, wouldn't think anything was out of the ordinary.

Donna Milo is a person who prides herself in getting to where she is by her personal ability and in spite of her differentness -- not like those who we support with our tax money or special favors to Cuban immigrants, perhaps. Will that differentness matter more to the GOP than the traditional Republican attitudes she publicly displays?

It remains to be seen whether the party so traditionally inimical to the rights of gay, lesbian and transgendered people -- their agenda -- as they so often phrase it, will welcome her into the three ring big top with the other anti-Castro, pro-corporate liberal bashing Miami paranoids or ushered out the side door.

(Cross posted from Human Voices)

Headline of the Day (Pope Benedict XVI edition)

By Michael J.W. Stickings

I couldn't help but chuckle when I read this one at the BBC today:

Gay groups angry at Pope remarks

Really. You don't say.

Now, these "gay groups" have good reason to be angry not just at the pope's remarks but at the pope himself:

Speaking on Monday, Pope Benedict said that saving humanity from homosexual or transsexual behaviour was as important as protecting the environment.

The comments were "irresponsible and unacceptable", the UK's Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement (LGCM) said.

Vladimir Luxuria, a transgender former Italian MP, called his words "hurtful".

What Pope Benedict said -- and the BBC has the "key extracts" here -- was that any blurring of the man/woman "order," including any efforts at "human auto-emancipation from creation and from the Creator" (whereby humans make themselves on their own), is "against the truth." It seems to me that this has more to do with transsexualism than with homsexualism, but the pope's point is clear: In nature, and by God, there are men and there are women and there is an order to gender and sexuality, namely, that gender is fixed (or ought to be) and that, sexually, only a man and a woman ought to copulate (and reproduce), each according to his natural, God-given purpose.

Now, I'm with the "gay groups" on this, more or less, whatever my concerns about humanity's efforts to conquer, by overcoming, nature. We are all little Nietzscheans now, perhaps, but that's not necessarily a good thing. What I recognize, unlike the pope, is that nature is flexible and that it is part of our nature, as rational creatures, to seek to shape it according to our desires. And the fact is, gender and sexuality are rather complex. (I'll defer to our co-blogger LindaBeth on this.) There aren't just men and women and we aren't all straight.

But here's why I couldn't help but chuckle: What did these "gay groups and activists" expect? This is the Roman Catholic Church we're talking about. It may be more "modern" than it used to be, but it's not exactly a bastion of progressive thinking on anything, let alone on gender and sexuality. And the head of the Church is Benedict XVI, the former Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, hardly a liberal. (Even the liberals in the Church are pretty conservative on such matters.) It's a wonder his remarks weren't much harsher.

So, fine, they're angry. I suppose they have a right to be, and I suppose I applaud their efforts to protest what is the Church's (and the pope's) "irresponsible and unacceptable" positions. Maybe one day, if it still exists, genuine liberals will take over the Church and bring it forward into Enlightenment. In the meantime, all we're going to get is more of the same from the same old narrow-minded fools and bigots (sorry, "true believers"). They're far too influential to ignore, but they're also far too ridiculous to take too seriously.