How “Cis” Killed Gender Theory

Modern gender theory is dead, and we have killed it. Weep — we were really onto something.

We wriggled out from a dichotomy of a “normal” sexual orientation (heterosexuality) and deviations from that norm (homosexuality and lesbianism, largely), to a world of “alternative lifestyles” (homosexuality and heterosexuality as equally valid “life choices”), to a world excited and exploding with the hundreds of labels we are growing fond and familiar with today (sapiosexual, omnisexual, pansexual, trigender, bigender — you know the drill).

This evolution is easy to trace. If there is no “norm” to sexual attraction, then every form of sexual attraction is its own norm. If there is no externally and communicably identifiable gender — no man or woman who can be identified by perception — then gender is defined by every internal experience of gender — we don’t perceive gender, we ask.

Ultimately, the hope went, “there are as many orientations and genders as there are people.” “Each to his own” is not a social nicety — it is a philosophical claim as to the source of sexual identity.

This happy horizon has been destroyed by the use of the term “cis.” Cisgender or cissexual persons (the terms are largely interchangeable) are defined as “individuals who have a match between the gender they were assigned at birth, their bodies, and their personal identity.” The term was initially used to simply indicate “non-trans” people, but academia has taken it up as a scientific definition — a category unto itself. It’s also the hippest term to throw out in a combox since “reactionary.”

Within its place in the dictionary of possible sexualities and genders to be, “cis” should be just another gender identity. It should fit snugly amongst options — transgender, trigender, cisgender. In reality, “cis” is almost always a spat word, to the point that Dan Savage has referred to it as a slur against “non-trans” people. On the surface, the reason for a resentment towards “cissexuals” that makes their confirmed label indistinguishable from an insult is obvious. They are not just another self-identifying group. They are the once-called-normative, who, by virtue of holding power for the vast part of human history, have created a world hostile to all other sexual identities and genders. They are the privileged oppressors who either actively harm other genders/sexualities by that whole demonic package of bullying, abuse, isolation, and even murder — or who passively harm by their tacit assumption of being “the normal ones.” While I don’t deny a justified resentment, if this were the whole story (“cis” as a gender identity, equal amongst all the others, one that just happens to be the dominant social identity at the moment) gender theory wouldn’t be dead.

But we killed our entire project. Remember the accepted definition. To be a cissexual is to be a match between the internal experience of identity (I am a woman), the body (I am a female body) and one’s “assigned” or “recognized” gender (the fact that I am a woman is communicable through the body to my community). But if it is a match, it is qualitatively different than the whole myriad of possible sexualities and genders. It is no longer a lifestyle amongst many. If it alone is that type of gender identity described as a match, an identity essentially described as a harmony, then its existence is an implicit claim that all others are a disharmony, a mismatch.

Now in theory, this is the death of everything we hoped for. In practice, this is hardly denied. Of course being ‘trans’ is a mismatch. The inner experience (of being a woman) does not match the body (which is masculine). Hence the sex-change culture, the effort to alter the body to match the interior experience — to bring two divorced principles into harmony. But what is implicit in the transgender strive to attain a unity between the inner and the outer was never explicit in the common tongue of modern gender theory, namely, that there is a certain type of sexuality (cissexuality) that is a match, that has what others strive for, that exists as a harmony of the principles of the interior and the exterior — of the inner life and of the body.

The project of all our gender defining, typing and sub-typing was one aimed at equality. Each to his own self-identification. But now, amongst this diversity of identities (each of which represent some form of relation between the body and the interior life) the introduction of a match introduced a new primacy. This not the primacy of history. This is not the primacy of quantity. This is not the primacy of the social norm. It is not the critical-theory-esque primacy of the power that has defined what is normal and what is not. “Cis” has been given primacy in the sense that it holds all other sexual identities in existence as the ground by which they have meaning. It is the “match.”A match gives the possibility of meaning to a mismatch. As fragmentation is known by the lack of a whole, deriving its meaning from it, while a whole does not depend on a background of possible fragmentation, but simply exists as itself, cisgenderism does not depend on a perceived lack of integration of gender, body, and identity for its own meaning. All other sexual identities — which are implicitly mismatches by virtue of cisgenderism being the only identity defined as a match — can only have meaning insofar as we assume the existence of cisgenderism — of a possible match, of an integration by which disintegration possible.

As rational beings we tend towards integration, the harmonizing of warring principles — towards peace, unity, wholeness and coherence. Though there is no explicit value judgment in defining cissexuality as a coherence and a “match,” there is an implicit one insofar as, in every other area of human existence, integration is valued over disintegration. Perhaps this is the deeper reason why there is such a natural slide into “cis” being a slur.  If it is not lambasted as that oppressor and locus of world-defining power, if there is not an immediate, resentful suggestion that the only reason cisgenderism/sexualism is dominant and free from persecution is its privileged historical power then a suspicion sneaks in — there may be an inherent value, beyond all merely social or historical values, to an integration between the body and the internal experience of gender.

So through our academic use of the term, and more than that, through our resentful use of the term, “cisgenderism” has killed the project of modern gender theory, insofar as it was an honest project toward the free, individual identification of personal sexual structures and genders, equal in value to the sexual identity of every one else. In an irony I doubt causes a lot of joy, we find we have come full circle — the norm and its deviations, 2014. Gender theory is dead, having accidentally created a norm with unshakeable reasons for being a norm.

Edited for clarity’s sake 5/4/2014

"I've already heard responses to this matter, don't bother repeating them to me."

Towards a New Argument Against Pornography
"And beisdes, just think about it, if a god existed, there'd be no need for ..."

Towards a New Argument Against Pornography
" it does'nt take a rocket t scientist to understand this."

Towards a New Argument Against Pornography
"Historians dismiss the story of George Washington chopping down a cherry tree since it was ..."

Towards a New Argument Against Pornography

Browse Our Archives

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • SABRMatt

    Wow. You should publish in the nothing-babble journals of sociology or philosophy. This article was a gigantic ball of nothing. Yeesh.

    • Benjamin2.0

      a gigantic ball of nothing. Yeesh.

      A more apt description of this inept comment, a critique with no real criticisms.

      • Nordog6561

        “Math is hard!” ~Talking Malibu Barbie

    • Laura

      Yeah, I’d be tempted to say that too if I hadn’t taken the time to read the article thoroughly. Polysyllabic words are time-consuming, but ya gotta read em if you want to make a judgement call.

    • Nica

      There’s also try factor that *your* apparent inability to understand sociology or philosophy has nothing to do with another person’s ability to grasp either. It made more sense to me than the redefining of gender ever has.

      • Montague

        Well, to be fair, that’s pretty easy xD

  • Bob

    I was born human, but on the inside, I know I was meant to be a walrus. I’m in the process of having species-changing surgery so I can be happy.

    • oldirtybaron

      You should watch TUSK.

    • Steve


      • Alexander S Anderson

        I am the egg man.

    • Giauz Ragnarock

      When the best defense for your biases is mockery, it’s not difficult to see why not just the millennials but people in the faith their entire lives are leaving or standing together in more fluid progressive communities.

      • Nordog6561

        Why do you hate the Species Dysphoric Community?

        • Giauz Ragnarock

          Neither the article nor the original post can reason as to why a person cannot alter their body to fit their gender considering quality of life is better than those who try to conform their gender to the societal expectations for their sex.

          Also, it is most obvious that because no one attempted to rebuke Bob, there must be scriptural support for trans-species surgery that I was not aware of. I don’t have an argument against it (plus, the tiger guy is AWESOME!:)

          • Giauz Ragnarock
          • Nordog6561

            Whatever, I’m just glad I’m normal and do not find myself compelled to defend insane notions.

            Cis: It’s the New Normal!

          • Giauz Ragnarock

            So…. (paraphrasing X-Men) “Filthy mutant freaks!”?

            You are not compelled to defend people because your empathy only extends to people like you and I, who lucked out in Jesus’ precious majority.

          • Nordog6561

            I defend people, I just don’t defend insanity.

          • Giauz Ragnarock

            How you view people, the way you express that on the computer screen, is what you show people about you. I don’t claim to understand any more than you do, but I won’t demean someone who isn’t harming a fly because peoples’ unwillingness to be uncomfortable SOMEHOW?? determines that a person is mentally ill.

          • Nordog6561

            You confuse compassion for one who suffers on the one hand, with endorsing whatever insanity that suffering compels them to embrace on the other hand.

            A freak is still a freak.

            While it is certainly unkind to say so in such a manner to someone’s face, it is a lie to deny it.

            Besides, it’s also a lie to say that people mutilating themselves surgically is “not hurting” anyone.

            You’re wrong if you think that the mental cases who spend lives and careers coming up with “queer” theory, “cis-” idiocy, and the like, are not hurting people.

          • Giauz Ragnarock

            Oh, the next thing you’ll say I should fear is women becoming the bread-winners and the white people being bred out of America (really hoping you’re not this bad of a control-freak).

            Have your opinion, express your opinion, and people won’t take orders from anyone who doesn’t have to live their lives and cannot demonstrate how any harm is being caused.

          • Nordog6561

            >>Oh, the next thing you’ll say I should fear is women becoming the bread-winners and the white people being bred out of America (really hoping you’re not this bad of a control-freak).<<

            Why is it that Leftists must always lie about the people they disagree with? I mean, besides the fact that Leftism IS a lie, so its adherents are inveterate liars, of course.

            Still, the hackneye and banal trope of going to the well of calling someone a racist and a sexist is really pathetic.

            Not surprising.

            But abjectly pathetic.

            And worse than pathetic, it's boring.

          • Giauz Ragnarock

            Well, to your credit, neither one of us seems to mind if either of those two things happened. I guess you’re not THAT bad 🙂

          • W.C. Degradation

            I won’t tell you that you’re an idiot to your face. But I won’t deny it either.

          • Nordog6561

            >>I won’t tell you that you’re an idiot to your face. But I won’t deny it either.<<

            You're hatred has you embracing lies in order to insult.

            Poor thing.

            But I will take note that any objection you may have to what I've written on the matter is not based in any principle you haven't violated in your own post.

            Kinda funny really, just not in the way I suspect you intended.

          • W.C. Degradation

            My boredom has me embracing arbitrary notions of who you are to make a point.

            Keep up.

            It also should be noted that I do not have any principles.

          • Nordog6561

            >>It also should be noted that I do not have any principles.<<

            How utterly unsurprising.

          • Proud Amelekite

            [Besides, it’s also a lie to say that people mutilating themselves surgically is “not hurting” anyone.]

            Generally speaking, of accounts I have read from transgendered people, they tend to be much happier and lead more fulfilled lives when they are free to embrace the gender they feel their spirit is. It doesn’t always involve surgery but we let women get breast enhancements and both men and women get botox to remove wrinkles so I fail to see how one can support plastic surgery then turn around and denounce people who want their gender changed, or what have you. In my eyes, these are equivalent things.

            [You’re wrong if you think that the mental cases who spend lives and careers coming up with “queer” theory, “cis-” idiocy, and the like, are not hurting people.]

            Nobody “comes up” with anything. Did we need to name igneous rocks “igneous” for them to exist? The people who study this are giving names to what already exists. I never needed to know the word “gay” to know that my fantasies of cuddling up to another guy were much different from the fantasies of my peers.

          • Nordog6561


            Being disordered is being disordered.

            Living a lie, such as saying, “I’m a woman because I had my man parts removed and I’ve been pumped with hormones” is still living a lie.

            You’re a guy who wants to cuddle with another guy?

            I’m sorry, but it’s not my fault.

          • Proud Amelekite

            I never said my romantic inclinations were your fault. Fault denotes a negative connotation and my romantic orientation has opened me to a post gender way of dealing with and looking at the world that makes me much more empathetic to the needs of others than I was before. I am easier able to walk a mile in their shoes and acknowledge my own privileges that I was blind to before. If anything, accepting my homoromantic inclinations has been a blessing and made me a much better person.

            And if it was getting parts removed due to assault or accident that made one transgender I would agree with your assessment. The surgery is preceded by feelings of being the soul of a woman trapped in a man’s body or visa versa. You can, of course, look at them as disordered, evil, sick, or what have you but until you convince the scientific and medical community of that, it will remain your perspective. An assumption about another.

          • Nordog6561

            You’re a deluded fool.

            Your absurdities do not cease being absurdities simply because they have become fashionable.

          • Proud Amelekite

            [Your absurdities do not cease being absurdities simply because they have become fashionable.]

            Actually, you will find that is exactly what happens, my dear. The more of your children and grandchildren I win to my side by simply being normal and visible the more acceptable and less absurd I become. You have deluded yourself if you think ad hominem will achieve anything more than making tradition synonymous with evil in the eyes of the generations to come.

            Of course, it serves my ends so far be it from me to silence you. Please, by all means, do go on~

          • Nordog6561

            I’m not your dear.

            That kind of talk may work for you at the rest stops, but don’t try it here.

            You can’t win people to your side by being normal, because, well, you are not normal.

            You may very well win everyone to your side, but you will do it with lies.

            You may believe the lies, and I suspect you do, but they are lies nonetheless.

            >>You have deluded yourself if you think ad hominem will achieve anything more than making tradition synonymous with evil in the eyes of the generations to come.<<

            You have deluded yourself if you think tradition being equated with evil hasn't already happened.

            It happened years ago.

            I make no pretense that the objectively disordered freaks have not already won the day.

            That's old news.

            I just refuse to comply.

            It's the new counter culture.

          • Proud Amelekite

            I am more of an old fashioned, monogamous guy so the rest stop scene isn’t my cup of tea. Or GRINDR these days as it were.

            When I say normal, I mean a functional, amiable neighbor and contributing member of society, not normal in terms of the Patriarchal gender norms fousted on us by society. The anti-gay side sets a very low bar, thankfully. So long as we aren’t narcissistic, disease spreading facsimiles of human beings touted by the likes of Scott Lively we win.

            As for lies, I haven’t the foggiest what you refer to. I think I know my experiences better than you.

            You are right about the last bit though. Surprising to see you admit to it and being honest.

            And in many ways, we have already won at least here in the West. My primary concerns move more to Russia, Uganda, and the Muslim world. I am hopeful, though. Good usually overcomes evil in the end so I think we will succeed ind creating a better world in time, slow as it seems. Call me an optimist.

          • Nordog6561

            >>As for lies, I haven’t the foggiest what you refer to.<>I think I know my experiences better than you.<>So long as we aren’t narcissistic, disease spreading facsimiles of human beings touted by the likes of Scott Lively we win.<<

            Not true.

            In all likelihood there will be a great push back, not due to what you describe here, but due to the intolerant, fascistic mob that has been on the rise for some time.

            "Winning" for the Alphabet Soup Pride People has come to mean total social submission by those who disagree with the gay political movement.

            I will not comply. I will never comply. There are many like me who previously loved the idea of "tolerance" and "live and let live" but who now know that such concepts as "tolerance" and "live and let live" coming from the Alphabet People are as much a lie as the ontological absurdity of "gay marriage".

            We will not endorse, even though we were happy to tolerate, and since tolerance on the Left and in the world of homosexual activism is a lie, we must be crushed by the mob.

            You keep talking about winning. What you fail to realize is that there are many like me who previously were sympathetic, but now have been radicalized .

            We will not comply.

            The only question is, how far will you go to crush us?

          • Those accounts have been shown to be fraudulent.

          • Proud Amelekite

            Not from any peer reviewed resource I have ever read nor from any first hand account of transgender people I have talked to.

          • Then why the suicides?

          • I didn’t. But because my mental disorder isn’t sexual (well, isn’t currently sexual, there were phases as a teenager just as there are for everybody, adolescence is a confusing time) I am privileged to KNOW that autism is a disorder and can work on mitigating it.

            Gender theory robs that knowledge from same sex attracted people, and harms them in the process.

    • Nordog6561

      Paul? Is that you?

    • Otherkin, I believe is what they call it.

  • $102828240

    Dear Marc, I love the idea you’ve been exploring and I think you are one of the brightest catholic minds on the internet. But maybe you should try to be a little bit more concise.

    • Santiago

      I love the way Bad Catholic writes – “In short…” and then proceeds to challenge for the world’s longest ever sentence. We love him for it.

  • Kate Cousino

    I followed you all the way through out of idle curiousity, as not being particularly relevant to me…and then got to your conclusion and was kicked upside the head. Because of course integration is the ongoing project we all face. Thank you, Marc. This was well done.

  • Camilla Cameo

    Good meaning and ultimate point, but your recent writing style has gotten severely dense, academic, and verbose. I’m not complaining about long words or philosophical terms, but rather: it used to be so lively and clever while still straightforward. Now it’s very repetitive and above all academic, very academic, in the sense of overly complex, really abstract, sometimes vague, and more than a bit dry. I’d recommend a return to Chesterton. (Forgive my presumption if you are reading him as much as ever; a good dose of his down-to-earth style is what I mean.)

    • Montague

      To be fair, Marc can’t draw as much language from Chesterton and Percy and Lewis at this point, since he’s dealing with idiocy from the last few decades, which goes almost beyond what they could imagine, prophetic though they are. They were given insight and spared the sight, I think…

      Besides, “Speak to a fool according to his folly, and you’ll sound dull.” It is difficult, indeed, to argue against fools. But we know Marc’s not a fool, since his words still mean something, rather cogently really, if you pay attention (unlike those he is mocking).

      Indeed, Marc is talented to speak rationally of this irrationality; it takes an even greater genius to speak humanly of such inhumanity, solidly of such substance-less gas. It’s more than we deserve if such a genius (the ghost of Gilbert, as it were) descends upon our dear Marc.

      TL;DR – New territory, bothersome subject matter, you’re expecting the extraordinary; goodness, how much do we admire the fellow xD Nonetheless, I too hope Marc does the miraculous: A beautiful critique of nihilism! (Even of the Crusades only the first fully succeeded, my dear friends, and what is the fight against nihilism, but a sort of Crusade? A bloodbath rather than a dialogue; and Islam at least is heretical, sez Belloc, unlike this Gehenna-scented rubbish).

    • John Doman

      I thought it was a parody

  • Montague

    John C. Wright, cismale gendernormaltive fascist. Check him out here:

  • Olivia Stark

    Omg I think I just threw up in my mouth a little. The only thing this article proves is that the vanguards of this whole movement are batshit cray cray.

    Get. A. Life. Please.

    • Carmen

      Hm, nice upside down flag. It’s interesting how people who have *so* much to say and are *so* entitled to their opinion often can do nothing else but warp symbols, rather than come up with something… get ready for it… ORIGINAL.

      You want to make a statement? Bitch… Say. Something. Substantial. Please. Your comment doesn’t speak of anything except emotionalism, but it’s incredibly loud. Like your icon. Like your opinion. UNLIKE this article, if you had the brain to read it and comment with something other than junk.

      • Olivia Stark

        It’s just all so boring and reeks of a navel-gazing, narcissistic good old-fashioned hissy fit. Here’s an idea: if you want to prove that you don’t care what people think of you…then stop constantly prattling on about what people think of you.

        And the upside down flag is an official naval symbol of distress. Look it up, dearie. Not my idea, but sure does indicated my concern for a country that is more worried about who has a pee pee vs. a hoo ha and what new ridiculous pronoun they demand to be called than they seem to be about the devaluation of the dollar and the overt DESTRUCTION of REAL inalienable rights.

        • Carmen

          You’ve got to be joking to suggest that your upside-down flag is suggesting naval distress rather than protest. GIRL. C’mon. Really? Naval distress? That’s hardly even used anymore by sailors, and we’re on the Internet not at sea! Trust me, baby, honestly: people on the Internet will 9 times out of 10 interpret your upside down flag as protest rather than naval distress.

          “It’s just all so boring and reeks of a navel-gazing, narcissistic good
          old-fashioned hissy fit. Here’s an idea: if you want to prove that you
          don’t care what people think of you…then stop constantly prattling on
          about what people think of you.”

          I think I agree with you, if you’re talking about the movement. Unless you were going for poetry, in which case I really like the use of alliteration here, “navel-gazing, narcissistic good old-fashioned hissy fit,” as well as the fact that it sounds like you purposefully used iambic pentameter.

          Navel-gazing, narcissistic
          Good old-fashioned hissy fit.

          Nice! A+

          • Olivia Stark

            Are you stubborn or just stupid?
            Do you really believe that I’m attempting to indicate with my quiet little avatar that I am at present on the high seas and texting from my satellite phone that I’m about to go down by the bow of my ship in rough seas? Holy crap, I think I just busted a gut laughing.

            News flash: please don’t call the Coast Guard on my behalf. There is no immediate emergency with me in which my life in danger by drowning. Thank you for your concern?

            Now if you want to talk about the astronomically rising cost of living, inflation and the debt, then we’re getting somewhere.

          • Olivia Stark

            As far as your original comment suggesting that I have “warped a symbol” then you pretty much are not a real “political animal” and I really don’t have much more to say to you in the political realm. If you think I am some sick little mind who just thought up using that symbol as a political statement, then there’s really nowhere to go from here with this discussion. I think it’s much more unusual and eye-catching than a Gadsden Flag, which is why I use it. Isn’t this page all about “self-definition and expression”?

            At least I’m not asking you to call me “Xer”.

            36,U.S.C., chapter 10. paraphrased ” no disrespect to be intended nor derived from the inverted flag

      • Laura

        Whoa, that was unnecessarily harsh for a few lines. Even if her comment wasn’t greatly phrased, a lot of your response is an example of the instant meanness the internet gives us. I doubt either of you know each other – I know I don’t know you – and Carmen, your comment was really hurtful and rude. We can respond to things like this better.

      • Nordog6561

        >>Bitch… Say. Something. Substantial.<<
        One of those heavy days?

  • John Doman

    It’s posts like this that remind why I love this blog.

  • Burka

    Request: Write some articles about Islam. Please.
    These Roman’s are crazy…..

  • Nordog6561

    Cis: It’s the New Normal.

  • john smith

    I have a sincere question: what does it mean to “feel” like the other gender, or other sex, or whatever? How would someone who was born “biologically male” or “biologically female” know how it “feels” to belong to the other sex, to where one could say with metaphysical, ontological certainty that they are literally a different gender “inside?”

    The claim is that, even after “transitioning,” many people remain attracted to the same gender as before, effectively becoming post-operative “homosexuals.” I am not trying to be rude, but what does that even mean? How could an infant who is born, for example, as a “heterosexual biological male” grow up and decide that they feel like a lesbian woman “inside”? Not trying to be a smartass, but inside of what? What universal, immutable trait binds the group “all homosexual men” or the group “all heterosexual women,” aside from biology and sexual attraction? How could anyone presume to know what it feels like in another’s skin, or to inhabit the biological ‘body’ of a broad demographic category?

    I could understand a person with homosexual inclinations convincing his or herself that, rather than being “a homosexual,” he or she is actually somehow trapped in the wrong sex. But how does one take the claims of any others seriously?

    • Giauz Ragnarock

      I have no personal experience so here’s someone else’s:

    • W.C. Degradation

      This is the sort of conversation we should be having. As someone who is uncomfortable with the notion that gender is inherent rather than a human invention, I find it confusing.

    • ozymandias

      Hi! I’m transgender. Have you read those articles about how sometimes after limb amputation people feel like they still have hands, even though they don’t? They will reach out to grab their cup of tea or even feel pain in a hand that isn’t real. That’s an example of body/brain mapping mismatch.

      For me, my brain’s map of my sex is mismatched with my body’s. My body is one sex: my brain insists that it is another sex. I look down at my body and I’m *surprised* to see that I have breasts there, because my brain thinks my chest is flat. Sometimes I’ll bump into things because I’m subconsciously not recognizing that my breasts exist. The first time I flattened my chest, I looked at myself in the mirror and *recognized* myself for the first time. You know how after a drastic haircut you might look in the mirror and go “wow, that doesn’t look like me”? That was me, except that with haircuts you get used to it, and I never got *used* to my body having the wrong sex characteristics. (I’m actually nonbinary rather than a man, which means for me my brain is upset at having sex characteristics at all– however, lots of nonbinary people have different experiences of sex dysphoria.)

      Because of this mismatch, I didn’t really learn to have a “female” gender identity. When people were like “girls like pink and cooking and dolls” I subconsciously thought “well, I am not really a girl, I don’t have the body girls are supposed to have– therefore none of this other stuff about girls applies to me either.” I felt really dissonant because people kept putting me in the girl category but I didn’t belong there– they were classifying me based on my sex, but my sex was wrong! Of course, I didn’t have the words to articulate what was wrong, because no one had told me anything about transness, much less nonbinary identities. I just went on not recognizing myself in the mirror, feeling weird when people called me a girl or treated me as a girl, and bumping into things because I forgot my breasts were there. 🙂

      This is obviously just one trans person’s experience: different people are different and have different frameworks for understanding. But I hope you can understand why I at least want medical transition.

      • That Was Then

        Actually, deep dissatisfaction with body parts is something most females grow up dealing with, in our culture saturated with artificial and unattainable images of beauty.

  • Odgred Weary

    I’m an Irish queer. I am an Irishman that prefers women over drink.

    That said, the time has come to declare “gender theory” what it truly is and always has been: a convoluted exercise in self justification so that those who engage in sexual evil can feel better about themselves. But it fails. Those who choose to wallow in pig shit will continue to smell like pig shit, even to themselves–ESPECIALLY to themselves– no matter how much they insist that it is in fact wallowing in Chanel #5.

    The only solution is to take a bath in the river Jordan and believe the Good News. There IS an odour of sanctity: but it’s not found in perverted sex and never will be.

    And no volumes of intellectual self-delusion will ever change that.

    • W.C. Degradation

      Is that you, Jesus?

      • Odgred Weary

        No, just one of those He instructed to bring the Good News to all people and to all nations. And the good news is that the aforementioned bath truly cleanses.

        • W.C. Degradation

          Does he talk to you? Do you hear things? Do you see spots?

          • Odgred Weary

            Does Foucault talk to you? Do you see anything other than a matching set of genitalia that doesn’t belong to you?

          • Odgred Weary

            The only time a man should be on his knees is to accept the body of Christ. Never that of Steve.

          • W.C. Degradation

            So, men should only give Jesus blow jobs?

          • Odgred Weary

            The words are yours.

          • Odgred Weary

            “What goes into someone’s mouth does not defile them, but what comes out of their mouth, that is what defiles them.” Matt. 15.

          • W.C. Degradation

            Christians swallow. Got it.

            I think you just converted me!

          • Odgred Weary

            The term of art is ‘cannibalism’ which I engage in on an ongoing basis. I bet even you think that is perverted. Or a foolishness. Or a stumbling block. In your case more a foolishness.

          • W.C. Degradation

            Why would you assume I would take issue with eating human flesh?

          • Odgred Weary

            You are unknowingly close to the kingdom of God.

            It is often difficult to evangelize active sodomy addicts. They think that when their act is called ‘perversion’ that it is a perversion of the marital act. It is not. It is a perversion of the Eucharist–which makes it far graver an offense (but ironically leaving the practitioner much closer to understanding the truth, if he will open himself to that truth).

          • Odgred Weary

            Now if you will exhume me I need to get back to work.

    • Proud Amelekite

      Well, it is a good thing transgender, being a man who is romantically attracted to other men, or the like doesn’t center around sex, otherwise we would be in some serious trouble. Load off my mind, let me tell you.

  • Proud Amelekite

    From the Catholic perspective where the spirit bows to the tyranny of the flesh (eg Complementarity) your argument holds a strong deal of merit. However, we are discussing academics and feminists (those who coined gender theory as we understand it today) and using their understanding of the world, gender is a social construct that dates back to the Law of Hammurabi and the post agrarian world to some degree or another. A system built based on the need for soldiers (and thus the need for men to control the uterus so their women would birth them soldiers). If we operate from that line of reasoning then your argument falls apart. If gender is even partially socially defined or developed (not inherent), your argument becomes a house built on the sand.

  • Good riddance. Gender theory is nothing more than institutionalized insanity.

  • Jack

    I didn’t understand a damn word of that article.

  • Agni Ashwin

    And yet no mention of cisalpine gender theory.

  • Vad

    What the heck are you talking about? Cis isn’t a match between your body and your inner experience of gender; it’s a match between your social assignment of gender and your inner experience of gender. I was assigned female at birth and I developed a female gender subjectivity, ergo I’m a woman and I’m cis. The only “match” is between Western society’s view of gender (women=vagina; man=penis; nothing else exists) and my inner experience. Which, yeah, I’m not gonna say that that makes me somehow more authentic than anyone else, considering Western society has a shit view of gender and shit philosophy in general. Not being “integrated” with Western views of the world certaily isn’t a negative.

    Additionally, there are other genders in the world that don’t fit the trans-cis dichotomy that from a Western perspective we might consider trans (eg bakla, hirja), but don’t necessarily involve a “mismatch” within the traditional culture. If your gender theory doesn’t account for these, at the very least you can’t make the claim that it’s universal.

    ALSO trans and cis describe a relation between gender and society, it’s not about sexuality (except to the extent that gender & sexuality are connected). Cissexual isn’t a sexual identity. Also Dan Savage is an asshole, why are you even linking to him?