Misogyny 1, Girl Athletes 0. Where are the Feminists?

Photo Source: Flickr Creative Commons, Public Domain by Rob Royce https://www.flickr.com/photos/coopersvillebroncos/

Photo Source: Flickr Creative Commons, Public Domain by Rob Royce https://www.flickr.com/photos/coopersvillebroncos/

Where have all the feminists gone?

It appears they’ve gone to political correctness, save for one.

I wrote a post for CatholicVote discussing the recent ruling by the Department of Education that girls who participate in sports in the Palatine, Il school district must pay for this privilege by showering with boys.

That’s a small simplification, but only a small one. The boys in question are young men who claim that they think they are women. These young men then demand that they be allowed to play on all-girl sports teams, and — get this — shower and change with the girls.

This is an abuse of the young women involved. It trashes the hard-fought gains that women’s sports have made. It subjects the girls to a forced sexual violation by requiring them to undress and shower in front of a male student.

Almost all “feminists” are either silent about this, or they are taking the side of the violators and abusers of these girls. There are exceptions, and I discuss this a bit in the post.

Here is an excerpt of what I wrote:

The United States Department of Education has given Palatine, Illinois School District 30 days to reach a “solution” that allows a “transgendered” boy who says he is a girl to shower with the girls. Failure to comply could result in the loss of federal Title IX funds.

The young man in question “identifies” as a girl. The school district has allowed him to play on the girls’ sports team. He is called “she” by school staff who refer to him by a female name. He says his “rights” are being violated because the school district asks him to change clothes behind a curtain rather than in front of the girls on the team, and to shower separately from them.

So. We have a teen-aged boy who says that he is a girl. He wants to play sports on a girl’s team and shower and change with the girls. If he is sincere, he’s mentally ill. If he’s not sincere, it’s possible that he’s found a trendy way to gain access to the girl’s locker room for the ultimate peep show.

I know this question is not politically correct, but do the actual girls have any rights in this?

- See more at: http://www.catholicvote.org/teen-girls-dont-need-this-new-form-of-mysogyny/#sthash.qk0o9XH4.dpuf


For more on this topic, check out my colleague Jennifer Fitz. 

Like Patheos Catholic on Facebook!


Studies Show Porn and Abortion are Allies

Photo Source: Flickr Creative Commons by Chris Lim https://www.flickr.com/photos/cats-eye-view/

Photo Source: Flickr Creative Commons by Chris Lim https://www.flickr.com/photos/cats-eye-view/

I was there when most of the tracks that led us to where we are now were laid down. By “there” I mean I was often in the room when the discussion were had and the decisions were made. On those occasions when I wasn’t part of the initial discussion, I was usually one of the first to know what was coming down.

If hindsight really is 22, then I have a clear view of how we got here, or at least the beginnings of it.

I wrote a bit about that in a post for CatholicVote. The post discussed a new study which revealed the old truth that abortion and porn are, in fact, allies.

Here’s part of what I said.

Well, duh.

A new study by the Journal of Sex Research indicates that users of porn may also be “useful allies” of the abortion industry.

This is news?

I was an active part of the feminist movement back in the 1970s. I was also the Oklahoma Director for NARAL. I remember when we (meaning those who advocated for legal abortion) partnered with the Playboy Foundation. Prior to that, the feminist movement had been, rightfully, against pornography because of its penchant for reducing women and children to objects. Porn is degrading to those who are depicted in it. Oftentimes it is violently degrading.

Just type a series of xxxs in your search engine and sit back and watch the porn depicting violence against and degradation of women roll down your screen. Or, type “rape” or “rape victim” in your search engine and see how many hits you get for pornography depicting violent gang rapes and snuff films — all with women and children as the victims. This is not to say that pornography only victimizes women and children. Gay porn is just as degrading and often as violent as that aimed at women.

Looking back with 20/20 hindsight, I realize that this compromise with the devil of pornography on behalf of the demon of abortion was, in many ways, the unraveling of the feminist movement.

Like Patheos Catholic on Facebook!


Planned Parenthood Medical Director Filmed Selling Baby Body Parts

Photo Source: Flickr Creative Commons by Charlotte Cooper https://www.flickr.com/photos/cecooper/

Photo Source: Flickr Creative Commons by Charlotte Cooper https://www.flickr.com/photos/cecooper/

“Laws are open to interpretation.”

That’s how Planned Parenthood’s Senior Director of Medical Services, Dr Deborah Nucatola, described the organization’s attitude toward federal law prohibiting partial birth abortion. This 2014 video shows Dr Nucatola engaging in conversation with someone she believed to be a Fetal Tissue Procurement organization.

She goes into grisly detail about the baby body parts that she will provide to buyers, and she names prices. She also explains her attitude — which, given her position, is probably also Planned Parenthood’s position – toward the federal ban on partial birth abortion. Here is what she said:

The Federal (Partial Birth) Abortion ban is a law, and laws are up to interpretation. If I say on day one, I do not intend to do this, what ultimately happens doesn’t matter.

In other words, the wording in the statute has a loophole that means it cannot be enforced unless the government can prove that the doctor deliberately intended to violate the law. Intent is a difficult thing to prove, as Dr Nucatola seems to know.

I think this is the portion of the statute that she is referencing. I put the verbiage that I believe Dr Nucatola probably believes supports her reasoning in bold.

Any physician who, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, knowingly performs a partial-birth abortion and thereby kills a human fetus shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both. This subsection does not apply to a partial-birth abortion that is necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself. This subsection takes effect 1 day after the enactment.

(b) As used in this section—

(1) the term “partial-birth abortion” means an abortion in which the person performing the abortion—

(A) deliberately and intentionally vaginally delivers a living fetus until, in the case of a head-first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother, or, in the case of breech presentation, any part of the fetal trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother, for the purpose of performing an overt act that the person knows will kill the partially delivered living fetus; and
(B) performs the overt act, other than completion of delivery, that kills the partially delivered living fetus; and
(2) the term “physician” means a doctor of medicine or osteopathy legally authorized to practice medicine and surgery by the State in which the doctor performs such activity, or any other individual legally authorized by the State to perform abortions: Provided, however, That any individual who is not a physician or not otherwise legally authorized by the State to perform abortions, but who nevertheless directly performs a partial-birth abortion, shall be subject to the provisions of this section.

It will be interesting to see if Dr Nucatola and Planned Parenthood will be prosecuted under this statute, given that it sounds as if Dr Nucatola has confessed on this video to deliberately violating it for profit. It will also be interesting to see if federal and state monies continue to go to Planned Parenthood in light of this video.

I’ve said before and I will continue to say that there is no reason why this money needs to go to Planned Parenthood to provide the services that the American public wants to continue. Many other organizations could provide pap smears and contraception. We also need to remember that Planned Parenthood teaches their philosophy to our children in our public schools under the guise of sex education. They receive large amounts of federal and state monies to indoctrinate our children in their death-dealing attitudes about human life.

I would also like to make the point that college-aged women who are targeted by egg harvesters are not protected by any law. These unethical doctors run ads in college newspapers to induce young women to undergo dangerous and damaging medical procedures so the doctors can harvest their eggs. The doctors to sell these eggs to researchers who use them to create embryos which are then killed and experimented on, or the doctors use the eggs to create babies that they then also sell. No doctor should be allowed to pay people to undergo unnecessary and dangerous medical procedures that are not in the patient’s best interests in order for the doctor to make money.

The barbarity of doctors making well people sick in order to harvest their bodies so the doctors can make money is one issue. It could easily be settled by simply making it illegal to pay women to undergo egg harvesting. All it would take would be to add egg harvesting to the statute prohibiting the sale of human body parts. The major reason this is not done is the lobbying efforts of the medical associations.

The issues surrounding the human rights violations inherent in using these eggs to create embryos for medical research or to create babies that are then sold on the open market like heads of lettuce should also be addressed. These baby-creating-selling clinics should be shut down and their operators put in prison. No doctor who makes well patients sick to make money for themselves should be allowed to practice medicine. No one should be allowed to buy and sell people.

Egg harvesters, abortionists and doctors who practice euthanasia are the ethical and moral twins of the doctor in Michigan who told well people they had cancer and then subjected them to cancer treatment in order to make money. I would also add the doctors who perform the procedure known as gender reassignment surgery on people who are mentally ill to this list.

The videos below were released by the Center for Medical Progress. I think their web site has been hacked. I was able to access it earlier today, but now I can’t. According to First Things,

The investigation was carried out by the Center for Medical Progress. According to their website, the “Center for Medical Progress is a group of citizen journalists dedicated to monitoring and reporting on medical ethics and advances.”

The video is the first by The Center for Medical Progress in its “Human Capital” series, a nearly 3-year-long investigative journalism study of Planned Parenthood’s illegal trafficking of aborted fetal parts. Project Lead David Daleiden notes: “Planned Parenthood’s criminal conspiracy to make money off of aborted baby parts reaches to the very highest levels of their organization. Elected officials must listen to the public outcry for Planned Parenthood to be held accountable to the law and for our tax dollars to stop underwriting this barbaric abortion business.”

I’m posting two videos. The first one is an edited version of Dr Nucatola’s conversation with what she thought were representatives of an organization seeking to buy baby body parts from Planned Parenthood. The second is the entire conversation, without editing.

YouTube Preview Image YouTube Preview Image


For Planned Parenthood’s reply, go here.

For other reactions to this video, read Simcha Fisher and Katrina Fernandez.

Like Patheos Catholic on Facebook!


Cancer Doc Who Gave Healthy People Chemo Gets 45 Years.

Photo Source: Flickr Creative Commons by Nicki Dugan Pogue https://www.flickr.com/photos/thenickster/

Photo Source: Flickr Creative Commons by Nicki Dugan Pogue https://www.flickr.com/photos/thenickster/

What happens when you cannot trust your doctor?

Dr Farid Fata is an example.

Dr Fata lied to patients who were not sick and told them they had cancer. Then, he subjected them to the horrors of cancer therapy. He also gave patients who actually did have cancer many more chemotherapy treatments than they should have had. All of his patients were subjected to the terror of cancer and were harmed by these treatments. Dr Fata also murdered some of these people, since they died from his unnecessary treatments.

Dr Fata was backed up by other doctors and by the hospital where he practiced. I would imagine that he also was aided in getting away with this crime by the abject terror with which people greet a diagnosis of cancer.

There are several things we can take away from this situation.

First, get a second opinion. Doctors often fight you on this. I’ve experienced this medical resistance to patients seeking second opinions myself, as have friends of mine. If you want to avoid being Dr Fata-d, you might also consider getting this second opinion in a different medical circle than the doctor who originally gave you the diagnosis. By that I mean go to a different state. If you’re in Oklahoma, go to MD Anderson. If you’re in Texas, go to UCLA. But do not go for a second opinion from a doctor who is either enthralled with your original doc or who is in debt to him or her.

Second, current medical practice gives us many reasons to mistrust our doctors. Commercial medicine is predatory by its nature. Consider doctors who make designer babies and sell them on the internet. Consider doctors who harvest the bodies of healthy women for eggs that they sell on the internet. These women are not sick, but the doctors pay them money to undergo dangerous amounts to hormones and unnecessary surgery which punctures their ovaries repeatedly in order for the docs to make money in the manufacture and sale of human beings. These procedures endanger women’s lives, health and future fertility, but they are marketed to callow college girls as safe.

Consider the trendy new medical barbarity of gender reassignment surgery. This ghastly procedure mutilates people who are suffering a mental illness. It also subjects them to massive, life-long dosages of unnecessary hormones that further mutilate them and endanger their health. The push right now is to extend this procedure to minor children, even without parental consent.

Third, consider the barbaric practices of euthanasia and abortion. When we give doctors a legal right to kill at will, do we seriously expect that they will not become junior Mengeles who murder babies who survive abortions and euthanize people for no reason and without their consent?

Dr Fata was, due to the courage of a whistle-blowing employee, exposed and brought to judgement in our courts. He did not get the sentence he should have gotten, and he was not charged with the crime he committed, which was torture and murder. But hopefully, he will never walk free again.

However, if what he had been doing was legal, how difficult would it have been to mount a prosecution against him in court? Egg harvesting doctors who exploit young women are often respected members of their communities. They are, like the original Mengele, considered scientists and physicians. They are highly educated, smooth, and wealthy. They can easily schmooze their way past a tearful coed who has been harmed, or her distraught family when she dies.

Doctors who murder outright through abortion and euthanasia have a whole socio-political movement behind them which lionizes them and characterizes them as heroes of compassion. The same goes for doctors who practice the quackery of gender reassignment surgery.

Dr Fata’s crimes will probably lead to more government regulation and oversight of medical practice. The same thing will eventually happen with each of these legal crimes of euthanasia, egg harvesting, abortion on demand, the quackery of “gender reassignment” surgery, and creating and selling human beings.

Government intrusion into anything is always heavy-handed and destructive. In medicine, it creates timid doctors who put compliance with regulations created by hand-picked committees of bureaucrats with agendas ahead of the needs of their patients. It makes doctors reluctant to prescribe and act on what their training and experience has taught them is their patients’ best interest.

The irony is that no amount of regulation can control the legal practice of medical barbarity and make it into something other than the barbarity it is. There are no laws that will ensure controlled killing and exploitation of innocents once other laws have made such things acceptable. You can’t kill, mutilate and exploit people for a living and, as Himmler said of the SS, “remain decent.” Himmler was self-deluded in this pretense, just as those who histrionically jump up and down and defend these barbarities today are self-deluded.

The only way to stop medical exploitation of patients and the barbarities that come with it is to make such things illegal in the first place. Certain medical practices, among them elective abortion, and the commercial harvesting and selling of human body parts to the detriment of living patients, as well as the creation and selling of human beings, should be illegal.

At the very least, doctors who pay women to harvest their bodies, who sell babies, who murder their patients, either born or unborn, should lose their license to practice medicine and be subject to civil suit. It would be preferable if they went to prison for these crimes against humanity, but given that the medical associations support these practices, that is impracticable right now.

I think increased government regulation and oversight of medical practice will harm patients, as well as doctors. But when the medical profession throws its weight behind exploitative practices such as egg harvesting, creating and selling babies and what is nothing more than trendy, politically-correct abuse of the mentally ill, it makes the case that medicine cannot police its own house. The failure to stop Dr Fata just puts the cherry on top.

It is ironic that the political power of the medical associations, which has always been used to protect medical practice from government intrusion, will end up being the cause of greater government regulation and surveillance of medicine. If the medical associations continue down this path of defending barbarity, their behavior will inevitably lead to heavy-handed government intrusion into medical practice. It will also lead to the loss of public trust and faith in doctors.

Dr Fata is, in many ways, the tip of the iceberg of true medical malpractice in this post-Christian world of ours. The difference between him and his brothers in blood is that he fell over the tripwire of illegality, while they are protected by nihilistic trendiness that pushes the poisonous philosophy of social deconstruction at all costs, including, sadly, human life.

From The Detroit News:

Detroit — The notorious oncologist who gave chemotherapy to cancer-free patients, and overmedicated others, as part of an expansive insurance fraud scheme cried and apologized Friday before being sentenced to 45 years in prison.

Dr. Farid Fata will be behind bars until he’s 95, but tearful, grief-stricken victims and their family members who attended the sentencing — many wearing yellow to symbolize their hopes for healing and closure — insisted that’s not long enough. They and prosecutors hoped Fata would get up to 175 years.

… Fata’s conspiracy ensnared several hundred patients across Metro Detroit. He was accused of giving cancer patients overly aggressive doses of chemotherapy while treating others with the powerful drug for cancers they did not have.

The once sought-after oncologist was silent during sentencing hearings this week, refusing to glance at his victims as they recounted how he deceived them and left them with chronic pain and suffering. Friday, his stoicism crumbled as he pleaded, with tears in his eyes, for leniency.

“I stand before you ashamed of my actions … it all went wrong,” Fata said. “I cannot bring back the past. My quest for power is self-destructive.

“I pray for redemption … I ask the court for mercy,” Fata said. “They (patients) came to me seeking compassion and care … I failed them.”


YouTube Preview Image YouTube Preview Image YouTube Preview Image

Like Patheos Catholic on Facebook!


Was St Maria Goretti’s Purity in Her Body? Let’s Ask St Augustine.

Photo Source: Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain

Photo Source: Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain

Purity is a virtue of the soul … not even when the body is violated is it lost. St Augustine

St Augustine had a lot to say about rape.

His teaching on this subject is the historic Christian attitude toward rape victims. It speaks comfort to the victims of ISIS and sex slavery today, as well as rape victims all over the world and throughout history.

St Augustine also discusses at length the practice — which is certainly still practiced in certain cultures today — of women who have been raped killing themselves from shame. He speaks forcefully against this.

St Augustine’s words on this subject separated Christianity from the world around it, and continues to do so today. It is a powerful affirmation of women’s rights as full human beings and, more importantly, as co-heirs of eternal life.

Augustine states clearly that rape does not defile the person who is raped. He says without equivocation that purity does not reside in the body, but in the soul of the person. He even goes so far as to say that the purity of soul of women who has been raped keeps their bodies pure, as well.

This is an enormous advance in the moral thinking of the world.

Christianity began in a world where baby girls were murdered for no other reason than that they were baby girls. It was a world in which women who committed suicide after being raped were thought admirable for having killed themselves; that they are “reclaimed” their honor by their suicide.

This carries over into our world today in many guises, including the gendercide of baby girls and demands from whole communities that women who have been raped commit suicide. In some countries women are actually sentenced to be raped for the crimes of their menfolk and then are expected to commit suicide afterwards to clear the family of the shame of having a woman who has been dirtied in this fashion in its midst.

Christianity, with its powerful affirmation of the eternal value of every human life, changed this. It stand as a sign of contradiction to it now, as if always has.

Christianity affirm the human rights of all people of every stage of their lives in a dramatic and powerful fashion. We do not offer our children to the Baals. We do not bend our knee to Moloch by murdering our children, our disabled, our elderly and our mentally disturbed.

We also do not condemn women who have been raped to the living death of life-long shame.

Or, at least, we shouldn’t.

The story of St Maria Goretti, as it has been told and is presented, is a reversion to the pre-Christian notion that women should commit suicide if they have been raped. Only with this story, the suicide comes before the rape.

I have a tremendous sense of oneness with Maria Goretti, this little girl who died at the hands of a murdering pedophile. But her death was a wanton murder by a grown man who wanted to rape a child. The miracle is that she forgave this man and converted him from the grave.

A few Public Catholic readers seem focused on whether or not there was “penetration” of Maria Goretti’s body by her murderer. I have trouble following their logic, and, to be honest, I find the whole line of reasoning disturbing.

St Augustine taught what has become the constant Christian teaching that purity resides in the soul. Nothing that is done to the body can defile a pure soul. In other words, if Maria Goretti’s murderer had raped her, her purity would still be intact. If it wasn’t for the misogynist character of the discussion, that would be a clear point.

If, say, we were talking about a man who had been drawn and quartered for his faith, no one would be debating whether or not the knife had “penetrated” his abdomen or if the rope had crushed his larynx. Everyone would understand that his body could not be defiled against his will, that the blood, gore, stink and filth of having his intestines yanked out and emptied around him could not touch the purity of his soul.

It is only women, only rape victims, who are subjected to the indignity of this kind of discussion.

The power of this shame is so strong that it multiplies when the victims of rape are men and boys. They feel the shame of having been raped and the additional shame of misogyny, once removed.

I’ve encountered a number of male rape victims, both in rape counseling situations and in my work as a legislator. I’ve actually passed new laws because of my encounters with adolescent boys who were violently assaulted.

The misogynist attitude toward women that informs much of our attitude about rape increases male victims’ shame. Part of their horror is that they have been used as if they were women. They feel debased and degraded in a unique way.

Rape is an attack on the humanity of another person. It is an attempt to deny and destroy that humanity. Because of its sexual nature, it is a powerful attack on the sexual identity and sexual pride of the victim. It is an attack on the life-force itself.

Because of the underpinning of misogyny that seeks to deflect victim’s rightful and righteous anger at what has been done to them, rape is also a kind of cultural warfare. This unspoken social construct of rape as a terrorizing thing men do to women which shames women and puts the in their place makes the shame and self-loathing of men who have been raped even greater.

The quotes below are the City of God, by St Augustine. They have been explicit Christian teaching for almost 2,000 years. St Augustine wrote at a time when an old world — the Roman Empire — was ending. He wrote in the midst of terrible persecution of Christians.

We live in just such a time today.

I copied this from the book itself, which I’ve read and have on my Kindle, so I don’t have a link. You can find a low cost (mine was free) Kindle copy of The City of God on Amazon.

The Violation of the Consecrated and Other Christian Virgins to Which They Were Subjected in Captivity and to Which Their Own Will Gave No Consent; and Whether This Contaminated Their Souls.

But they fancy they bring a conclusive charge against Christianity, when they aggravate the horror of captivity by adding that not only wives and unmarried maidens but even consecrated virgins were violated.

But truly, with respect to this, it is not Christian faith nor piety, nor the virtue of chastity which is hemmed into any difficulty; the only difficulty is so to treat the subject as to satisfy at once modesty and reason.

… It is, in the first place, laid down as an unassailable position, that the virtue which makes the life good has its throne in the soul, and thence rules the members of the body, which becomes holy in virtue of the holiness of the will; and that while the will remains firm and unshaken, nothing that another person does with the body or upon the body is any fault of the person who suffers it … But as not only pain may be inflicted, but lust gratified on the body of another … shame invades even a thoroughly pure spirit.

… is there a fear that even another’s lust may pollute the violated? It will not pollute, if it be another’s …

… purity is a virtue of the soul, and has for its companion virtue the fortitude which will endure all ills … and since no one, however magnanimous and pure, has always the disposal of his own body, but can only control the consent and refusal of his will, what sane man can suppose that, if his body be seized and forcibly made use of to satisfy the lusts of another, he thereby loses his purity?

For if purity can thus be destroyed, then assuredly purity is no virtue of the soul … If on the other hand, it belongs to the soul, then not even when the body is violated is it lost. Nay, the virtue of holy continence … sanctifies even the body and therefore when this continence remains unsubdued, even the sanctity of the body is preserved because the will to use it holily remains.

For the sanctity of the body does not consist in the integrity of its members, nor in their exemption from all touch … so long as the soul keeps this firmness of purpose which sanctifies even the body, the violence does by another’s lust makes no impression on this bodily sanctity, which is preserved intact by one’s own persistent continence.

… We maintain that when a woman is violated while her soul admits no consent to the iniquity, but remains inviolably chaste, the sin is not hers, but his who violates her.


For another take on our modern world and rape, check out Simcha Fisher. 

Like Patheos Catholic on Facebook!


10 Reasons Not to See Fifty Shades of Grey

Photo Source: Flickr Commons by Ira Gelb https://www.flickr.com/photos/iragelb/

Photo Source: Flickr Commons by Ira Gelb https://www.flickr.com/photos/iragelb/

Fifty Shades of Grey did big box office yesterday. It pulled in $30.2 million. It is also, as the article I linked to shows, being regarded as something of a cultural event. I imagine today will be even bigger box office for the movie.

The fact that many of the viewers are women tells its own tale about the degradation of the female which has taken place in our world. There was a time when the feminist movement would have tarred Fifty Shades and women themselves would have been willing to march against it. It is the essence of failed feminism that, after decades of “advocating” for women’s rights, this is where we are.

In my opinion, that has everything to do with the fact that feminism replaced the just and prophetic cause of women’s rights with the fight for legal abortion. I feel so strongly about this that I’m writing a whole book about it.

If  you plan to give this movie a pass,  you need to congratulate yourself. You’re doing the right thing.

In case you need them, here are 10 reasons why.

1. Linking sex and violence is evil.

2. Depicting women as objects and degrading them for entertainment is evil.

3. Getting your jaw smashed is not liberating.

4. Men who abuse women shouldn’t be “rescued.” They should be put in jail.

5. Holding up the masochistic woman as a twisted ideal is the oldest misogynist game in the world.

6. There’s nothing romantic about excruciating pain.

7. Celebrating mental, emotional, spiritual sickness is not good for your own mind, heart, soul.

8. Blood, fecal matter, torture and abuse are not turns-ons … unless there’s something really wrong with you.

9. Your lifespan is finite. Why waste 125 minutes of it on this trash?

10. Your money is finite. Why waste a chunk of it on “art” that degrades the female half of the human race?

Like Patheos Catholic on Facebook!


The ‘Fifty Shades’ Controversy: Sicko Sex and Failed Feminism

Photo Source: Flickr Commons by Ira Gelb https://www.flickr.com/photos/iragelb/

Photo Source: Flickr Commons by Ira Gelb https://www.flickr.com/photos/iragelb/

What is it with women who read Fifty Shades of Gay and who will go to the movie? You got me.

Fifty Shades sounds like the classic masochistic nonsense: Woman redeeming the bad man by allowing him to abuse her. This sort of claptrap has been used to keep women in abusive relationships for millennia. It’s right up there with the “she asked for it” defense of rape.

It is interesting that it’s Christians who are speaking out most strongly against this misogyny. The feminist response, such as it is, has been much weaker and more muted. For instance, this is the only response I found on NOW’s website. There was no comment about Fifty Shades on the National Women’s Political Caucus website.

This is the same old sick stuff that feminists once rightfully condemned with all their force. In my opinion, the popularity of Fifty Shades after decades of feminist work is a sign and a symbol of a failed movement.

One of the commenters in the video below says that linking sex and violence is evil. I absolutely agree. That fact that this sicko movie is the  big box Valentine’s Day release says a lot, and none of it good, about our culture.

YouTube Preview Image

Like Patheos Catholic on Facebook!


Cardinal Burke’s Woman Problem

Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke 1

Photo Source: Wikimedia Commons


I’ve written about this before. 

There was a reason why I entered my anti-God period. It had a lot to do with violence against women and the indifference of the church — meaning the whole of Christianity — to that violence. 

I spent 17 years, wandering in the spiritual wilderness over this. When Jesus basically reached out and scooped me back into His arms, I was confounded. The unconditional, ecstatic love that He showered on me was a complete contradiction of Who I had thought He was. 

Still, I was faced with a conundrum. If the men who claimed so stridently that they, and they alone, spoke for God, were telling the truth of things, then what place did I, a female person who actually felt that I was a full human being and not some smidge of what’s left of a human being after the preachers got done limiting me and my life down to what they thought was acceptable, what place did I have in any church that bore the name of Christ?

The Jesus I met seemed to me at that time to have very little to do with the mean-spirited, woman-despising message I had been given by His spokesmen. I loved this Jesus I encountered, and, right from the first, I trusted Him. But that other Jesus — the one who supported the double standard and thought women and girls should live their lives in the circumscribed margins of life that these men of God set out for us, who basically wanted us pushed aside, that Jesus I had been told about and bashed with, I mistrusted and feared to my core. 

I was so confused that I prayed and asked God directly if He hated women. This wasn’t a test. It wasn’t an argument. It wasn’t even much of a prayer. It was a plea and a question from the bottom of my shattered heart. 

I don’t always or even often get direct, immediate and discernible answers to my prayers, but God answered me then. I’ve been walking my walk with Christ on rock-solid certainty of that answer ever since. 

I realize that the Church does not recognize personal revelation except in very rare and well verified circumstances, and that even then these personal revelations are not binding as a matter of faith on the people of God. I think that’s a sound practice. 

I also think that this position on personal revelation makes Cardinal Burke and me just about even so far as this woman question is concerned. I had a personal revelation that God loves the female half of the human race and that He’s not so happy with His preachers who say otherwise. The good Cardinal evidently has had a personal revelation of some sort that the many and manifold problems of the Church are due to those of us who have two X chromosomes. 

In the Gospel according to him, the priest shortage is due to the existence of altar girls. His explanation for this is that boys don’t like to be around girls. Even aside from the fact that we are talking about adolescent boys, a good many of whom seem to rather like adolescent girls, that is absolute nonsense. 

There are a number of factors that have contributed to the priest shortage; the cultural upheavals — the sexual revolution, dissolution of the family, the priest sex abuse scandal, birth control — of the last 50 years chief among them. In addition to the huge changes in society, a major reason for the priest shortage is due to the 800 pound gorilla in the room that nobody will talk about.

As most Catholics over the age of 12 have probably observed, a good many of our priests are gay. Homosexuals are a much smaller pool of potential applicants than straight men. Also — get ready for this Cardinal Burke — straight adolescent boys don’t really want to spend their time with gay men. They just don’t. Call it homophobic. Call it adolescent sexual insecurity. Call it whatever you want, but there is one thing for sure about it: It’s not due to altar girls. 

In another report, I read that Cardinal Burke is decrying the “feminization” of the Church. In his view, men don’t go to church because there are too many women there. 

Uh huh. 

Men just hate being around women. I’ve noticed that all my life. They don’t like the way we smell. They don’t like our soft hands or higher voices. And they really can’t stand the way we look. 

I guess that Oklahoma parishes are just unduly macho — or maybe that’s sissified, I can’t figure it out exactly — but we’ve got a lot of men sitting in the pews every week. And quite a few of them are sitting beside their wives, daughters, mothers and, yes, even their girlfriends.  

I’m not sure how Cardinal Burke plans to run his Church if he and those who think like him manage to turn it into a Spanky and Our Gang Woman Haters Club House, but my personal opinion is that if they succeed in chasing off the women, they might think about closing up shop. 

Jesus did not found a boys club. He founded a universal Church that welcomes everyone. When Our Lord walked this earth, He went out of His way to treat women with honor and dignity that men of that place and time found scandalizing. 

God sent me to the Catholic Church and since the One Who owns the whole deal told me to be here, I’m staying. But I’m not going to listen to anybody, no matter what kind of hat they wear, who says things like altar girls are the cause of the priest shortage and that this Church with its all-male priesthood which makes all the decisions is too “feminized.”

Frankly, between this kind of thing coming from American cardinals, and the doh-si-doh about marriage coming from Germany and Belgium, I’m beginning to wish somebody would pull the plug on these guy’s mikes. 

I’ve struggled with this all my life and I can tell you that ramblings like those from Cardinal Burke were a big part of what kept me walled up in what I thought was self-protective armor against a God I believed hated me. 

You’ve gotta be careful, you men of God, telling half the human race that God thinks less of them than He does the other half. Aside from the enormous harm you do to the souls of the people you are supposed to be shepherding — and this little dance with misogyny is massively damaging to both men and women — you are defaming the Lord. 

Because God doesn’t hate women and He doesn’t want us at the back of the bus.

I know. 

I asked Him. 

Like Patheos Catholic on Facebook!


Breaking: ISIS Murders 150 Girls and Women in Iraq. Boko Haram Kidnaps 100 Villagers in Nigeria.

ID 10040013

Photo Source:  FreeDigitalPhotos.net

ISIS, the Taliban and Boko Haram seem to be in a race for the title of most barbaric terrorist.

Boko Haram specializes in attacking schools and churches and killing, kidnapping, raping and selling children. Four hours ago, Boko Haram attacked a village in Northern Nigeria, killing at least 33 people and kidnapping at least 100 others.

The Taliban attacked a school in Pakistan this week, killing 141 people, most of them children. Now it turns out that ISIS has murdered 150 women and girls for refusing to have sex with them and for refusing to enter into “Jihad marriage” with them.

“Jihad marriage” sounds like another name for rape. So, I guess that makes them mass murderer/rapists. No need to fancy this up with talk about jihad and such.

They’re murderers. They’re rapists. They are satanic. All of them.

Like Patheos Catholic on Facebook!


Send it Back: Surrogates and Killing Their Manufactured Babies

It’s the new hot trend. Go online and pick an egg donor from photos and order up a harvesting of her body in order to design a baby, made to your specifications. Then hire a “surrogate” (read that breeder) to carry the baby to term for you. And if the thing goes wrong, as biology is wont to do, why, then, order the surrogate to kill the baby for you. You know, like a Roman Pater discussing the upcoming birth of his child with the family Mater in this love letter from the front:

“Know that I am still in Alexandria…. I ask and beg you to take good care of our baby son, and as soon as I received payment I shall send it up to you. If you are delivered (before I come home), if it is a boy keep it, if a girl, discard it.”

This lovely practice of “discarding” baby girls —along with babies with birth defects — runs throughout recorded history. It is still practiced in parts of the world today.
Early Christians labeled the practice infanticide. They went out into the streets, got these baby girls, brought them home and raised them.

The idea that there is no Greek nor Jew, no male nor female but all are one in Christ Jesus was a startling Christian innovation. The teaching, which was formalized in writing as early as the Didache, that all human life, including unborn human life, is sacred, is another peculiar Christian innovation.

Today’s version of “discard it,” at least in the “civilized” West, is abortion. The neat tidiness of legal killing in a clinical situation has it all over any other mass killing field in history. There are no furnaces belching out smoke to run day and night disposing the bodies. No one sees the carnage except the medical staff. Even the receptionist who sits out front is left innocent of what is really happening.

Combine this take-a-number-and-wait killing field with the highly-lucrative business of harvesting and renting women’s bodies as if they were farm animals in order to manufacture made-to-order babies for sale, and you have the total commercialization of human life and human beings.

Call it “creating families” or whatever pretty little phrase you want to paste over its ugliness. This is the practice of commercialized medicine for hire, put to the service of creating, buying and selling people. It has nothing to do with the healing arts or medicine practiced to save lives.

It is the ultimate prostitution, and the “doctors” who do it are the ultimate pimps. It degrades women and babies to the level of chattel for the express and openly acknowledged business of buying and selling people.

The tripping up part, of course, is what if the baby-buyers decide at the last minute that they don’t want their new human widget. What if, say, there’s a divorce? Or the manufacturing process goes awry and the baby has a cleft palate or down’s syndrome or spina bifida. What if those designer genes turn out to be somewhat idiosyncratic?
In that circumstance, our “modern” baby buyers do the modern thing. They order the baby killed. It is, after all, their possession that they bought in good faith that it would be delivered as ordered.

Now, it’s defective. They’re behaving the way anyone would if the factory delivered the wrong purchase. They are sending it back. Consider these stories:

1. An Australian couple who was paying a woman from Thailand to carry their twin unborn babies as a surrogate asked the woman to abort one of the babies because testing had revealed one of the babies has Down Syndrome.The couple enlisted the woman, whose family was heavily in debt, to become their surrogate and to use IVF to become pregnant. She was subsequently found to be pregnant with twins but the initial joy turned to rejection when testing showed a boy nicknamed Gammy was diagnosed with Down Syndrome.The couple wanted the mother to have an abortion, but she refused and eventually gave birth to Gammy and his twin sister in Bangkok. The couple then refused to take Gammy back with them to Australia and left him in Thailand.

2. A British surrogate mother said yesterday that she is raising a disabled baby as her own after the child’s intended mother told her she did not want a ‘dribbling cabbage’ for a daughter.The healthy boy was taken home by the childless British couple whom the surrogate mother claims then rejected his unwell sister because of her disability.‘I remember her saying to me, “She’d be a ****ing dribbling cabbage! Who would want to adopt her? No one would want to adopt a disabled child”.’She is now raising the baby – identified only as Amy – with her partner and their other children.

3.  A British woman who agreed to become a surrogate mother for an American couple is suing them for allegedly backing out of the deal because she is carrying twins.Helen Beasley, 26, claims Californians Charles Wheeler and Martha Berman demanded she abort one of the foetuses because they only wanted one child.When she refused, they allegedly refused to have anything more to do with her.Miss Beasley, who is six months pregnant, wants to put the twins up for adoption. But under Californian law, parental rights in a surrogacy agreement go to the intended parents, not the surrogate mother.Miss Beasley, a single woman from the Midlands, already has a nine-year- old son. The two of them arrived in the U.S. a week ago.She said she could not afford to support the twins, so adopting them herself was not an option. But she claimed to feel very responsible for the babies.’You can’t help but get attached to them, and I just want the best for them,’ she said last night. ‘When they’re born, what happens to them? I can’t have them. I can’t do anything with them. They’re not mine.

4. “The View” host Sheri Shepherd reportedly wants “nothing to do” with her unborn childnow that her marriage has folded. Shepherd reportedly used IVF to conceive a child with her husband Lamar Sally but now is not interested in caring for the baby, who is being carried by a surrogate mother. 5. Doctors told surrogate mother Crystal Kelley, 29,five months into her pregnancy last year that the baby she was carrying had a series of disabilities. When the child’s parents told her they wanted to abort the foetus, she fled from Connecticut across the country to Michigan, where under state law she had legal rights as the child’s mother. … The baby was suspected to have a cleft palate, a brain cyst and serious heart defects. Doctors were unable to locate the child’s spleen or stomach, and gave the baby only a 25 percent chance of living a normal life They offered her $10,000 to have the procedure but Ms Kelley refused, demanding $15,000 instead in what she says was a “weak moment”. The parents refused, and reminded her of her contractual obligation to abort the foetus if it displayed signs of abnormality. If she refused, she would be sued for the fee she had already received, plus all the medical expenses and legal fees.

Like Patheos Catholic on Facebook!