New belief among teenagers. What do you think?

[Fervent]

If it is an objective truth that they feel and think such things then it's an objective truth that they feel and think such a things. What objective facts does that change?

None, which is my point. Male and female are an objective binary that we're born into, and feeling or thinking don't change objective facts.

 

[BCP1928]

None, which is my point. Male and female are an objective binary that we're born into, and feeling or thinking don't change objective facts.

Male and female biology are (for the most part) an objective binary that we are born into but human sexuality as a total package is not necessarily binary just because you think God said so.

 

[RDKirk]

The military can say "hair colored in un-natural colors is detrimental to good order and discipline," but that is written to people in the military, not to civilians.

We have to remember that all scripture is written to believers.

And by "we" I mean believers must remember that as well.

 

[Fervent]

Male and female biology are (for the most part) an objective binary that we are born into but human sexuality as a total package is not necessarily binary just because you think God said so.

Sexuality is beside the point, because trans isn't about sexual attraction but about "transitioning" from male to female or female to male. Its about prioiritizing the subjective thoughts and feelings of individuals over distinct objective categories. Which is why they play with language and insist that we now say that doctors 'assign" the sex rather than observe it.

 

[BCP1928]

Sexuality is beside the point, because trans isn't about sexual attraction

Human sexuality is about more than sexual attraction. In cultures where there are four accepted gender categories it is observed that trans people can be either homosexual or straight.

but about "transitioning" from male to female or female to male. Its about prioiritizing the subjective thoughts and feelings of individuals over distinct objective categories. Which is why they play with language and insist that we now say that doctors 'assign" the sex rather than observe it.

Transitioning is about coming out. A person such as I described, a biological male with the cognitive and emotional traits commonly associated with females, has to decide what to do about it with, one hopes, competent medical advice. Some will decline to pick a lane, adopt a unisex style and be "nonbinary" A few will go on to sex reassignment surgery. It depends on the strength of one's personal identity and also, of course, on how rigidly the surrounding society inforces biology-linked gender performance norms.

 

[Fervent]

Human sexuality is about more than sexual attraction. In cultures where there are four accepted gender categories it is observed that trans people can be either homosexual or straight.

This is getting away from the issue at hand.

Transitioning is about coming out. A person such as I described, a biological male with the cognitive and emotional traits commonly associated with females, has to decide what to do about it with, one hopes, competent medical advice. Some will decline to pick a lane, adopt a unisex style and be "nonbinary" A few will go on to sex reassignment surgery. It depends on the strength of one's personal identity and also, of course, on how rigidly the surrounding society inforces biology-linked gender performance norms.

The idea that one's identity can over rule objective reality is precisely why it goes beyond a moral disagreement and into an existential one.

 

[d taylor]

-
​

Nothing new under the sun

 

[BCP1928]

This is getting away from the issue at hand.

The idea that one's identity can over rule objective reality is precisely why it goes beyond a moral disagreement and into an existential one.

What objective reality? People come in all varieties over a broad range, They all know what biology they started out as, even if they have some of the superficial characteristics altered later on. What's not objective reality are arbitrary binary categories into which all humans must be sorted.

 

[Fervent]

What objective reality? People come in all varieties over a broad range, They all know what biology they started out as, even if they have some of the superficial characteristics altered later on. What's not objective reality are arbitrary binary categories into which all humans must be sorted.

Arbitrary? You yourself recognize the reality of this binary when you say "they all know what biology they started out as"....male and female are not "arbitrary" in anyway, but it is quite clear from our conversation you've been infected with modes of thinking that in many ways deny the existence of objective categories in favor of a cultural and social construct paradigm which in effect is a denial of truth and an idolization of human beings by asserting that we are in large part the creators of our own reality.

 

[MehGuy]

Good morning, what do you think about the rather disturbing belief that's currently trending among young people on platforms like Tumblr, TikTok, and Reddit, in which members believe they are animals and record themselves walking on all fours on TikTok?

They call themselves Therians, and they truly believe they are animals, most often dogs, cats, or other popular mammals. Many of them believe they have "species dysphoria" and that their souls are not human souls but animal souls. I even heard of a case of a teenager who wanted to rip off her skin because she felt she was a dog, and dogs have fur.

Am I the only one who finds this a bit terrifying? Not to mention the large number of children and teenagers who follow this trend. Even ten-year-olds are posting about it on TikTok and even creating special masks to sell on platforms like Vinted or Etsy. I've even seen adults walking on all fours in the mall or barking at strangers or howling.

-Marlena Telep.

Hmm.. depends.. if a 5 year old thought he was a tiger I would roll my eyes and laugh it off. If they are saying this at 13 I would be more concerned.

Although I imagine these cases are really rare and even the majority of them might actually be a cry for help and be part of a deeper problem requiring psychological care. Really hurt people sometimes feel solace in losing their identity in something else.

 

[BCP1928]

Arbitrary? You yourself recognize the reality of this binary when you say "they all know what biology they started out as"....male and female are not "arbitrary" in anyway,

In biology, it's more or less binary. But how many of the other traits by which we differentiate between men and women as they function in society are uniquely determined by biology? In any case, they are just categories, all of them--male, female, gay straight, LGBT or whatever. They are descriptive, not prescriptive,

but it is quite clear from our conversation you've been infected with modes of thinking that in many ways deny the existence of objective categories in favor of a cultural and social construct paradigm which in effect is a denial of truth and an idolization of human beings by asserting that we are in large part the creators of our own reality.

What "truth?" Trans people generally are well aware of their biology.

 

[Fervent]

In biology, it's more or less binary. But how many of the other traits by which we differentiate between men and women as they function in society are uniquely determined by biology? In any case, they are just categories, all of them--male, female, gay straight, LGBT or whatever. They are descriptive, not prescriptive,

Simply because there are cultural expressions, generally as a matter of exagerating common secondary distinctions, does not render the entire category merely descriptive. And again, this isn't a moral objection I am raising.

What "truth?" Trans people generally are well aware of their biology.

The truth that what they were born is what they are, no matter how they alter the aesthetics. A man can never become a woman, and it is clear that trans people want their identity to overrule that basic fact.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

None, which is my point. Male and female are an objective binary that we're born into, and feeling or thinking don't change objective facts.

Male and female is a binary we as humans created to classify people scientifically and socially. There have been people to don’t fit into that classification since people walked the earth, it’s only now that we’ve expanded the classifications to more accurately reflect the complexities of gender. Nothing has changed except our understanding of gender and what makes us what we are.

What you’re arguing is tantamount to arguing that Pluto really is a distinct planet because that’s what it was classified as upon its discovery, that’s what you learned, and thus it always shall be until forever. The reality is the criteria that defines what a planet is expanded upon the discovery of other celestial bodies in that neighborhood, and Pluto no longer qualified in the new classification.

Nothing about Pluto changed. We just learned and discovered more. Those discoveries required our classification of what makes a planet to change, which restructured our solar system, which resulted in Pluto being reclassified.

Besides which, non-binary gender has existed in the animal and plant kingdom for a millennia. It’s not like non-binary is a recently invented classification, just that we now know how it applies to us, too, and how it’s not an aberration, but a normal state of being and our classifications have flexed appropriately.

 

[Fervent]

Male and female is a binary we as humans created to classify people scientifically and socially. There have been people to don’t fit into that classification since people walked the earth, it’s only now that we’ve expanded the classifications to more accurately reflect the complexities of gender. Nothing has changed except our understanding of gender and what makes us what we are.

What you’re arguing is tantamount to arguing that Pluto really is a distinct planet because that’s what it was classified as upon its discovery, that’s what you learned, and thus it always shall be until forever. The reality is the criteria that defines what a planet is expanded upon the discovery of other celestial bodies in that neighborhood, and Pluto no longer qualified in the new classification.

Nothing about Pluto changed. We just learned and discovered more. Those discoveries required our classification of what makes a planet to change, which restructured our solar system, which resulted in Pluto being reclassified.

Besides which, non-binary gender has existed in the animal and plant kingdom for a millennia. It’s not like non-binary is a recently invented classification, just that we now know how it applies to us, too, and how it’s not an aberration, but a normal state of being and our classifications have flexed appropriately.

It's not merely about classification, and re-classifying Pluto as a micro planetoid is hardly analogous to claiming that men can become women or women can become men. Your notion that categories are simply abstract taxonomical strucctures reflects a broader philosophical conception that sees such things as epistemic rather than metaphysical, when Christianity in many ways depends on metaphysical distinction among universals.

 

[FireDragon76]

It's not "conservative" to accept that there is one, and only one Creator and that we must conform ourselves to the reality He has created even when we don't find it agreeable.

It’s not “conservative” to affirm that there is one Creator to whom we owe our lives and whose reality we are called to receive—even when it unsettles or challenges us. That’s simply faith.


But you’re making a category error by importing Aristotelian metaphysics into what is, at its heart, a relational and dynamic faith. Biblical faith, especially as revealed in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, is not built on static philosophical categories. It is rooted in covenant, in story, in lived relationship with the living God.


Medieval thinkers baptized Aristotle, but that system is not the measure of truth. Christ is. And Christ shows us that truth is incarnational, not merely conceptual. Truth is not grasped by abstract logic alone, but encountered, embodied, and lived. It transfigures human experience. Figures like Aquinas didn't seriously grapple with some of the deeper, patristic interpretations of Jesus parables, such as the Parable of the Mustard seed or the Parable of the Leaven, which speak not of building a status quo on fixed, essentialized certainties, but transformation and "New Creation".

It's not the "unconventional behavior" but the implicit philosophical commitments involved, and it doesn't undermine my belief simply stands as a cultural assault on necessary elements of theistic belief in placing human beings as defining truth.

Human beings don’t define truth. But we encounter it personally, in the face of Christ and in the lives of others. That’s not relativism. That’s the mystery of the Incarnation.

 

[Fervent]

But you’re making a category error by importing Aristotelian metaphysics into what is, at its heart, a relational and dynamic faith. Biblical faith, especially as revealed in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, is not built on static philosophical categories. It is rooted in covenant, in story, in lived relationship with the living God.

I'm not adopting a particular metaphysical understanding per se, simply rejecting the Western embrace of nominalism and anti-realist notions towards universals. An affirmation of which is in part necessary if we are to affirm that the death and resurrection of a Jewish man in the 1st century continues to have a real impact today and don't simply commit ourselves to the moral influence theory of atonement.

Insofar as I have a metaphysical position, it is informational realism with a Trinitarian ontology.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

It's not merely about classification, and re-classifying Pluto as a micro planetoid is hardly analogous to claiming that men can become women or women can become men. Your notion that categories are simply abstract taxonomical strucctures reflects a broader philosophical conception that sees such things as epistemic rather than metaphysical, when Christianity in many ways depends on metaphysical distinction among universals.

That’s a word salad of nonsense where you oversimplify gender dysmorphia via tropes and stereotypes, not facts. The fact is that it is a reclassification based off of further learning on something that has always existed but not captured effectively because of the limited scope of the classifications. Same as Pluto’s reclassification.

If you want to believe these classifications aren’t valid because they’re not metaphysical enough for you, whatever, but it doesn’t change the science. Facts are facts, but superstition and the belief in metaphysical Christianity does not overrule designations of science.

 

[Fervent]

That’s a word salad of nonsense where you oversimplify gender dysmorphia via tropes and stereotypes, not facts. The fact is that it is a reclassification based off of further learning on something that has always existed but not captured effectively because of the limited scope of the classifications.

If you want to believe these classifications aren’t valid because they’re not metaphysical enough for you, whatever, but it doesn’t change the science.

You accuse me of word salad, and then dish out that garbage?

 

[FireDragon76]

I'm not adopting a particular metaphysical understanding per se, simply rejecting the Western embrace of nominalism and anti-realist notions towards universals. An affirmation of which is in part necessary if we are to affirm that the death and resurrection of a Jewish man in the 1st century continues to have a real impact today and don't simply commit ourselves to the moral influence theory of atonement.

I do agree, the real, living impact of Christ’s death and resurrection can’t just be some abstract moral example. That’s really what faith is about.


But at the same time, trying to box that mystery into any one philosophical system misses something vital. The early Church wrestled with this too — Christ’s incarnation and resurrection go beyond our human ideas and invite us into a real, living encounter, not just a concept.


So sure, philosophy can help us put words to it, but in the end, this is a relational, embodied mystery we’re called to live into, with humility and openness.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

You accuse me of word salad, and then dish out that garbage?

I notice that you’ve yet to refute anything I’ve said, though… Get mad, lash out, and yell “NUH UH!!!” you’ve done… But, again, that and your reliance on metaphysical beliefs don’t change the reality or the facts.

I tend to think this response is proof positive that you want to believe what you want to believe, despite not being able to articulate why, and that’s that.