Other Gender?

Post Reply New Topic

Actually, I did a research paper on this in college. My research indicated that the word "homosexual" (or any other word with the same meaning) was introduced into the Bible in the 1800's. The Bible has undergone many revisions and re-translations to make it consistent with the ever-changing languages of its devotees. Translation inevitably involves some cultural bias. This is essentially how the Bible went from saying nothing about homosexuality to mentioning it in a few verses that are now popularly quoted - usually out of context.

These Biblical condemnations of homosexuality were originally intended to discourage incest, rape, and sexual behaviors that were likely to spread disease (keep in mind that in Biblical times, there were no treatments for any STD's and it was not even common to attempt to diagnose them - they could really devastate communities). Rape and sexually transmitted diseases are still highly problematic, but in modern times, we have things like condoms and sex education, so sexually risky behaviors are different than what they were in Biblical times.

I should add that I have a second credential on this subject. My father holds an advanced degree in theology, has read early versions of the Bible in various languages, and agrees with the above statements.

He and I agree that it is important to understand the Bible in context - to think about the intentions behind these statements, to recognize the rich symbolism, and to freely contemplate the diverse philosophical and moral questions raised by this highly complex book. Quoting short passages to support your personal agenda is counter-productive to Christian theology.

Biblically, there is no denial of the existance of transexuals that I can think of at present.
And also, some of Jesus' words may partain to this issue:
His disciples say unto him, "If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry." But he said unto them, "All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given.
For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it" (Matt 19:10-12).

I underlined the parts I think are most notable.

Also, Jesus may be classifying people born with both parts as "eunuchs", which status,
I am quite sure, made such people inelligible to marry back then.
That may seem harsh, but how many other things -- like psychological conditions -- are
we born with which make marriage not a good idea for some of us? Severe AS would be one.

The fact of the matter is, life is not fair. Not everyone is born able to do absolutely everything,
and I accept that even about myself. I was sure I wasn't cut out for marriage, but the Lord
obviously disagreed. But I could easily have not been marriage material. And in such a case,
I was prepared to shrug it off, and accept that it was just not my lot in life.

Interesting. My take on the passages you quoted is that eunuchs (probably meant to include anyone who is not clearly male or female), compared to everyone else, are equal in God's eyes - loved unconditionally and as worthy of the kingdom of Heaven as any other Christian. Whether or not the law of that day allowed them to marry seems like an insignificant matter in comparison to their relationship with God. Christianity does prioritize one's relationship with God and willingness to do His work lovingly above all else.

Eunuchs seem more to refer to the inability (or unwillingness) to reproduce in the ancient text. In more recent time it refers to having genitals removed or of or genderless (theoretically). Not all the types of transex make the person infertile. technically an enlarge clitoris could be considered transex, though generally they probably would consider themselves female.

Interestingly Iran has one of the leading sex change centers.

Some Shi'ite believe that transex is a disease, and with the sex changed they can marry people opposite to their acquired sex.

Are we going to get a robot gender?

I would personally like to have an option because from now I have to ignore picking a gender, seeing as it doesn't give me a choice of a preferred "third-gender".

It seems more appropriate to at least add an other option rather than having a whole bunch of options. Some websites even go as far as to put more than three options in the gender section, but here I'd understand maybe simply an "other" option.

I kinda half and half understand why there's no other option than male or female, but I'd think an accepting community would at least keep the idea in mind.

I hope for this topic to get itself seen into the light once again, even if it's been over a decade.

There have been many discussions about this subject in the intervening 12 years. I think there’s a consensus that it is a good idea, but our admin is largely absent. If it is even possible for it to be changed, then it is not likely to.

Thank you for your reply, The_Walrus.