someone who chooses to become a transgendered person must undergo many intense psychiatric evaluations before being allowed to participate in the hormone treatment that IRREVERSIBLY changes them to their preferred gender. it is not a simple matter of waking up one day, deciding life would be easier as the other gender, and just putting on the uniform of the opposite sex. just as not all transgendered undergo the reassignment surgery for various reasons, but still feel as though they are living their lives as they were meant to be after the hormones start working. but if you actually took the time to understand how the world works, you would have probably known this already and you would not have wasted your time ranting about something that icks you out.
is the problem that you're secretly attracted to Caitlyn Jenner and this is how you deal with that taboo? it wouldn't be the first (nor last) time a republican was found to be attracted to someone whose existence they pretend to be morally opposed to. thank goodness we still have a nation of laws which are not based on the sect of religious studies that produced your twisted identity....
And you never, ever disappoint.
The attraction and desire to do wrong is a fundamental premise of Christian belief, as is the universality of succumbing to the same. Every single human being commits sin. This does not make them ineligible to speak on the topic, or to condemn such action. Nor does it make them hypocrites when they succumb. Hypocrisy would be asserting that such behavior renders another person less than the speaker for getting caught doing what the speaker does in secret, or it would be proclaiming different standards for different groups, such as Al Sharpton or the like demanding racial privileges for their group, while condemn the perception of similar privileges for another group.
If only saints could speak against sin, there would be no one who could. "He who is without sin cast the first stone" does not exclude the possibility of stone casting, nor did Jesus refrain from correcting the sinner He defended with that statement. My own sins might preclude me from prescribing punishment, so I will and have not. Anywhere in this post. It's strange how you seem to think that one Republican's sin means no Republicans can speak against sin, but you make no move to shut down Weight Watchers or Alcoholics Anonymous, where leadership and counseling and the condemning of self-indulgence is done exclusively by those who have committed those sins themselves.
As to the specifics of your post, once again, you presume a great deal about other people, seemingly based on the notion that absolutely no one could come to a different conclusion from the same set of data. Also, you seem to think that the same Hollywood medical establishment that served Michael Jackson so well, can be taken for granted to be behaving in a professionally responsible manner when they treat Bruce Jenner. How many "transgendered" aspirants accept the diagnosis of a doctor who tells them "In my professional opinion, you are the exact right gender and sex and whatever bullshit terminology people invent to twist reality to their liking. Mutilating yourself will only deepen your psychological issues. Instead I recommend we deal with correcting those issues so you can live a normal life, and save money on clothing."? I'll bet the number is similar to the numbers of woman who accept a plastic surgeon's diagnosis that breast implants would be a bad idea, that they would distort her figure, cause back problems, and maybe she should learn to be happy with a B cup. Or that their noses look fine, or that a couple of wrinkles are to be expected at age 58.
Amazing how you can assert that this stuff is necessary and always goes on, but making sure a woman looks at a sonogram of her fetus before killing it is "a war on women." IMO, calling Bruce Jenner and Larry Waichowski women seems a more offensive declaration of war than affirming the special quality that elevates women beyond smaller, weaker and less rational men.
wow, talk about false equivalency and presumption.... forcing medically unnecessary procedures on women without their consent is the same as being icky about someone who chooses to undergo the psychological and physical change to a gender they feel is the correct one for their personality? i also never said it's necessary for someone to become transgendered, but you keep knocking down those straw men....
to the actual SCIENCE that you rail against, it takes upwards of a full year or more of both psychological exams and hormone treatments before a person is able to transition. as i said, it is not a matter of one day waking up and deciding to be something else, it's a matter of literal life-changing decisions that must be weighed heavily against other considerations before a doctor signs off on treatment to transition. but you would know this if you even cared one whit about the situation you're ranting against.
again, why does Jenner changing genders to become Caitlyn bother you so much that you feel the need to rail against it on a random, isolated, right-wing forum dedicated to SF/Fantasy literature in the internet's backwaters? i'm impressed that some of your cohorts have called you out on your rank misanthropy -- or is it misogyny again? i can never keep track. regardless, Caitlyn Jenner is now and will forever be transgendered female whether you like it or not. i think you should heed the advice of the person who suggested you spend some time with transgendered people. i realize compassion is not your strong suit by a country mile, but i still hold out hope that one day you too may know the true meaning of "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself".
"That's the trouble with political jokes in this country... they get elected!" -- Dave Lippman