Transgender: Confusion or controversy?

Update: September 24, 2015

Bruce Jenner at 2012 Olympics

(This post is not a mean post, yet it should help both sides in understanding)

According to Wikipedia, Transgender is defined as: People who experience a mismatch between their gender identity or gender expression and their assigned sex.  Since Bruce Jenner has come out as Caitlyn Jenner, there are more and more transgender individuals that have openly submerged to the top of some controversy.

Transgender people are very recognizable (as are crossdressers) unlike some people who consider themselves to be ‘gay’.  How would you accept a transgender person coming into a gender-specific sauna, shower room or public restroom that you were occupying, and there were no individual stalls?

Caitlyn Jenner

Turmoil is now brewing over transgender persons using gender-specific restrooms and locker rooms, yet not every facility is financially or structurally able to construct a separate unisex area.  Some individuals don’t want to be forced to use a particular area, but isn’t that what makes us civilized?

In February of this year, a national news agency reported that a Michigan woman lost her gym membership over the ‘inappropriate’ manner in which she complained about a transgender woman in the locker room.  She wanted to know why there was a man in the women's locker room.  To her, he looked like a man with male parts, and that's what stopped her.  She was uncomfortable with him, as a male, in her locker room and restroom.  The facility has committed to creating a non-intimidating, welcoming environment for their members.  Their gender identity nondiscrimination policy states that members and guests may use all gym facilities based on their sincere self-reported gender identity.

Lila Perry

Around September 2015 another news source reported a dispute erupted after a transgender student (a male who identifies themselves as female) began using female facilities at Hillsboro High School in Missouri.  High school senior Lila Perry said that she wanted to fit in with the rest of the girls, so she started using the girls’ bathroom and locker room.  Parents said their daughters were uncomfortable, because even though Perry wears dresses and a wig, she is still physically a male.  After a school protest Lila decided that she didn’t want to use the ‘gender neutral bathroom’ that is an option at the school.

Once an individual completes the transition of change, how would a potential straight partner react once an intimate exchange is established?  Would they flip-out or understand the deceit that the transgendered has brought to the relationship?  A woman can identify another woman just as a man can recognize another man, despite cosmetic implications.

God does not make a mistake.  When He created individuals, He was not confused.  He made them either male or female.  As taught in many Catholic Schools, from the Baltimore Catechism, the first two questions and answers are as follows: Who made us?  God made us.  Who is God?  God is the Supreme Being who made all things.  If God is the Creator, than He chose what gender He placed in each individual.

This is not a ‘bashing’ post, nonetheless, since the subject keeps coming up in the news and on TV shows; it needs to be addressed.  We are to love individuals despite whether they may have decided to change their original nature (male/female), yet we do not have to love the sin-nature which they have chosen.

And one more thing: To Whom It May Concern, Christians are taking back “The Rainbow” because it’s God’s promise made to mankind who believe on His Word.

Also to read similar posts – Get the Book:

“Where Did That Come From?” by Ms. "V" (Victoria Thomas Poller)

NEW!  Top 5 Google Areas to Ms. "V"s Website for September 8 – September 24, 2015 are:

   • Memphis, Tennessee

   • Lakeside, Florida

   • New York, New York

   • Tampa, Florida

   • Krasnoyarsk Krai, Russia

Ms. “V” WELCOMES ALL the new countries to her site.   ***To be notified of biweekly highlights, click the “Join This Site” button above***

Public Assistance - To Increase or Not

This was a question posed from my friend Beverly, on Face Book.  It proved to be a very interesting discussion.

QUESTION Re: Entitlement cuts: “Would you “support” or “protest” a law that said any family currently receiving government assistance would be Denied an Increase in assistance if they had more children while receiving assistance???”    

Jimmy: Protest

Beverley: Why jimmy?

Marina: You can't keep helping people who not only don't help themselves but make things worse for them. Making babies takes effort. You don't have to plan for it, but you have to put out the effort to create it.

Kevin: Support

Victoria Thomas Poller: If I were still paying taxes, are you asking me if I would give a woman a raise for having more children out of wedlock?

Jimmy: I am 60 percent disabled from Iraq and Afghanistan.  I still work a full time job and the $469 a month I get for food stamps to feed a family of 5 my VA disability pays my rent AND MY job pays the bill combine with my stamps i barely have enough at the end of the mouth and we don’t buy national brand stuff on junk food just the needed stuff and if i have a another child then i feel i should receive some more assistance.

Kennard: I support helping people but if they are trying to help themselves then they don't deserve additional assistance. When the Great Society programs were developed they were intended to be temporary whereas Americans have come to see them as a permanent benefit. I could support some type of restriction.

Kennard: My mom got assistance but she was like Jimmy, she worked.

Beverley: It could be a married couple Ms. V receiving a housing allowance & food stamps

Jimmy: and Mrs. Marina, I can understand that there are those that take advantage of the system and yes if you abuse the system then boo on you but if you are like most Americans that’s struggling and need the extra help and your trimming to do better then why not help them

Victoria Thomas Poller: If I couldn't afford to give my children that I already have a good life, why would I bring more children into this world. I was once a single Mom and I worked, went to school and received "public assistance for a year. I sent the department of public assistance a note to thank them and I never looked back. Welfare (as it was once called) is not a "source" but it is an avenue while other means are obtained.

Shaun: No more kids I'm sorry!

Rhonda: I would protest. The problem is not that people aren't working who receive assistance. The vast majority of the poor do work. The problem is that companies don't pay a living wage. If they did, there would be fewer people on govt assistance. Not increasing assistance is only going to hurt the children. You are just increasing the number of children in poverty. Besides, it is not a realistic solution. If it were then we would seriously need to talk about funding for birth control measures for families.

Jimmy: And you’re right Ms. “V”

Rhonda: Also, it is a myth that most people stay on assistance for years. The reality is that people cycle on and off. When they make enough money to get off, they do.

Jimmy: Now that’s a good thought also Ms. Rhonda.  Our min wage is not enough to support a family of 4 with the basics needed for living. And by basics I mean food, shelter, water

Victoria Thomas Poller: Well BeeBee, you've seem to have started something. Let me know when you think the discussion is over and I may write a column on the subject.

Terry: Support. Unless, legitimately against abortion. However, from a monetary standpoint having a baby while on PA is irresponsible. Strap up or no backup.

Rick: Support.

Jennifer: Yes, I work very hard for my money and did not get a raise for giving birth to any of my children simply because I got pregnant. why should they?

Felicia: Support!!

Mario: I'd support such a law. People have to proactively create kids they don't just happen. It's irresponsible to increase the financial burden on an already cash strapped government when it's completely avoidable. In financially hard times you have to be prudent.

Vicquita: I would not support it. The Bible says if you don't work you don't eat. (2 Thessalonians 3:10) Of course there are provisions for those who need assistance because being a Christian means being charitable. However we are talking about those who are ALREADY being helped. No matter what the family circumstance if you can't take care of the children you have you should not have more. And for those babies that are not planned. As my grandmother would say there is always room for one more. Make due...

Beverley: Playing devil's advocate... If assistance were not increased, I could see increase in abortion rates, child abuse & neglect, domestic abuse due to stress, unhealthy births, etc... So which actually costs more: increasing assistance or the possible consequences for not increasing assistance?

Victoria Thomas Poller: Aren't all those things that you mentioned already happening to some of the children on the system? Social workers are already over case loaded.

Beverley: True Ms. V. But I think if such a law were passed, we could see a dramatic increase

Mario: I liken that to rewarding bad behavior though. We are dealing with adults. Not kids. They should know better. To me that like assuming buying kids unlimited ice cream will deter bad behavior indefinitely. You can do it but at some point giving them everything they want will hurt. Either their tummies or your wallet from dentist visits.

You could give them extra money. But there will be consequences.

Beverley: Lol Jennifer... That's a great analogy - ha!

Beverley: Mario -Where's the compassion for the children? Lolol ;p

Victoria Thomas Poller: Let's just pray that things won't get any worst and that people depend on God to help them and not the system. I'm living proof that following the 'source' is the way to go. He is Jehovah Jirrah and He doesn't have a 'magic wand'. Just saying.

Mario: Okay Bev how about this. If you have more kids while on assistance. The Government takes the child and puts them in the home of someone that's pulling their weight responsibly. You get your child when you start doing likewise. That way the child is taken care of.  I honestly think government needs to create some form of disincentive for people that are on assistance from having more kids. They should do it for people that aren't in a position to take care of kids period. That's my extreme view though.

Victoria Thomas Poller: Mario, I think that's called "Foster Care" or "Adoption" if you desire to make a permanent difference in that child's life.

Marina: While I do believe that there are people on the system who have good intentions and are legitimately needing it to gets their head above water, there can be a question as to how much "help" is actually helping. I live in California where there more people on welfare here than in any other state, 30% of the welfare population and growing. We also offer the highest cash pay-out system over non-financial assistance. I've seen people selling their ebt cards for a cash payout on craigslist. So I see a lot of abuse and those people who are takers will keep on taking. (As OBD said on MTV when he drove over to the welfare dept in a limo: "if the govt is going to give me money, I'm gonna take it." - paraphrased). I have to constantly remind myself that people that abuse the system are really the ones taking from the ones that truly need it and they are the ones that cause the bad judgments on those that are really trying. There's also that part of me that believes that a child who watches their parents struggling to survive by doing the best they can will always be better off than one that expects things to get handed to them when things get tough. Although I concede that I would never want to see a child go hungry. I do have a lot of faith in the will of the people to make success happen even though we may have to go through the misery of failure after failure to achieve it.

Meunda: Protest, that's my darn taxes paying for the bullcrap.

              ???What Say You???          Make your comments below!!!

To read more – go to Ms. “V” Examiner (Blue Button) Page.

NEW!  Top 5 Google Areas to Ms. "V"s Website for January 6 – January 19, 2013 are:

• ·         Florida
•           California
• ·         Illinois
• ·         Maryland
• ·         Australia

Ms. “V” WELCOMES ALL the new cities and countries to her site.

°°°

***We need your NAME and "Sign-in Address" in order to post your COMMENTS***

If you sign in as “Anonymous”, your comment will NOT be posted.