Friday, November 7, 2014


Regina lay in bed on her back with her feet pressed against the wall. Every so often she would put enough pressure against the wall that her back would arch upward. With her body strained she would press on her stomach to see if she could feel anything. She knew this wasn’t a scientific process, but she simply couldn’t stand the waiting.

Two weeks before, after a terrible day at work where her boss reprimanded her twice for making the coffee too strong (which it wasn’t even), she whispered something into her lover’s ear. He said nothing, but she slowly slipped off his condom and pulled him closer. In that moment, she knew she was becoming a better, stronger woman. She smiled when she felt him relieve himself inside of her.

Regina was quite nervous about the whole process. She had always been a bit of a prude. She had only slept with three men and had enjoyed it (as much as she could) with only one, her current lover, Jesse. She rarely drank, and she’d only been drunk twice. She absolutely hated both experiences and found herself uncontrollably irritated whenever someone would get a bit too loud, a bit too fun at a bar.

Friday, October 31, 2014

Glitter Bomb

The Pride Parade started off with a bang. Billy, a still-fit 33-year old journalist was throwing glitter bombs—small firework devices that erupted into harmless glittery explosions—from a float in the parade. And even though it sounds a little bit silly, glitter bomb thrower was actually a highly coveted position. Attendees loved them and would often refer to them as “explosively fabulous.” As sort of an inside joke, a small minority called them “fabulously explosive.” And if we’re going to be completely honest, the bombs really were beautiful. It wasn’t just a gay thing. When Billy wanted to get the crowd going, he would throw multiple bombs at once, a loud pop followed by a sparkling shower of glitter falling from above. It was light and free, the whole thing. Oh, the joy that follows freedom. Billy was a minor celebrity in town and had found some success reporting on gay issues for the city’s newspaper. He was known nationally for his interviews, which were crude but often surprisingly poignant. His focus was the gay rights movement, but he also spent a great deal of time interviewing pornographers and other gay icons. It was this minor fame that landed him the glitter bomb thrower gig.

Friday, April 25, 2014


I want to write a little about transgenderism. Fun Friday, I know, right? I don't think this will be a long post. I'm not sure. I think transgenderism is sort of a tricky issue in some ways, and I don't mean to address all the issues that stem from transgenderism here. Specifically, I have no intention of addressing the moral ramifications of transgenderism. I just want to address the claim that a transgender person might make when he says "I feel like a woman" or more specifically "I have a female brain; I am a woman."

There is a lot of criticism of people who focus on genitalia in defining sex or gender. They're often criticized for being reductionists who are ignoring the whole rest of what makes a person what a person is. These people instead focus a great deal of attention on the brain and cite studies showing that transgender brains are different, that a transgender man has the brain of a female, etc. It's usually put like this: if a person has a penis but has a brain identical to a female brain, why do we favor the penis in deciding that the person is male? Why favor one over the other?

There's something that has always bugged me about this. And I don't want to even get into Thomistic metaphysics (directly) or anything like that. It's the premise of the question. It's question-begging. It's assuming exactly what it's trying to prove and disprove at the same time. What I mean, I think, is obvious. Specifically, what is a "female brain"? The concept cannot make sense without a standard outside of the brain itself. Otherwise, how could you tell a male brain from a female one? Why not call a male brain female and vice versa? Why call one female and one male at all?

When a man says he has a female brain, all he is really saying is that he has a brain similar to someone who has a vagina. In which case, he's defining sex through genital makeup, exactly what he was trying to disprovev as valid. I can't think of what else the statement could possibly mean. There are no other characteristics outside of genitalia that are inherently female or male, that are tied directly to sex---which is really just an extension of sexual reproduction. If reproduction weren't done how it's done, there probably wouldn't be sexes in any relevant sense. 

I think this is a complex issue in different ways, but this has always bothered me. Because people are so convinced by it. "See, he has a female brain!" and everyone has to pause and reevaluate everything. I see it all over the place, even in Catholic circles. And I don't even deny it. It's probably true that transgender people have brains more similar to people of the opposite sex! In fact, I'm almost certain that it's true that their brains are different. But I can only accept the claim that a transgender man has a female brain if I first recognize that a female is a human being with a vagina and a female brain is the brain a person with a vagina usually has. This is why going from "He has a female brain" to "He is a female" should clearly be problematic for people. And it never seems to be.

Sunday, December 8, 2013

Natural Law, Natural Goodness, and Evolution

A fun fact(?) that some people like to point out is that that Thomas Aquinas envisioned the concept of "evolution" long ago. From the Summa Theologica:
Objection 3: Further, nothing is said to be complete to which many things are added, unless they are merely superfluous, for a thing is called perfect to which nothing is wanting that it ought to possess. But many things were made after the seventh day, as the production of many individual beings, and even of certain new species that are frequently appearing, especially in the case of animals generated from putrefaction. Also, God creates daily new souls. Again, the work of the Incarnation was a new work, of which it is said (Jer. 31:22): "The Lord hath created a new thing upon the earth." Miracles also are new works, of which it is said (Eccles. 36:6): "Renew thy signs, and work new miracles." Moreover, all things will be made new when the Saints are glorified, according to Apoc. 21:5: "And He that sat on the throne said: Behold I make all things new." Therefore the completion of the Divine works ought not to be attributed to the seventh day.
Reply to Objection 3: Nothing entirely new was afterwards made by God, but all things subsequently made had in a sense been made before in the work of the six days. Some things, indeed, had a previous experience materially, as the rib from the side of Adam out of which God formed Eve; whilst others existed not only in matter but also in their causes, as those individual creatures that are now generated existed in the first of their kind. Species, also, that are new, if any such appear, existed beforehand in various active powers; so that animals, and perhaps even new species of animals, are produced by putrefaction by the power which the stars and elements received at the beginning. Again, animals of new kinds arise occasionally from the connection of individuals belonging to different species, as the mule is the offspring of an ass and a mare; but even these existed previously in their causes, in the works of the six days. Some also existed beforehand by way of similitude, as the souls now created. And the work of the Incarnation itself was thus foreshadowed, for as we read (Phil. 2:7), The Son of God "was made in the likeness of men." And again, the glory that is spiritual was anticipated in the angels by way of similitude; and that of the body in the heaven, especially the empyrean. Hence it is written (Eccles. 1:10), "Nothing under the sun is new, for it hath already gone before, in the ages that were before us." (Emphasis mine).

Monday, November 18, 2013

Only Excellence

I have recently discovered Whit Stillman movies. I know, I know, what kind of gay Catholic doesn't know about Whit Stillman? Anyway, I have come to the conclusion that Metropolitan is a masterpiece. It may be one of the best movies of the modern age. I've watched it almost a dozen times now. It's great. Maybe I will write about it soon. You have to have a certain type of temperament to like it, I think. Namely, you can't be a liberal, but I recommend it to everyone. It's on Netflix, check it out. But this scene, so fantastic:

Monday, November 4, 2013

Hi Again, I Passed the Bar?!

Hi guys,

A sincere apology for my absence. My life over the past few months, which still isn't in order, has been all over the place. I have not lived in a single place for any significant period of time since May. From studying to the bar to taking the bar to moving...twice, I've just not been able to really write at all. I'm actually at my new office right now, sitting on a couch, writing this. I did get a pretty neat new laptop though, so it's not so bad.

Tuesday, August 27, 2013

Prudishness and Chastity

I apologize for such sparse posting. I've been busy transitioning into the whole being an adult thing. And honestly, I've been a little depressed. A lot of that, I imagine, has to do with the transitioning. (Incidentally, every time I hear the word "transitioning," I think of some transgender person saying something like, "I'm transitioning right now" or something. As if it's some sort of separate state of being.) It's weird how one always gets depressed during life changes. Even good life changes. There's always something sad about changing.