First non-binary priest in C of E

I’m a wee bit confused. He kept talking about not being straight (which afaik relates to sexual orientation not gender) and yet he doesn’t directly address his orientation at all. Is he claiming that by becoming non-binary and being married in a heterosexual relationship means he is no longer heterosexual? If he is instead coming out as gay then wouldn’t it be fairer to let the wife go?

His sexuality is his business in the end but the way the article posted on page one was written, it was really confusing around the
issue of sexuality. It stopped short of saying what was heavily implied.

"As far as I know, the issue with some 'church' people is the 'act of sodomy' itself, apparently something in the bible probably, along with the shellfish but they somehow don't mind about that."

@WerewolvesAtMidnight Huh? Ok I will admit, being a heathen I've never read the bible, but discovering it covers sodomy and shellfish maybe I should.

I'm confused as to the shellfish. from the small amount remember from primary school assembly I don't remember any particular sermons on the shellfish being the anti Christ or anything so what did I miss whilst I was busy picking my nose rather than absorbing the religious blah blah blahing? (although I can still recite psalm 23).

And yes of course it would be beneficial for women to explore and heal what is making them uncomfortable / unhappy / traumatised delete as appropriate. If it helps them feel happier / more able to cope / fit in better delete as appropriate to define as non binary in the mean time, have at them. Seek counselling too I'd say.

We don't have to allow men into female only spaces. Under the law we are allowed and entitled to have female sex based spaces as it's perfectly fine to exclude trans women under the circumstances written in the Equality Act. We probably need more higher ups to step up and specify them as that under the law where we need them.

I think it probably IS difficult to talk about the concept of 'feeling' feminine and masculine without referring to feminine and masculine 'stereotypes' because it's difficult to describe feelings, it's easier to describe thoughts and actions or behaviours

So tell me why we all suddenly have to allow men who 'feel' feminine or perform sexist stereotypes they think apply to women, into female only spaces etc?

You already said sex isn't gender, which we all know, so why does someone's 'gender identity' or 'gender expression' suddenly entitle them to things meant for the opposite SEX.

This is the crux if this felling based nonsense religion.
Self expression is just personality.
Gender doesn't alter biology.
Men can never be women or female.

If a woman wants to call herself non binary because she doesn't feel comfortable being a woman sometimes, do you not think it would be healthier for her to actually explore WHY she feels uncomfortable rather than hiding behind a nonsense, utterly meaningless label.

I feel bloody uncomfortable that men's fantasy of what a woman is, is being prioritised in law over and above actual women!!

Isn't it more that they believe there isn't JUST the binary genders. Not just TWO genders? There is presumably a spectrum with genders ranging towards and at each end. It could also be referring to spectrum as in what autistic people refer to as a spectrum which is more of a circle rather than a line.

@crunchermuncher you make some really valid points and you could be right, maybe the concept of 'non binary' does go towards shoring up stereotypes. Because it's difficult to talk about feelings without 'resorting' to 'stereotypes' sometimes.

How does one describe a feeling without talking about stereotypical behaviour, actions and thoughts when having that feeling? E.g. being happy. Smiley, sunny, giggly. None of that's a feeling it's a stereotype of 'being happy'.

I think it probably IS difficult to talk about the concept of 'feeling' feminine and masculine without referring to feminine and masculine 'stereotypes' because it's difficult to describe feelings, it's easier to describe thoughts and actions or behaviours.

I find feelings very difficult to describe.

Catholic Church is this way -->>>>

Around ten percent of catholic priests are married and most joined when the ordination of women was introduced. How many will join along with their parishioners if this continues?

😁

And the car thing...Yeah you don't see that much now do you!

Obviously have more important things to spend their money on (and I shall stop there as I think I'm probably very close to being on the naughty step after the amount of deleted posts I've had since this year started. I've been on a two day rage).

What I don’t get is one of the mantras of queer theory is that gender is on a spectrum … there is NO gender binary , and those who think there is a binary are conservative and behind with the times. So if gender by definition is a spectrum then everyone must be non binary, because there is no gender binary to begin with. It’s like if I called myself a non- wizard … this depends on the idea of wizards existing. But if wizards don’t exist then everyone must be a non-wizard! I don’t understand how non binaries don’t see they are imposing a literally non existent identity on the rest of humanity … non existent by their own theory of gender!

Bingo 😂

You're still missing the point.

I don't think someone saying they are non binary is a judgement on me, personally (and if it is, I don't give a toss).

I don't assume that I know what "non binary people" think. But I'm trying to figure out how you would decide that you are non binary,as distinct from just having some masculine and some feminine traits, like everybody does (paraphrasing your post).

I'm asking how it's possible to define non binary without reference to stereotypes.

And I'm arguing that the concept of non binary in itself assumes that most people conform, more or less to stereotypes (otherwise in what way are NB people different?why does it need to be announced? What does it actually mean?).

And that this concept of some people being especially non stereotypical - meaning the rest of society by definition is stereotypical- is helping to shore up, rather than break down stereotypes - which benefits no one.

@postcardpuffin that's really awful and shouldn't be allowed, absolutely appalling. As far as I know, the issue with some 'church' people is the 'act of sodomy' itself, apparently something in the bible probably, along with the shellfish but they somehow don't mind about that. That seems to fit with them 'allowing' gay relationships and partnerships but apparently making them sign these 'celibacy agreements'. I have to admit I was not aware that happened any where other than the Catholic Church 'vow of celibacy'. That's awful.

I would assume though that if a trans woman was 'doing the act' with a man they would face the same restriction as it's the act not the relationship? As far as I know lesbians have never faced the same restrictions as in the days all that was written people didn't believe women could ever do such a thing!

@WerewolvesAtMidnight — that’s not what I meant, though. I meant within the church. Gay clergy in the CofE, even in relationships or civil partnerships, still have to sign a pledge not to be sexually active but to be celibate, AFAIK; and face institutional intrusion into their sexual lives. Not so for trans or “non-binary” clergy.

So if you are a gay male vicar in a committed civil partnership you have to pledge that you aren’t having actual sex with your partner! And the church hierarchy can be quite intrusive about this, apparently. So being gay is theoretically okay, just not actually doing anything gay in practice.

Trans clergy don’t face any such restrictions, AFAIK. What happens if a gay make vicar identifies as a woman? Do they then get to have sex with their partner? Presumably so! And what if a married heterosexual man then identifies as a woman? Still can have sex with the wife even though it’s now a “lesbian relationship”! So not subject to the same “rules” as non-trans gay clergy.

As with everything trans, it’s all a fudge of pretence and inconsistency and sometimes we believe in changing sex and sometimes we don’t, and oh-look-over-there-a-squirrel! But the Anglican church certainly seems to be institutionally far less bothered by transgender ideology and its various mumbo-jumbo spiritualisms, than by the whole idea of homosexual sex. Or female vicars giving birth. Funny that!

Oh that's amazing that he's called "Bingo" because that's what I shouted when I'd read the article 😂

✅✅✅✅✅

I miss the "buy a penis car" midlife crisis of old.

Was there not a Bingo in the Banana Splits. The drummer - a gorilla? Used to love the theme tune!

@crunchermuncher sorry another 'typo' to refer to your point, in my answer where I've said 'all' that should probably read 'most'.

Yes most people are 'binary' i.e not non binary, I suppose, but we aren't walking stereotypes and it shouldn't be inferred that non binary people think we are.

Remember they believe that gender is a feeling, not a stereotype. Difficult to understand I know, and no more easy to believe in than the fact that some people believe in paganism or ghosts, but each to their own it doesn't reflect anything tangible on us, or on what we do. Not really. But I get that you think it does and maybe you're right.

I think Bingo would be a great name for a character in a girl's comic . Midnight feasts with her pals Bunty and Tig.
Alternatively, a jazz 🎺 musician of the 50s. Maybe that's it - he had the wrong vocation?

Typo - Been should be *mean.

I agree some people and possible you find it offensive for someone to declare themselves non binary because they somehow see it as a judgement on themselves. I'm not sure why that is but I'm trying to see your viewpoint. The existence of non binary people doesn't been you have to be a walking stereotype of a woman (or man). E.g. toxic masculinity is not a good thing. Do you think non binary people think we are all walking stereotypes, or do you think there is a concept of masculinity and femininity which we all have a bit of?

Yes I see your point, and empathise. We should have room for both being non binary, AND not being non binary but smashing the gender stereotypes.

And getting the appropriate help for trauma.

I don't know what the answer is with the apparent correlation between being austistic and non binary, I've seen this too.

@Poonicorn what are you talking about? Bi and Gay ARE mutually exclusive.

Referencing the binary - now we're getting somewhere!

Not necessarily assuming everyone else is binary, but as a poster upthread said, assuming that to be outside of the binary is sufficiently unusual that it warrants stating.

And if it's unusual to be non binary, that means it must be usual to be binary, ie most other people are.

And that is the part that is offensive to many people. Declaring yourself non binary is, by definition, a comment on them.

You keep saying it isn't, but you don't explain how it isn't.

My bit about non binary females thinking they are better than women didn't come out how I was thinking. I'm finding it difficult to articulate. I guess with young girls they think they are being radical and different therefore assume they are 'better' than boring, straight women. Yet to me it is far more radical to say I'm female and I'm smashing gender stereotypes (as opposed to reinforcing them).
Also at our school the girls who are non binary are mostly autistic or have had some kind of trauma or could be lesbians. They change their name to Jay, Elliott or Kai and have their hair cut short and wear trousers. Bizarre they think that makes them non binary.

Again your analogy doesn't work. Bi, gay etc are not opposites of each other. Non-binary and binary are mutually exclusive opposites. You cannot have non-binary without assuming a binary!!