I don't have the time (or skills) to Photoshop a condom into his hand. Just imagine it.
And I love it.
While in Seattle, I didn’t have a lot of time to keep up with the news, but I did catch something on airport-CNN about Pope Benedict saying that condoms were okay for male prostitutes to prevent HIV transmission. The assumption was that female sex workers were shit outta luck, since they needed to remain open to the possibility of Life. …Since we all know that sex workers and those who employ their services are always thinking about makin’ babies.
But wait! Further clarification from the press seems to show that Benedict is okay–or, at least less un-okay–with female prostitutes using protection, too, provided it’s for disease prevention. The issue was one of translation and the gendering of the noun “prostitute” in German (the language of the Pope’s newest book, a collection of his interviews) and Italian (the language through which the story was disseminated).
From the story:
he Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, told reporters Tuesday that he asked the pope whether he intended his comments to only apply to male prostitutes. Benedict replied that it really didn’t matter, that the important thing was the person in question took into consideration the life of the other, Lombardi said.
“I personally asked the pope if there was a serious, important problem in the choice of the masculine over the feminine,” Lombardi said. “He told me no. The problem is this … It’s the first step of taking responsibility, of taking into consideration the risk of the life of another with whom you have a relationship.”“This is if you’re a woman, a man, or a transsexual. We’re at the same point. The point is it’s a first step of taking responsibility, of avoiding passing a grave risk onto another,” Lombardi said.
Holy crap, y’all, quite apart from the safer-sex issue, the Vatican just recognized the existence of trans people, without judgment or slurs! Have I been smoking something, or is this really happening?
While I’d love for Benny to take off his fancy shoes and say “just kidding, everyone, let’s work on feeding the hungry and making sure that we have a just society,” I’ll take it. I am slightly concerned that talking about “condoms are okay-er than infecting your partner” will serve to smear prophylactics as only for illicit sex, which might not protect women whose male partners are already infected, but it’s a step in the right direction. I think…
I’m not sure why Catholics who are also sex workers (already a no-no for Papa Ratzi) would think “oh, but I can’t use a rubber! What Would Jesus Say?”, but I’ll take it. And I won’t give it back. Shine on, you crazy diamond.
Mind you, I’m still super-skeptical of this Pope and the general edicts of Catholicism when it comes to contraception and sex…but this sort of seems like some kind of very mild progress toward applying common sense. Maybe.
I am also bemused and slightly delighted that the idea of male and trans sex workers is so forefront in Benedict’s mind!
The actual argument is the same as earlier statements made by the Vatican that it might be permissible for a married couple to use condoms if they are sero-diverse and the purpose of the condoms is to prevent disease, not pregnancy (horrors!). I think it is kind of funny and strange and yes, a little hopeful, that the Pope is delving into the relative morality of different sinful acts. Classifying all sexual sin as equally “disordered” is part of what led to the abuse crisis, in my opinion — the leadership did not seem to draw a distinction between different ways of breaking vows, so that consensual sex with adults (sinful for a priest) was of an equal weight with child abuse — both sins of sexual order. It was like the relative harm to the other person never came into it. The fact that he is expressing a more nuanced view can only be healthy, and I think as you point out PhD that the fact of his mentioning diverse genders and sex workers as moral agents is the most radical (for the vatican) part of what he is saying.
Baby, baby, baby steps!
Um, thinking further on Lombardi’s comment “men, women, or transsexuals”…seems like maybe he thinks trans people are neither male/man nor female/woman? Ugh. Not so good.
There’s a detail about timing that doesn’t make 100% sense to me. The recently published book is a collection of interviews. So when was the interview that includes the condoms question?
I wonder because I want to know whether this statement is a reaction to criticism of his policies towards Africa. Just how much does the Vatican react towards outside criticism? If the answer is only a little, that’s still a big change.
We’re all sex workers now, kids! (Well, at least Catholics are.)
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Vyckie D. Garrison, Pursuit of Harpyness. Pursuit of Harpyness said: Latest: The Pope is Losing His Damn Mind http://bit.ly/gjDVq8 [...]
What PhDork said about the trans comment. The inclusion of “transsexuals” in an exclusive-or list with “women” and “men” is definitely a slur.