Italian media has said that the pope used a highly derogatory slur against LGBTQ+ people at a bishops conference. The remark may sour attempts by the pope to make the church more welcoming.
Pope Francis allegedly used a highly offensive term to refer to LGBTQ+ people during a closed-door meeting with Italian bishops, Italian media reported on Tuesday.
The major Italian daily newspapers La Repubblica and Corriere della Sera both cited anonymous sources as saying that the pope had made the remark while reiterating his position against gay people becoming priests.
The 87-year-old pontiff was reported as saying that the Catholic seminaries were already too full of “frociaggine” — a highly derogatory term in Italian.
It’s interesting that we have documented cases of homosexuality in thousands of different species, and yet not a single other species that practices Catholicism.
Being gay is more natural than being Catholic.
There’s this saying “a fish is caught through its mouth,” and this is an illustration of what it means. This pope might present this ‘cool’, ‘modern’ image to the public, but his words spoken in private amongst his peers reveals his real stance about these things.
Edit: proofreading.
Former Catholic, now atheist. I’m glad the Pope is making some progressive steps in the Catholic Church including the LGTBQ+ community.
I hope this was a misstep, and the case of a 90-year old man from a different country using language that he was not aware is a slur. I really really hope that, or else all that good will was for nothing.
Don’t hold out hope
I’m so glad the pedophile ring is invluding the lgtbq+ community. They are so nice and progressive. If i were gay, the first thing i’d wish for is that the pedos like me.
I “meet” a gay religious Catholic once online and my brain is still recovering from it.
Why? Why? It makes no sense.
Get raised catholic, turn out gay. What’s to make sense of? Lots of religious followers cherry pick the bits of text they like and disregard the rest, why should gays be any more rational?
I can’t think of a single institution that has done as much damage to the LGBT as the RCC.
maybe so from a first world perspective, not that they’ve been idle in developing nations. but plenty of governments don’t need the pope’s say so to criminalise non-heterosexuality
https://www.humandignitytrust.org/lgbt-the-law/map-of-criminalisation/
I mean single institution. They have been around for almost 20 centuries.
But if you truly believe in the religion, what does that change?
Like I can absolutely abhor some of the things people have done in the name of medicine and often are still doing, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to stop going to doctors when I’m sick. Because I fundamentally believe in medical science and that I’m more likely to die without them. If you are raised catholic, there’s a good chance you fundamentally believe your eternal life is better if you continue to follow the religion. Sure, I probably have more proof, but their belief is just as strong.
When seemingly everyone in your life is telling you lies about “oh we just hate the sin, not the sinner”, it’s really hard to see it for what it is That and some very specific parts of Catholicism and Christianity in general are very comforting. Also, if you were born into it, breaking away could mean losing everyone close to you or having to put up with people trying to convert you back
Look, apologist for people who justify raping small children, then slur was intentional, and you’re being eye-rolling naive in the most generous reading of your comment
The world is a much better place if you don’t whip yourself into a frenzy at every opportunity.
Removed by mod
Italian isn’t his first language, so it’s possible, but I’m not giving him the benefit of the doubt.
All things considered, I am. He’s old, Italian isn’t his first language, and he has a history of progressive changes in favor of the lgbtq+ community. I’m more inclined to believe it was a mistake than to think it was intentional or malicious. Especially given how quickly an apology has been issued.
the pope had made the remark while reiterating his position against gay people becoming priests.
It doesn’t matter what word he used, he was using it in an anti LGBT sentiment.
The 87-year-old pontiff was reported as saying that the Catholic seminaries were already too full of … gay men.
Here, I removed the slur. This isn’t any better. Italian fluency wasn’t the problem and didn’t change his argument.
It doesn’t matter what word he used, he was using it in an anti LGBT sentiment.
i think it does matter wrt what he actually said or intended to say. whether he’s being homophobic in his position regard gay clergy isn’t a matter of debate: he is.
the issue is that he claims not to have intended to use an offensive term, and apologizes for the offense cause by the term. That i’m willing to believe. i’m not debating his gay clergy policy, which i obviously agree is bigoted.
You’re right, it’s very likely he wasn’t intending to use a slur. But it seems to me like a lot of the reporting is “he didn’t mean to disrespect people!” when that’s not the case. The pope’s intentions were absolutely to disrespect people, just by his actions, and not by that specific word. the specific phrasing he used to do so doesn’t really matter.
That specific word in Italian has multiple meanings, one of which being something like “excessive/useless detail or addition, especially when done for the cool factor only” and another being “gayness”.
Without the full context of the sentence, it’s very hard to say what he meant or what he was saying.
Of course the word is still originating from the slur and shouldn’t be used by the pope, but it’s technically possible that wasn’t even used in relation to any minority (just as much as the opposite)
Unless I missed some extra info or source that has the full context, it’s hard to say
Intentional? Or old man being old?
The dude is ancient; half his vocabulary as a child is probably a slur by this point.
This is something more people need to remember.
The level of casual racism and sexism in the past is staggering when looked at from today, but was no big deal at the time.
“Mr. Mom” a movie about the insane idea of having a man doing childcare, came out in 1983.
“Fu Manchu” with Peter Sellers doing yellowface came out in 1980.
For context the gap between “Mr. Mom” and The Dark Knight is 25 years. The gap between The Mummy and today is 25 years.
Yeah I don’t know if you could make Three Men And A Baby today because the premise “lol men doing childcare, amirite? This is gonna be gold” just isn’t funny anymore. Millennial men are much more active and engaged fathers than previous generations.
It might be nicely subversive to make a modern reboot of Three Men And A Baby that’s just Clerks but one of them has his son in a thing on his chest. Three 30 year old men competently care for an infant without incident while sharing pithy if relatable dialog.
People always say that satire is dead, but they don’t realize that it took subversive with it.
Go read the Ian Fleming novels about James Bond. Or don’t. By page count I think about 1/3 of the books are just his bigoted rants
Let me put it this way.
For a long time I refused to watch ‘Gone With The Wind’ because it was a ode to the Old South.
Finally it came on a free cable station and I had no reason not to watch it.
It’s insanely racist, but it’s a good damn movie.
Also, you might want to look up “The Wind Done Gone.” It’s a reimagining of the action from the point of view of Scarlette’s slave sister. One of the things she points out is that Mammy had delivered all the slave babies on the plantation and certainly could have helped if she’d wanted to.
insanely racist, but it’s a good damn movie.
The most succinct review of Gone With the Wind ever. Absolutely spot on.
At least.
There are people I am willing to give benefit of the doubt to about certain issues and people I am not. You are right, old age happens, and I am positive some word I am using today will be a slur in the future.
The thing is I will have a lifetime of evidence proving what I was about, so people will assume good faith.
But I guarantee people will still call him “Cool Pope.”
It’s all been an act.
He is the “cool pope”… when compared the literal Nazi one before him or the sexual predator protecting one before that. They are all horrible, this one happens to be the least horrible in a long time…possibly ever. Less horrible is still horrible.
That’s like saying Kim Jong-Un is the “Cool North Korean Dictator.” It really doesn’t mean much.
Exactly.
“The one who protected sexual predators” really doesn’t narrow it down 🙃
It really does. John Paul II and predecessors were the one who did most of the covering up of sexual misbehaviour, the theft of Irish children, etc, the Nazi inherited the mess, didn’t know what to do with it and rage quit. The latest guy came in well after the shit had hit the fan.
For those wondering, the word can be roughly translated in english as ::: spoiler Faggotry :::
Esit: can’t figure out how to mark something as spoiler correctly
Noun - - frociaggine - - (plural frociaggini)
(...)
(vulgar, derogatory) f a g g o t r y
FYI I think your reply is getting automatically censored due to the slur even though you’re just trying to provide context
You mean the whole thing? Or just the word?
Just the word. Says “removedry”
that’s your lemmy instance. looks normal to me on Mander
Didn’t realize til today, thanks
Ok that’s actually quite funny, can you give me a screenshot?
Yup, here you go
Looks fine from here, must be your instance.
The spoiler is also broken for me, but that’s my client.
Thanks!
So, instead of saying, “Catholic seminaries were already too full of [bundle of sticks]” instead he meant to say that “Catholic seminaries were already too full of homosexuals”. I’m not sure fixing the one word helps his message or is actually even the problem.
The term he used is being censored on here so I used a substitute.
The woke pope ain’t that woke
well, compared to the last hitler youth…
This really isnt any different than Grandpa calling the cashier at the Piggly Wiggly a ‘colored’.
The leader of an oppressive organized religion? Using slurs? Say it ain’t so!
FUCK THE POPE, the old geriatric fuck.
I heard many bishops were offended and took it as a personal attack.
Few things, 1 He has done a lot for the LGBTQ community when it comes to the church ( allows the community to be blessed in church, supporting them to join the church).
2 I’m sure these was released by a “concerned” bishop instead of someone pissed at him.
3 Fuck all religion but the leaders need to follow his public example and support the LGBTQ community. Instead they stoke the flames. Be as rasicts, homophobic, or whatever as you want in your private life, I dont give 2 fucks. This coming from someone that looks white but is mix and grew up in Tennessee. Its when they try and push their shit on everyone else that i have an issue.
wow he’s so great, he let’s LGBTQ people exist in the church’s vicinity.
He could be calling for their deaths or blaming them for everything. Progress is done by small changes not massive changes. Is he still shitty, yes. Is he better than most other popes, yes.
Yes, that slur lol
It’s Italian for “/f@ggotness”
