56. At the same time, the Church highlights the definite critical issues present in gender theory.
In order to converse with coherence on issues of sex and identity, one has to get informed. The problem we have here is that “gender theory” is not quite a thing. We have “gender studies” which expands from minimizing a troubling area as a “theory.” These days the term used here is often a pejorative. Hard to take name-calling seriously, even from Rome.
On this point, Pope Francis has reminded us that “the path to peace calls for respect for human rights, in accordance with the simple yet clear formulation contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, whose seventy-fifth anniversary we recently celebrated. These principles are self-evident and commonly accepted. Regrettably, in recent decades, attempts have been made to introduce new rights that are neither fully consistent with those originally defined nor always acceptable. They have led to instances of ideological colonization, in which gender theory plays a central role; the latter is extremely dangerous since it cancels differences in its claim to make everyone equal.”[Francis, Address to Members of the Diplomatic Corps Accredited to the Holy See for the Presentation of New Year’s Greetings (8 January 2024)]
“New rights” needs some clarification. One new “right” would be having sex outside of man-woman relationships or marriage. Another might be the contracting of a civil union or marriage. As old as civilization on one hand. Not always involving sexual intercourse, on the other. So the moral objection, outside of intercourse may be harder to fathom.
And equality, well: on one level all people do have a basic dignity. That’s what this whole document is about. Equality under the law is an aspiration, not yet a reality.
Without more details, DI 56 looks vague to me. Let’s wait for section 57.
Click this link to read the DDDF document on the Vatican site.
Catholic Sensibility 
While not on specific topic for this section of the document, the news that the Louisiana legislature has approved legislation for the surgical castration of criminal pedophiles*, awaiting the signature of a publicly hyper Catholic governor and it makes one wonder: It will be interesting to see if and when the Catholic bishops of Louisiana announce publicly their opposition to this legislation, as intentional sterilization is a huge no-no, and coerced sterilization even worse, under Catholic teaching.
* from the news wires:
Louisiana judges could order surgical castration for people convicted of sex crimes against young children under legislation approved Monday, and if Republican Gov. Jeff Landry signs it into law, the state apparently would be the first with such a punishment.
The GOP-controlled Legislature passed the bill giving judges the option to sentence someone to surgical castration after the person has been convicted of certain aggravated sex crimes — including rape, incest and molestation — against a child under 13.
A handful of states — including California, Florida and Texas — have laws in place allowing for chemical castration. In some of those states, offenders can opt for the surgical procedure if they prefer. Bu the National Conference of State Legislatures said it is unaware of any states that allow judges to impose surgical castration.
It also reveals an innocent understanding of sexual crimes. Perhaps straight white men and some women think of sexual organs as defining all crimes, but not all child abusers are focused on their own organs. Would it be indelicate of me to mention hands, feet, tongues, as well as inanimate objects?
YOu charitably write innocent (in the more learned sense of ignorant), I’d say cynically reductive.