Eternal Gender: Biology at Birth?

[The Nehor]

33 minutes ago, lightparticle said:

For the record, I didn't do any advocating. I didn't do any preaching about it. I told the bishop and a few close friends. It got out from there when someone copied my personal post from Facebook and passed it on -- life of its own at that point. To stop rumors and other hearsay, the bishop and stake president allowed me to share testimony and tell the ward at that point, as long as it wasn't advocating. I did precisely that (which they did thank me for). Most of my testimony was about how God helps us through our lives. In only one sentence did I briefly mention that I was trans. Instead of helping, it fanned the flames and resulted in the massive wave of hostility. I cut off contact with 99% of the ward. We stopped attending shortly after that and really have not been back since.

I know not everyone is like that. I'm not saying they are. Unfortunately, there are a lot that act poorly about that which they don't understand. Rather than trying, they take general statements from the leadership and run to the extremes.

I was not suggesting the scenarios were analogous and I apologize if I implied that. I just wanted to share a glimpse of the difficulty in balancing charity and the need to not encourage.

Anyone who takes President Oaks address as license to be a jerk is either blindered or incapable of basic verbal or reading comprehension. It is a sad truth that many people want a reason to hate or vent anger and will take any minor pretext to do so even when the overall message is explicitly saying do not do that.

[lightparticle]

2 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Thank you ever so much. May I ask, as has been wondered or stated about Caitlyn Jenner, she just wants attention. What would your answer back be to the poster that stated it? Not trying to condemn this poster, but would love a person that is going through it or having gone through it such as yourself, please explain how it isn't about getting attention. 

Thanks again for posting this, we need you to help open eyes. 

LOL. The infamous Jenner. I can't speak for her. She doesn't speak for the transgender community either, though she seems to think she does. The general rule is that if you've met one transgender person, you've met exactly one transgender person.

Transgender people tend to be a cross-section of society as a whole. I've met transgender people who are just amazing and the most Christlike people I've ever met. I've also met some who are manipulative, irresponsible, and reprehensible people. I've met some from in between those levels. None of them, including myself, are representative of the whole. Some people are just terrible people.

I can't say how to determine if someone is transgender or not. There isn't a definitive test that proves or disproves. In Jenner's case, I can only take her at her word. From my own perspective, I think she is actually transgender, because going through all of that for a publicity stunt would be outrageously difficult. Being such a public figure, there may be a measure of using the status for attention. But, I can't read her mind. Her intentions are hers alone.

With that said, there are some that are looking for attention, or at least increased attention -- just like any other person in the world. Their situation is not helped by such behavior, and it certainly doesn't help the rest of the trans community when they act poorly.

In my own case, I avoided attention as much as I could, until I couldn't anymore. I find that most transgender people that I have met just want to blend into society because standing out and bringing attention can have very negative outcomes.

[lightparticle]

1 minute ago, The Nehor said:

I was not suggesting the scenarios were analogous and I apologize if I implied that. I just wanted to share a glimpse of the difficulty in balancing charity and the need to not encourage.

Anyone who takes President Oaks address as license to be a jerk is either blindered or incapable of basic verbal or reading comprehension. It is a sad truth that many people want a reason to hate or vent anger and will take any minor pretext to do so even when the overall message is explicitly saying do not do that.

No issues. I had thought of that, but I sided with the "no implied" connection.

From your anecdote about the experience, it sounds like that particular youth went about it all wrong. We know what the rules of the church are, whether we agree or not. By purposefully violating those rules through advocacy in church, or during church functions, that would tend to make others very uncomfortable and was out of line. I would expect adults to know better, though youth might not know better, which is where I would expect an adult to step in and explain why that is being disrespectful. There's a time and place for everything.

[The Nehor]

28 minutes ago, lightparticle said:

No issues. I had thought of that, but I sided with the "no implied" connection.

From your anecdote about the experience, it sounds like that particular youth went about it all wrong. We know what the rules of the church are, whether we agree or not. By purposefully violating those rules through advocacy in church, or during church functions, that would tend to make others very uncomfortable and was out of line. I would expect adults to know better, though youth might not know better, which is where I would expect an adult to step in and explain why that is being disrespectful. There's a time and place for everything.

Yeah, it was explained but she was in a very toxic online environment that was pressuring her to evangelize (for lack of a better word) and she wanted to be able to report success. I think this was primarily due to permissive failure on the part of the parent. 8 hours plus a day online is not healthy. The other child was probably a full video game addict. To be honest I am not sure if she experienced gender dysphoria or if that online community was just the only consistent place she felt accepted so she latched on to it. It was a sad story all around.  

Anyways, I only told the story to try to show how difficult it can be to navigate. It is not very difficult to just not harass someone online like you say you experienced. Ugh! How do people even have time to bother with that kind of thing? Get a life!

Edited October 6, 2019 by The Nehor

[lightparticle]

27 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Yeah, it was explained but she was in a very toxic online environment that was pressuring her to evangelize (for lack of a better word) and she wanted to be able to report success. I think this was primarily due to permissive failure on the part of the parent. 8 hours plus a day online is not healthy. The other child was probably a full video game addict. To be honest I am not sure if she experienced gender dysphoria or if that online community was just the only consistent place she felt accepted so she latched on to it. It was a sad story all around.

That's unfortunate. When youth are vulnerable, they latch onto whatever acceptance they can find. That can be good or bad depending on circumstance. I avoid most of the online transgender community. It's more of a personal decision. I am happy to explain and even do some advocacy work. Unfortunately, it feels like there are some very toxic elements within the transgender community itself that makes it difficult to get along with the rest of the world. There is a constant theme of negativity and offense that permeates much of it. It can be all-consuming. I try to maintain a more positive outlook and give people the benefit of the doubt if they mis-gender me, or they don't understand something. That has led me to some disappointment in the past. But, overall, most people have been kind when they found out about my history.

I am not against answering honest and sincere questions. However, I fear those would steer this thread too far from the original question, which was discussion of the biological aspects of the gender question and how it concerns the church. If someone does have other questions, then another thread might be appropriate, if someone wants to start it.

[katherine the great]

21 hours ago, california boy said:

It is illegal to perform sex changing surgery before the minor reach the legal age of 18.

Is this just for transsexuals? It used to be routine for intersex children.

[Calm]

12 hours ago, california boy said:

Ok.  So is it Gods will that some have both sexual identities?   

The way I have had it explained to me (starting first back when I was 15 on a long drive with my dad to a Mutual activity up in the mountains tobogganing) was in a fallen world, God allows for imperfect situations not because he desires those details to occur, but because the fullness of his plan for the advancement of humanity eternally requires it (not each situation specifically, but the possibility).

It is my belief that is God’s Will that the Plan of Salvation gives access to exaltation for all. For some reason we don’t know, this required a very imperfect world to go through mortality in, including less than perfect bodies and minds and veiled spirits (which to me means most likely much of our spiritual nature is suppressed...like someone who can’t feel what they touch).

I don’t know if this is why transgender or intersex individuals experience what they do. I haven’t been given any personal spiritual insight to their situations, which is why I tend to approach the subjects (Transgenderism is very distinct to me from intersex biology) through the filter of my clinical psych education or medical experiences. 

Edited October 6, 2019 by Calm

[Calm]

3 hours ago, Tacenda said:

but would love a person that is going through it or having gone through it such as yourself, please explain how it isn't about getting attention. 

Jenner is a special case. Few transgender individuals take their transitioning so public as she did. I suspect that is why the poster went to “just wants attention” rather than just the transitioning itself.  Though I may be wrong, hopefully they will clarify. 

[Calm]

3 hours ago, lightparticle said:

LOL. The infamous Jenner. I can't speak for her. She doesn't speak for the transgender community either, though she seems to think she does. The general rule is that if you've met one transgender person, you've met exactly one transgender person.

Transgender people tend to be a cross-section of society as a whole....

Well stated and balanced response, thank you (am stating this as it will be a number of posts before I can give you a rep point).

Edited October 6, 2019 by Calm

[lightparticle]

47 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

Is this just for transsexuals? It used to be routine for intersex children.

Just for clarity -- some people find the term 'transsexual' to be an offensive or pejorative term. If anything, it's a deprecated term that isn't really used much anymore. I'm fairly certain you aren't being rude. Just wanted to include that info.

It used to be commonplace for the surgery to be performed on an infant with an intersex condition, including in some cases where the doctor and parents would decide on what the physical sex of the child would be. From a spiritual perspective, such an action could result in being incongruent with the spiritual/personality gender of the child. There were some documented cases of this. Because of issues such as this, many parents simply wait until the child can give some input. Some states have gone so far as to introduce legislation to prevent immediately operating on infants to modify intersex conditions.

I can't say for certain that the law requires being 18 before surgery can be performed in cases where an intersex condition is not apparent. I don't think any licensed therapist worth their weight in humanity would blindly sign off on it if the person was under the age of 18 unless a doctor determined an absolute need. I've only ever heard of puberty blockers being used.

[katherine the great]

6 hours ago, lightparticle said:

It used to be commonplace for the surgery to be performed on an infant with an intersex condition, including in some cases where the doctor and parents would decide on what the physical sex of the child would be. From a spiritual perspective, such an action could result in being incongruent with the spiritual/personality gender of the child. There were some documented cases of this. 

There are many documented cases of this. I think performing surgery on a child with ambiguous genitalia is simply wrong. I understand why parents may have done it in the past because we do live in a world where being male or female is generally just a given. However, I agree with the current medical wisdom that  intersex children are fine the way they are and as they approach adulthood, they will know whether they feel male or female (or both or neither). I just was surprised at California boy's comment because it used to be normal protocol to surgically default to the female when there was only partial (or very small) male genitalia at birth. Because it was easier. I consider it a positive that some states are moving to make this illegal.

[california boy]

This has been an interesting thread for me.  I appreciate all of your answers.  It has given me insight into how you feel about this issue.  As I have read your responses, I actually think that one of the early quotes pretty much nailed the reason.

Quote

Bruce Hafen of the First Quorum of the Seventy 
"If you are faithful, on resurrection morning—and maybe even before then—you will rise with normal attractions for the opposite sex."  
(Elder Bruce C. Hafen Speaks on Same-Sex Attraction". Mormon Newsroom. Retrieved 29 October 2016.)

The Church has a long history of not liking anything that is not "normal".  Isn't that what drives racism?  This is a Church that doesn't allow beards or men wearing long hair at BYU for heavens sake.  This is a Church that doesn't like multiple piercings or tattoos.  This is a Church that wants everyone to be attracted to the opposite sex. And this is a Church that, of course, is going to kick out someone transitioning.  There are a lot of members who feel uncomfortable because they are still single in a very family oriented church.  This is a Church where if you are not wearing a white shirt on Sunday, you are out of uniform.  There are a lot of single parent families that feel they are "different" than what the Church expects.  Diversity has never been the strong point of Mormonism, except maybe in the very beginning.

There aren't solid reasons for kicking out transgenders.  There isn't some moral stance they can hide behind.  In the end, as Ahab stated repeatedly "these people are not normal."  And he is right.  They don't fit in with the "normal paradigm of Mormonism.  So the Church kicks them out.  Honestly, is anyone really all that surprised?

Edited October 7, 2019 by california boy

[longview]

8 hours ago, katherine the great said:

15 hours ago, lightparticle said:

It used to be commonplace for the surgery to be performed on an infant with an intersex condition, including in some cases where the doctor and parents would decide on what the physical sex of the child would be. From a spiritual perspective, such an action could result in being incongruent with the spiritual/personality gender of the child. There were some documented cases of this. 

There are many documented cases of this. I think performing surgery on a child with ambiguous genitalia is simply wrong. I understand why parents may have done it in the past because we do live in a world where being male or female is generally just a given. However, I agree with the current medical wisdom that  intersex children are fine the way they are and as they approach adulthood, they will know whether they feel male or female (or both or neither). I just was surprised at California boy's comment because it used to be normal protocol to surgically default to the female when there was only partial (or very small) male genitalia at birth. Because it was easier. I consider it a positive that some states are moving to make this illegal.

How about letting the child wait until the time comes for receiving a patriarchal blessing?  Usually around age 13?  Some definite insights/revelations can help with planning for the "rest of mortality".

My life was pretty unusual (in my opinion).  My blessing (at age 13) has been verified at several points that I had no way of foreseeing.

[smac97]

6 hours ago, california boy said:

This has been an interesting thread for me.  I appreciate all of your answers.  It has given me insight into how you feel about this issue.  As I have read your responses, I actually think that one of the early quotes pretty much nailed the reason.

Quote

Bruce Hafen of the First Quorum of the Seventy 
"If you are faithful, on resurrection morning—and maybe even before then—you will rise with normal attractions for the opposite sex."  
(Elder Bruce C. Hafen Speaks on Same-Sex Attraction". Mormon Newsroom. Retrieved 29 October 2016.)

The Church has a long history of not liking anything that is not "normal".

I'm not sure about that.

Quote

Isn't that what drives racism?  

Not really.

Quote

This is a Church that doesn't allow beards or men wearing long hair at BYU for heavens sake.  

I think there are a number of reasons the Church has dress and grooming standards at BYU, and expectations generally.  

Quote

This is a Church that doesn't like multiple piercings or tattoos.  

Same as above.

Quote

This is a Church that wants everyone to be attracted to the opposite sex.

Lots of doctrinal reasons for this.  Aversion to "non-normal" is not really among them.

Quote

And this is a Church that, of course, is going to kick out someone transitioning.  

Same as above.

Quote

There are a lot of members who feel uncomfortable because they are still single in a very family oriented church.  

Plenty of sociological reasons for this.  Most of them benign/unintentional.

Quote

This is a Church where if you are not wearing a white shirt on Sunday, you are out of uniform.  

The expectation is for those presiding or acting in a priesthood function.  

Quote

There are a lot of single parent families that feel they are "different" than what the Church expects.  

Again, plenty of sociological reasons for this.  Most of them benign/unintentional.

Quote

Diversity has never been the strong point of Mormonism, except maybe in the very beginning.

"Diversity" of this sort deserves air quotes.

There are all sorts of "diverse" things in the Church.  And all sorts of things in which we seek unity, too.

Quote

There aren't solid reasons for kicking out transgenders.  

Not sure you are situated to make such an assertion.

In any event, discipline for undergoing such a procedure is not mandatory.  

Quote

There isn't some moral stance they can hide behind.

There certainly is.

Quote

In the end, as Ahab stated repeatedly "these people are not normal."  And he is right.  They don't fit in with the "normal paradigm of Mormonism.  So the Church kicks them out.  

That depends on the individual circumstance.

I don't think you are fairly characterizing the Church's position here.  Or the situation here generally.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited October 7, 2019 by smac97

[Ahab]

On 10/5/2019 at 2:37 AM, california boy said:

Just how do you get that penis back once it is cut off?  

It doesn't have to be that particular penis.  Any penis will do to make them look like a male again

On 10/5/2019 at 2:37 AM, california boy said:

And if they physically can not repent, then what.

Part of repentance is acknowledging that what was done was not what should have been done, and if they couldn't restore or fix their body to the condition it should be in then they would have to wait until their resurrection to have their body restored to the condition it should be in.

[katherine the great]

On 10/7/2019 at 10:00 AM, Ahab said:

It doesn't have to be that particular penis.  Any penis will do to make them look like a male again

What an incredibly bizarre statement. In that unlikely scenario, form is much less important than function. 

[Ahab]

1 minute ago, katherine the great said:

What an incredibly bizarre statement. In that unlikely scenario, form is much less important than function. 

 The point is that any man who realizes he is a man even though he once went through some great effort to look or act like a woman, when repenting, would try to look and act like a man again.  So if he cut off his penis, he would want another one to replace it.

 I mean, that is what repentance is all about, right?  Correcting any sin we have committed as much as we can correct for it while trying to not ever act that way again.  It would be pretty pitiful if he just kept on cutting off and putting on other penises forever.

[Calm]

Quote

 I mean, that is what repentance is all about, right

Humbly and sincerely living with the consequences of our sins and aligning one's heart with God's Will and trying to restore to others what we may have taken from them is what repentance is all about in my view.

[Ahab]

14 minutes ago, Calm said:

Humbly and sincerely living with the consequences of our sins and aligning one's heart with God's Will and trying to restore to others what we may have taken from them is what repentance is all about in my view.

Not just to others but to ourselves, too.  When we repent we turn our own lives around, correcting any problems we have made for ourselves, as much as we can.  We do what we can for others, too, but our primary purpose is to make ourselves better people, doing to others what we should do while not doing what we should not be doing to either ourselves or to others.

[california boy]

On 10/7/2019 at 6:00 PM, Ahab said:

It doesn't have to be that particular penis.  Any penis will do to make them look like a male again

I love how you started out your comments about transgender people as not being "normal".  But you think sewing another man's penis on is perfectly understandable and expected in order to repent.  

Is it possible that "normal" is in the eye of the beholder?

[Ahab]

3 minutes ago, california boy said:

I love how you started out your comments about transgender people as not being "normal".  But you think sewing another man's penis on is perfectly understandable and expected in order to repent.  

Is it possible that "normal" is in the eye of the beholder?

A man who cuts his own penis off, or wants someone else to cut it off for him, is no longer a normal person even if he really really wants to be.  At least by having a penis put back on him he would appear more like, and maybe even function as, a man as he was meant to be.

 

[Meadowchik]

On 10/6/2019 at 6:51 PM, The Nehor said:

Excommunication can be a merciful act.

It can also be cruel and counterproductive to the ostensible purpose of the organisation and the welfare of the individuals.

[The Nehor]

14 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

It can also be cruel and counterproductive to the ostensible purpose of the organisation and the welfare of the individuals.

And I would argue that those who understand and believe in the organization’s mission can most clearly judge if that is the case while those who have only one of those attributes or even lack both of them would have no clue.

[The Nehor]

On 10/7/2019 at 11:00 AM, Ahab said:

It doesn't have to be that particular penis.  Any penis will do to make them look like a male again

Are you volunteering as a donor?

[Meadowchik]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

And I would argue that those who understand and believe in the organization’s mission can most clearly judge if that is the case while those who have only one of those attributes or even lack both of them would have no clue.

It depends, doesn't it? An adherent's belief can be poorly-constructed and opinions thus ill-informed while a non-adherant's opinion can have more integrity. Especially those views based on us versus them are known to be classically vulnerable to cognitive bias.

Your position, that I must necessarily know less about what is good for the church as an unbeliever, is inherently flawed. As an unbeliever, perhaps generally I would have less "say" in a democratic theocracy, but the church isn't a democratic theocracy. 

Excommunication is a cruel "solution" for GLBT church members. There are evils in this world, but they are not from consenting adults loving each other or individuals believing their bodies do not represent their true gender. Calling love a "sin" is evil.