Gender: an eternal characteristic

[Tsuzuki]

He doesn't appear to believe in the pre-mortal existence of a spirit in the first place, which would make the discussion rather trivial to him.

I believe that one's spirit can extend backward through time, even before birth and conception, but it has its temporal origin with one's brain, and is entirely dependent on it. This is why the resurrection, and physical bodies in general, are so important.

[the narrator]

Well this is an interesting topic. If I understand Narrators point correctly he is arguing gender as it is commonly used and defined is entirely physical. When a baby is born we don't perform some kinda of spiritual gender definition test to determine the gender of the babies spirits (assuming spirits have gender). Instead we give the baby a spank turn it over get a look at what certain physical characteristics it has and write male or female on the birth certificate. Gender is entirely defined based on certain physical characteristics. Hence when someone states spirits have gender this is a nonsensical statement because gender as we use it is defined entirely by certain physical attributes and spirits don't have a body. And just saying spirits have gender without defining what that means in a context entirely devoid of the physical characteristics we use to define gender here on earth is not helpful and conveys no information. Suppose I was to claim Australians have a characteristic defined as "zoom" when asked to define exactly what that means I claim I don't know only that I know they have this characteristic. Well if I can't define what is meant by "zoom" then claiming Australians have "zoom" is meaningless I have in fact not described in a meaningful fashion anything about Australians.

Similarly claiming spirits have gender without defining what that means tells me nothing about the characteristics of spirits. I know what gender means here on earth it refers to specific physical attributes. Since spirits don't have bodies it can't mean the same thing so what does it mean?

Now as pointed out by Darrin you could simply claim spirits have those physical attributes we use to distinguish between genders in physical bodies. In which case gender simply means spirits are shaped like humans and have "spiritual" male or female parts. To me this seems somewhat reasonable except it still provides two different and possibly contradictory definitions of gender. Suppose a spirit with female parts was born into a male body according to the definition of gender we use everyday here on earth that person would be a male they have male parts. But according to the "spiritual" definition of gender they are female hence mutually exclusive genders are assigned which is messy to say the least. Narrators objection to this idea of spirits with male and female parts as I understand it is that gender is defined on the basis of physical attributes hence speaking of "spiritual" gender is nonsensical there can be no such thing because gender is defined physically. I can understand his viewpoint but will simply say gender in such things as the proclamation to the family is using a different definition of gender than everyday usage which is confusing to say the least but still seems fair to me. It is like finding a new flower and calling it a rose yes this is going to be very confusing but does not mean the flower being called a rose does not exist. There is such a flower it is just an unfortunate choice to call it a rose.

Now I still think my Australian example used above holds in this case. Simply saying gender in spirits is different than how we define gender here on earth may be legitimate. But unless I can define what I mean by spirits having gender then I have really not produced any meaningful information about spirits. Simply saying it is different than physically having male or female parts does not define what is does mean to claim spirits have gender.

Best,

Uncertain

Well you pretty much nailed it. However, I would make the more nuanced point that sex is determined by physical characteristics, and that gender is more of an abstract and sociological notion that is dependent upon sex. For example, there are arguably more than 2 genders--drag, homosexuality (and expressions of gender within homosexuality - think "butch" lesbian), transexuals, hermaphrodites, neuters, etc all complicate the concept of gender.

[the narrator]

I can say a lot, although you could just call it speculation.

An "intelligence" is a form of life, and our intelligence came from God, our Father in heaven, when he created our spirits. But not from out of nothing, or only beginning with him, as some people suppose, but from an eternal source of his and our form of intelligence which has been around forever, which we call God. Thus, life doesn't begin at conception, because life doesn't begin. Life continues as each kind of being reproduces however that kind of being reproduces, and we (all men/women and boys/girls on this planet) are the children of our Father in heaven, with Jesus Christ being the first one who was reproduced by our Father in heaven, in the spirit, as an embodied intelligence, gender/sex: male.

Why assume a literal premortal parentage? It's not in the scriptures.

To avoid a long thread jack with this, let me just point to another conversation I had about the problems of literal parentage. http://smallsimple.wordpress.com/2010/03/29/my-smpt-experience/#more-615 the conversation begins about a dozen comments in.

[CV75]

For my Race, Class, Gender and Ethnicity course, I will be writing a paper on the following statement on the following statement from the Proclamation on the Family... and how it relates to eternal marriage. Any ideas on what I should include?

Maybe you've written your paper already, but since gender is a set of behavioral, cultural, and psychological traits associated with the sex of an individual, and eternal marriage is the union of a man and a woman in the order of the Holy Priesthood, I

[Uncertain]

Well you pretty much nailed it. However, I would make the more nuanced point that sex is determined by physical characteristics, and that gender is more of an abstract and sociological notion that is dependent upon sex. For example, there are arguably more than 2 genders--drag, homosexuality (and expressions of gender within homosexuality - think "butch" lesbian), transexuals, hermaphrodites, neuters, etc all complicate the concept of gender.

I agree, gender has a more nuanced definition than just the physical sex male/female. Gender as it was used in the proclamation to the family to me seemed liked it was being used a proxy for sex. And the same holds to some extent in this thread. Which is a practice that will tend to cause confusion.

Best,

Uncertain

[Tsuzuki]

I can say a lot, although you could just call it speculation.

An "intelligence" is a form of life, and our intelligence came from God, our Father in heaven, when he created our spirits. But not from out of nothing, or only beginning with him, as some people suppose, but from an eternal source of his and our form of intelligence which has been around forever, which we call God. Thus, life doesn't begin at conception, because life doesn't begin. Life continues as each kind of being reproduces however that kind of being reproduces, and we (all men/women and boys/girls on this planet) are the children of our Father in heaven, with Jesus Christ being the first one who was reproduced by our Father in heaven, in the spirit, as an embodied intelligence, gender/sex: male.

My speculation is as good as yours, and on the subject of intelligences it meshes more with Joseph Smith's ideas.

[Daniel2]

Not controversial, but non-sense. It makes a good image (as most fantasy does), but once you look at it, it stops making sense. As I just mentioned before, the scriptures do not teach that we are literal (sexually reproduced and birthed) children of God, and Joseph Smith did not teach it. To make that step just dives into non-sense.

Certainly, Narrator, from my perspective, this is all 'good fantasy,' even if non-sensical.

Mormon doctrine is beautiful and inspiring--a fairytale ideal of living forever united with one's loved ones. It speaks to the inherent longing for shared eternal companionship for many.

Darin

[Deborah]

I feel quite confident that I have done much more study on preexistence in Mormonism than you have.

Then you are aware of D&C 20:18 "And that he created man, male and female, after his own image and in his own likeness, created he them;"

Furthermore gender is very much a part of what the church teaches about us:

[the narrator]

I agree, gender has a more nuanced definition than just the physical sex male/female. Gender as it was used in the proclamation to the family to me seemed liked it was being used a proxy for sex. And the same holds to some extent in this thread. Which is a practice that will tend to cause confusion.

Best,

Uncertain

Yeah, as I pointed out in a previous comment, I think the word "gender" was (inappropriately) used due to the tendency of general authorities to avoid using the S-E-X word.

[the narrator]

Then you are aware of D&C 20:18 "And that he created man, male and female, after his own image and in his own likeness, created he them;"

It is quite clear that Joseph is quoting Genesis and invoking the common creedal belief that God created physical human beings as male and female. Nothing earth-shattering there.

Furthermore gender is very much a part of what the church teaches about us:

[Ahab]

My speculation is as good as yours, and on the subject of intelligences it meshes more with Joseph Smith's ideas.

I'm sure you think so, but I've noticed how a lot of people don't correctly understand what Joseph was talking about.

[the narrator]

I'm sure you think so, but I've noticed how a lot of people don't correctly understand what Joseph was talking about.

And you do understand him correctly?

[Ahab]

Why assume a literal premortal parentage? It's not in the scriptures.

It's not an assumption, and yes it is.

Furthermore, it also makes sense from the standpoint of what we're going to be doing after we are resurrected, with our spouses.

Celestial men and women actually make their own children, from within themselves, and they are literally their own children.

[Ahab]

And you do understand him correctly?

Um hmm.

[the narrator]

It's not an assumption, and yes it is.

Where?

Furthermore, it also makes sense from the standpoint of what we're going to be doing after we are resurrected, with our spouses.

Celestial men and women actually make their own children, from within themselves, and they are literally their own children.

Where does it say that they reproduce spirit babies?

[Ahab]

Where?

Where does it say that they reproduce spirit babies?

Where it says we are literal children of God, in so many words.

[the narrator]

Where it says we are literal children of God, in so many words.

please point to a scripture that says we are literally children of god--that are a product of divine literal reproduction and literal birth.

[CV75]

please point to a scripture that says we are literally children of god--that are a product of divine literal reproduction and literal birth.

I think the closest thing we have canonically is D&C 132:19, "And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of promise, by him who is anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the keys of this priesthood; and it shall be said unto them

[Dr. Jd]

Who teaches the class?

[thesometimesaint]

Stop clinging to me; for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brethren (disciples), and say to them, 'I ascend to my Father and your Father, and my God and your God.' (John 20: 17).

[USU78]

Stop clinging to me; for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brethren (disciples), and say to them, 'I ascend to my Father and your Father, and my God and your God.' (John 20: 17).

Also there's this:

Acts 17:28-29 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring. Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man

[thesometimesaint]

[Nathair/|\]

Who teaches the class?

Professor John Dimitrovich. It's at the University of Montana.

[Dr. Jd]

I took it at BYU, I really enjoyed the class.