"Gender" - a Premortal Choice/Assignment/Track of Learning?

[David T]

In another thread, TAO said, "Thus why men and women cannot be compared to this example - because they had no choice in becoming what they are. "

I'd like to suggest that this isn't established as a clear fact, and in fact, would suggest an interesting way to read this is from Elder Scott's book, "Finding Peace, Happiness and Joy" (yes, BCSpace, I know it's not an official source. That doesn't matter for this discussion - it serves to acknowledge that it may not be as clear cut in everyone's mind as some may think.)

" "And I, God, created man . . . ; male and female created I them." This was done spiritually in your premortal existence, when you lived in the presence of your Father in Heaven. Your gender was established before you came to earth. You elected to have this earth experience as part of His plan for you. The prophets have called it "the plan of our God," "the plan of mercy," the "eternal plan of deliverance," "the plan of salvation," and, yes, "the great plan of happiness." You were taught this plan before you came to earth and there rejoiced in the privilege of participating in it." (Finding Peace, Happiness, and Joy, Chapter 3)

First off, I acknowledge that Elder Scott holds the Tripartite Theory (Intelligences -> Spirits -> Mortality), which when understood, makes it appear that he is saying that Gender was not a part of Raw Intelligence, but came into being ('was established') when an Intelligence was organized into a Spirit Child of God.

I'd say I would use the same terminology to perhaps understand something different. I do not believe Joseph believed or taught that the terms 'intelligences' and 'spirits' were different things. they appeared to him to be synonyms. But because in modern post-B.H. Roberts Parlance the terms have been used to express a division into 'stages', I might as well suggest the term 'Intelligence' can be applied to a stage of an individual before they were Adopted by Covenant as a Child of God, and accepted and agreed to His plan for their progression.

'Gender' and 'Sex' as it relates to male/female biology across the board makes no sense to me in a pre-mortal eternal non-created spiritual context. However, if the terms are applied to specific roles in the plan of Salvation, it makes more sense. The biological nature of male and female would be a convenient method of separation of the two "Complimentary Tracks of Progression".

I believe it is probably that in the premortal state, we were either able to choose, or were assigned and accepted, 'tracks' of preparation for our mortal and eternal lives. Those who progressed on Track A were assigned as biological females. Those who progressed on Track B were assigned as biological males. They developed complimenting skills, talents, and dispositions that would compliment and enhance the mortal biological bodies that they would agree to inhabit. Each track would be an equally essential part of the plan.

Thus, as the Family Proclamation states, I will agree that "Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose." - but not that it is an essential inherent characteristic of our base uncreated selves. It is something that becomes essential as our preparation for complimentary roles in the plan of Salvation are accepted and developed.

Thoughts?

[thesometimesaint]

nackhadlow:

What knowledge we do have is that each of us is a beloved son or daughter of Heavenly Father. How far back that goes I don't know, other than from before the foundations of the world. Could it mean that at some point in the distant past(when we were intelligences) gender had yet to be established? Coulds be.

[Sargon]

One's thoughts on this are going to be influenced by how you interpret the nature of "intelligence". There are so many variations of belief about "intelligence" that it will be difficult to hold a discussion with more than a small handful of people. But this sort of creative thinking is healthy and fun.

I've always believed that our gender is an eternal part of us in the sense that a male has always been a male and a female has always been a female. This suggests that gender transcends flesh and bones and is ingrained into the fabric of our intelligence/spirit. I doubt we have enough solid data one way or the other though to demonstrate what the truth of the matter is.

Interesting discussion nonetheless. The implications for women the priesthood are obvious.

[CV75]

I've always believed that our gender is an eternal part of us in the sense that a male has always been a male and a female has always been a female. This suggests that gender transcends flesh and bones and is ingrained into the fabric of our intelligence/spirit. I doubt we have enough solid data one way or the other though to demonstrate what the truth of the matter is.

It would seem to me that, if we are co-eternal with God, then we always possessed agency (existence) and so chose our gender, or progressed in a way so as to attain one gender or the other.

[Sargon]

It would seem to me that, if we are co-eternal with God, then we always possessed agency (existence) and so chose our gender, or progressed in a way so as to attain one gender or the other.

I guess I just don't understand agency in this way. For me, agency is the ability to choose between available options. I've never thought of gender as being an available option.

[David T]

I guess I just don't understand agency in this way. For me, agency is the ability to choose between available options. I've never thought of gender as being an available option.

I think because in mortality, it's not - it's a decision already made

[Jason]

I think you're stretching Elder's Scott's text a bit. Yes he says that gender was established before we came to Earth. That does not mean that we didn't always possess it in some form - he is merely emphasizing that your gender isn't an accident of birth.

"You elected to have this earth experience" probably isn't referring to some kind of gender choice at all. I don't see any indication from his text that gender was not an aspect of us as intelligences, before we had spirit bodies.

Personally I feel that my gender was always a part of me, and was not the result of a choice I made at any point. Intelligences simply come in male or female configurations, and everything that comes later - spiritual and physical bodies - simply build on that fundamental difference that already existed.

[CV75]

I guess I just don't understand agency in this way. For me, agency is the ability to choose between available options. I've never thought of gender as being an available option.

Like you say, we don't have enough solid data one way or the other to demonstrate what the truth of the matter is. My understanding of agency leads me to believe that we chose our gender or made choices that led to the determination of our gender at the most fundamental stages of our existence; we certainly can't legitimately change it now!

[Sargon]

Like you say, we don't have enough solid data one way or the other to demonstrate what the truth of the matter is. My understanding of agency leads me to believe that we chose our gender or made choices that led to the determination of our gender at the most fundamental stages of our existence; we certainly can't legitimately change it now!

That's cool.

I wonder...what are the theological benefits of either position? Do we gain something by suggesting that gender is chosen?

Perhaps what is gained is the ability to say, "You chose your gender, now stop complaining about it!". But I doubt that is the motive. Or, is this a "TK Smoothie" (a belief that arises out of necessity because of some other belief)?

(Google TK Smoothie. It will give you a good laugh.)

[David T]

Partially because biological gender makes no sense to me in a non-sexually-reproductive/generative eternal spirit/intelligence sense. In this earth system, sexual gender has a specific biological purpose in even non-intelligent life (plants, lower animals, etc - which I'd say probably has nothing to do with their eternal pre-mortal identity ) - and in some cases is even completely irrelevent or non-existent.

[Sargon]

Partially because biological gender makes no sense to me in a non-sexually-reproductive/generative eternal spirit/intelligence sense.

I'd agree that it makes no sense if we were to limit the paramters of gender to chromosomes. But we don't have to (at least I don't think so).

[Sargon]

If should ask myself the same question. What do I gain theologically by positing that gender is eternal?

I'm not sure. Perhaps it is just a sense of continuity with myself throughout the eternal rounds. I self-identify as a male, and I can't identify myself as being genderless. I don't think I would be me anymore.

Of course, that is all subjective reasoning. How I feel about it shouldn't weigh heavily.

[David T]

I'd agree that it makes no sense if we were to limit the paramters of gender to chromosomes. But we don't have to (at least I don't think so).

The thing is, in using the same words, we are. Gender/Sex is technically biological, and serves a biological purpose, and has biological roots. One's personality and cultural identity is something different, even though we as a culture tend to lump them together. It would make much more sense to say there were 'Type A' and 'Type B' spirits who, for convenience, were assigned to biological male and biological female mortal bodies (which would complement their nurtured identities) - we then associate Type A with 'Gendered Male', and Type B with 'Gendered Female'.

The question is if the Type A and Type B are inherently eternally existing (going back) that way, or if it was a choice/assignment of emphasis and progression, and our biological bodies are given to assist in the development of those specific attributes as part of the cooperative and fully voluntary and chosen Plan of Salvation.

[Sargon]

The thing is, in using the same words, we are. Gender/Sex is technically biological, and serves a biological purpose, and has biological roots. One's personality and cultural identity is something different, even though we as a culture tend to lump them together. It would make much more sense to say there were 'Type A' and 'Type B' spirits who, for convenience, were assigned to biological male and biological female mortal bodies (which would complement their nurtured identities) - we then associate Type A with 'Gendered Male', and Type B with 'Gendered Female'.

The question is if the Type A and Type B are inherently eternally existing (going back) that way, or if it was a choice/assignment of emphasis and progression.

All excellent points.

I wonder how far we should go in our belief that the pre-mortal spirit has the form and appearance of the mortal body that it will inhabit (or however that union works). Our spirits/intelligences are matter, after all, and they have a shape. They take up a finite volume of space. We assume they have arms and legs, a head and a torso. That was what the brother of Jared saw.

Again we are stumped by a lack of data. We could interpret the brother of Jared's experience in different ways. But I think the most traditional LDS view is that our spirits look basically like our bodies. Does that extend to body parts that determine gender? Maybe.

[CV75]

That's cool.

I wonder...what are the theological benefits of either position? Do we gain something by suggesting that gender is chosen?

Perhaps what is gained is the ability to say, "You chose your gender, now stop complaining about it!". But I doubt that is the motive. Or, is this a "TK Smoothie" (a belief that arises out of necessity because of some other belief)?

(Google TK Smoothie. It will give you a good laugh.)

I'll never look at a Sonic menu in quite the same light again...

I try to compare thoughts such as "God loves me so much He honored my choice of gender" with "God made me a man." Also questions like, "How important is an individual's gender that it would be something that was acted upon and not the result of an independent act?" The more important or meaningful something is to us, like eternal life, the more it seems to be a consequence of choice. Is there anything so important and meaningful to us that God does not leave it up to us to choose?

On the other hand, there is comfort in God assigning a gender without our involvement yet in our best interest, assuming we acknowledge that our gender is inherently good, and a blessing, encouraging faith in His eternal promises.

[David T]

All excellent points.

I wonder how far we should go in our belief that the pre-mortal spirit has the form and appearance of the mortal body that it will inhabit (or however that union works). Our spirits/intelligences are matter, after all, and they have a shape. They take up a finite volume of space. We assume they have arms and legs, a head and a torso. That was what the brother of Jared saw.

Again we are stumped by a lack of data. We could interpret the brother of Jared's experience in different ways. But I think the most traditional LDS view is that our spirits look basically like our bodies. Does that extend to body parts that determine gender? Maybe.

The problem with the idea that our spirits looks identical to our physical bodies is that then professes the principle that all marriages/parentages must be predestined to combine the genes (and chromosomes) that will make children who look like their parents, which is the form of their spirits, etc. It doesn't makes sense logically, or doctrinally - and denies our agency in our mortal decisions.

[CV75]

Does that extend to body parts that determine gender? Maybe.

The spiritual aspect of gender is in the beauty of the human form and its varieties, including the primary sex characteristics. A spirit needs to comprehend what his or her future will bring (in mortality and eternity), and appreciate these things as part of making a choice in he plan of salvation. A spirit also needs to understand and appreciate gender differences as part of this choice, and the mortal test associated with gender; the spirit having sexual caracteristics helps in this as well.

[Sargon]

CV75,

I think you've probably identified the most important reasons for even considering these questions. If our gender dictates the ways that we think and behave, can that have an influence on our potential for eternal life? We probably all agree that it doesn't. But if it does, it would seem important that our gender was not chosen by God.

One possibility that I think you failed to consider was that gender just is. It isn't chosen by either us or by God, but it simply exists as an eternal and fundamental aspect of our being.

This causes me to wonder how mainstream Christians view gender. Does God assign it or does he allow it to sort itself out in the womb? Does gender persist after death?

[nicolasconnault]

Very interesting discussion. Like Jason, I find no evidence whatsoever in Elder Scott's quoted text to indicate the notion of choice in gender. However the notion brings up an interesting point: is everything that makes up who and what we are entirely the result of our own choices, and does it need to be?

If you answer "yes" to either question, then a critical problem appears: did we choose to exist in the first place? Even if you ignore that specific question, the problem remains in some way: if we have always existed (assuming the theory of eternal existence promoted by Joseph Smith), then was there a "state of origin" at which our identity and make-up was not yet determined by any choice we had made? Take two souls in such a hypothetical state: are they, like carbon copies, exactly identical? What would that state consist of?

It makes my brain hurt just to think about this

[CV75]

The problem with the idea that our spirits looks identical to our physical bodies is that then professes the principle that all marriages/parentages must be predestined to combine the genes (and chromosomes) that will make children who look like their parents, which is the form of their spirits, etc. It doesn't makes sense logically, or doctrinally - and denies our agency in our mortal decisions.

There is a balance here as well. The "bounds and habitations" that tend to put people into proximity that influence their mortal choices were agreed upon pre-mortally, so what we look like, in part, is consistent with our pre-mortal arrangements. Not in precise detail, but enough to reflect that covenant lines are being honored.

[Sargon]

The problem with the idea that our spirits looks identical to our physical bodies is that then professes the principle that all marriages/parentages must be predestined to combine the genes (and chromosomes) that will make children who look like their parents, which is the form of their spirits, etc. It doesn't makes sense logically, or doctrinally - and denies our agency in our mortal decisions.

Yes. I've long thought this also. Characteristics like eye color, height, skin tone, etc. likely aren't present in pre-mortal spirits. That would imply predestined family relationships, which I just don't buy.

But that doesn't extend to things like whether you have arms and legs...or other organs. I suggest that the brother of Jared saw the finger of Christ's pre-mortal spirit. He wouldn't have been able to guess what skin color Christ would have based on his finger, but he would have been able to guess that Christ would have a finger. I hope that illustrates my point.

[David T]

Very interesting discussion. Like Jason, I find no evidence whatsoever in Elder Scott's quoted text to indicate the notion of choice in gender. However the notion brings up an interesting point: is everything that makes up who and what we are entirely the result of our own choices, and does it need to be?

If you answer "yes" to either question, then a critical problem appears: did we choose to exist in the first place? Even if you ignore that specific question, the problem remains in some way: if we have always existed (assuming the theory of eternal existence promoted by Joseph Smith), then was there a "state of origin" at which our identity and make-up was not yet determined by any choice we had made? Take two souls in such a hypothetical state: are they, like carbon copies, exactly identical? What would that state consist of?

It makes my brain hurt just to think about this

While the Scott quote does not discuss choice, What I think the Scott quote does state is that Gender was something that was done as we were 'created male and female' spiritually.

If this implies (which I believe it does) an assignment or act that God did, and we also believe (as does Scott) that prior to the state of being Children of God (whatever that means - I view it as a Covenant Adoption) we existed as free intelligences, then the question that can be implied/come from the quote is:

a) Does Elder Scott believe God choose to 'create us' or assign us as Male and Female spirits without our involvement in the decision?

b) Does Elder Scott believe we had a choice in sustaining/choosing this assignment?

[CV75]

If our gender dictates the ways that we think and behave, can that have an influence on our potential for eternal life? We probably all agree that it doesn't. But if it does, it would seem important that our gender was not chosen by God.

Gender heavily influences, and some may say dictate, the ways we think and behave in gender-related matters. We are asked in all things to think and behave within the bounds set by the Lord, so any attribute we have is influenced or controlled by our fundamental self-mastery. We are to use our gender in righteousness, just as we use any other attribute in righteousness ("BIC" comes to mind, but this applies to any talent we might have).

[nicolasconnault]

While the Scott quote does not discuss choice, What I think the Scott quote does state is that Gender was something that was done as we were 'created male and female' spiritually.

If this implies (which I believe it does) an assignment or act that God did, and we also believe (as does Scott) that prior to the state of being Children of God (whatever that means - I view it as a Covenant Adoption) we existed as free intelligences, then the question that can be implied/come from the quote is:

a) Does Elder Scott believe God choose to 'create us' or assign us as Male and Female spirits without our involvement in the decision?

b) Does Elder Scott believe we had a choice in sustaining/choosing this assignment?

That interpretation of Scott's comments is in direct contradiction with the very plain statement made in the Proclamation on the family, to which he participated: "Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose", unless you interpret "eternal" as forward-looking only. I have always read it as meaning eternal in both directions. Still, that doesn't answer the points I raised in my post.

[David T]

There is a balance here as well. The "bounds and habitations" that tend to put people into proximity that influence their mortal choices were agreed upon pre-mortally, so what we look like, in part, is consistent with our pre-mortal arrangements. Not in precise detail, but enough to reflect that covenant lines are being honored.

So, the implication of this is that you're saying appears to be that you believe some pre-mortal spirits look physically like Asians, some look like Africans, some are Aboriginal, others European, etc. Is that your position? That races are 'classes' of Spirits that were arranged to be born into those ethnic groups because they already physically look like those ethnic groups?