Mortal embodiment and gender

From "Embodied cognition and the content of our minds" Latter-day Saint Philosopher, 30 Jun 2019

When the Proclamation on the Family states that “gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose,” most Latter-day Saints (rightly) take this to mean that gender is more than a social construct or personal preference — it reflects something essential about our natures as sons and daughters of God. Further, embodied cognition hints that the lived experiences of being male and female are rooted not merely in different social norms and constructs, but also in differences in embodied experience and what those entail in the social world. 

When we strip away historically situated social norms and conventions (many of which may be important), most of what we know and experience about gender is somehow related to our physiology. If we take embodied cognition seriously, it might be that mortality is an important step towards more fully realizing gender — as in, making real or bringing to fruition what was before more of an expectation, anticipation, or foreordination. It may be that physical embodiment is a way of becoming gendered. And as such, at birth, we are stepping into, realizing, or taking up our eternal identity as sons and daughters of God. 

Some Latter-day Saints have argued that gender dysphoria may be due to a mismatch of spirit and physical gender; it is possible (they argue) that a “female spirit” to be trapped in a “male body”, or vice versa. This legitimizes gender dysphoria by treating it as a signal that a person’s biological sex is a defect that does not match their eternal gender identity. We have observed this idea spread and take root among some corners of Latter-day Saint thought, as a way of legitimizing the idea of gender transition and transgender identity — it is seen as a way of changing one’s physical sex to match the gender of their spirit. 

Embodied cognition may bring some clarity on that issue. What does it mean, we might wonder, for a man to say he “feels like a woman”? Prior to alterations done to his body, does he have any idea what it feels like when his breasts began to firm up, what it was like to have that first period (especially when it came on unexpectedly in class one afternoon), what it felt like to worry about whether or not he was pregnant the morning after, what it means to feel vulnerable in the presence of sexually aggressive males? All of these are physiological experiences, or psychological / social experiences that have roots in physiological differences. What would a pre-embodied spirit know (or correctly anticipate) of physical embodiment, such that it can later conclude that its gendered experience is “wrong”? 

The primary takeaway — which is wholly uncontroversial from a doctrinal point of view — is that, as male and female, our world of experience is shaped in part by the physiological possibilities and constraints of our gendered bodies, and the social and societal norms which arise from those differences. Gender is an essential component of our eternal identity at least in part because it is intrinsic in the experience of mortal (and resurrected) embodiment. Our entrance into this world as male and female is full of divine purpose, and not mere happenstance. Furthermore, physiological embodiment gives vast new dimensions to gender that were certainly not available to premortal spirits (at least, not fully).

Love and Law

We need to be loving and respect the commandments of God.

https://youtu.be/SsrZ1XqwQlg

From the video of Dallin H. Oaks from Oct 2016:

As Latter-day Saints, many of us (not all of us) but many of us are inclined to insist on the law and do so in an unloving way. 

I receive many letters from people who are devastated at the choices being made by someone in their family. And they say, "What are we to do?" And the first thing I always suggest is keep loving them. In the end, that is something you can always do. 

We have to have in mind, the commandments of the Lord, which I'll refer to as the law and also the great commandment to love one another. And those will come into conflict when someone we associate with is not keeping the commandments or keeping the law. That makes is harder for us to associate with them and to love them. And yet if we love the individual, and at the same time, keep a tight hold on what we know to be our responsibilities to the law, it's possible to do so. 

We benefit by having people among us from different backgrounds. And the challenge of having people among us who bring a different point of view, a different background, different ways of thinking, different values to some extent, it's great. And it's a personal benefit for our progress. 

We should not start off our interaction with people who are making different choices than we desire, by arguing about their choices. It's better for us to start off talking about, "Where are you coming from? What are your basic values? What do you want to accomplish?" Then in that context, we can explain that we are concerned about the Lord's commandments. Because what's important to us is to stay on the path to Eternal Life. 

We are given commandments. When we obey those commandments, we are obedient. The consequence of being obedient to commandments is to put ourselves in harmony with the eternal law that permits us to grow and progress toward eternal life. 

The Savior commanded his followers to "love one another as I have loved you". So we look at how He loved us. He sacrificed himself for us. He was concerned always with the individual. He had a wonderful outreach for people. I think those are all indicators of how we can love one another like He loved us. If we make him our role model, we should always be trying to reach out to include everyone.

This video is featured on  https://mormonandgay.lds.org


"I will speak of restored, gospel truths that are fundamental to the doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Please consider these truths carefully. They explain much about our doctrine and practices perhaps including some things not yet understood." (Sat Morning Session talk by Dallin H. Oaks,  6 Oct 2018, Timestamp 3:35)

"In this Church, what we know will always trump what we do not know. And remember, in this world, everyone is to walk by faith." (“Lord, I Believe”, Jeffrey R. Holland, Apr 2013)

My Evolving Understanding of Homosexuality

In 2008 I was asked to contribute to the passage of Prop 102 in AZ. I wrote then about how I could persuade someone without a reference to religious belief why they should vote in favor of it.

I had an acquaintance at work that is gay. We had extended chat sessions where I had to defend my views on marriage. I came to see the issue from a gay man's point of view. It affected me greatly.

At the time, I thought being gay was a choice. Probably the primary thing that turned this for me was a lecture by Emeritus professor William Bradshaw who visited Brigham Young University on Sept. 23, 2010 and delivered a lecture entitled "The Case For A Biological Origin of Homosexuality".

I was confused. All my life I had been told that gay was a choice. This lecture opened the possibility that it was not.

In December 2012 the church launched the website mormonsandgays.org
"Where the Church stands: The experience of same-sex attraction is a complex reality for many people. The attraction itself is not a sin, but acting on it is. Even though individuals do not choose to have such attractions, they do choose how to respond to them. With love and understanding, the Church reaches out to all God’s children, including our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters."

I have come to the same conclusion. I am not sure what causes homosexuality generally. From what I have heard it is not a choice.

I do believe strongly in traditional marriage. In the summer of 2014 discussingmarriage.org. I had heard of many of these secular arguments for traditional marriage. I think this site makes a good case the case for it.

Maybe I'll Meet a Girl

A great story about compassion and Christlike love.

"Maybe I'll Meet a Girl" by Jeff Benedict

Three Reflections on Same-Sex Marriage in Utah

I don't find anything that I disagree with in this article by James Goldberg.  Following are some short snippets that sum it up for me.

I see myself as an heir to a long legacy of Abrahamic values, and I believe those values have blessed the world far more than they have harmed it.
...
I believe that a culture of marriage ought to be built around customs of procreation and child-rearing within the relationship between husband and wife.
...
the following three principles will be continue to be challenged in different ways and that affirming them will continue to have utility:
Principle #1. Biological parents will be accountable to their children; children have a right to responsible biological parents.
...
Principle #2. Fatherhood and Motherhood still matter as distinct roles. Communities succeed when they find the proper balance of guidance and flexibility in preparing the young for these vital roles.
...
Principle #3. The link between sexuality and procreation is not incidental.

The Law of Chastity Is Not Changing

The Law of Chastity Is Not Changing. Jeffrey Thayne. Oct 2013

Be at the Forefront in terms of Expressing Love

Elder Quentin L. Cook in an emotional interview about a sensitive subject.

Clearly the hardest thing that I had when I was stake president is I was president when AIDS, the medical community first became aware of AIDS. We had a significant number of our men who found that they had AIDS, some of them had not been in the Church, the majority of them, a few had we found that we had seventeen men with AIDS and at that point there was no cure. And all seventeen of them ultimately died of AIDS while I was stake president. I learned some incredible lessons through that process, that as a Mormon community, it’s a loving and compassionate community. I watched Bishops who made incredible sacrifices to take care of some of these young men who were dying. I watched them try very hard to reconnect them with their families and to have their families take care of them, and again at that time there was no cure, and no abeyance of it. I watched them take care of each other. And I watched some of them, one of them comes to mind in particular, a returned missionary, in a single incidence of conduct, took it upon himself to take care of the most difficult situations, those that were the most ill, and he was the last one to die. I think the lesson that I learned from that is that as a Church nobody should be more loving and compassionate. No family who has anybody who has a same-gender issue should exclude them from the family circle. They need to be part of the family circle. Do we teach the Proclamation on the Family, do we teach Heavenly Father’s plan, do we teach the first chapter in the second handbook, yes we do. We have a plan of salvation. And having children come into our lives is part of Heavenly Father’s plan. But let us be at the forefront in terms of expressing love, compassion, and outreach to those and lets not have families exclude or be disrespectful of those who choose a different lifestyle as a result of their feelings about their own gender. I’m sorry, I feel very strongly about this as you can tell. I think it’s a very important principle. (Quentin L. Cook, video on mormonsandgays.org)