Philosophy Now Forum

Does the MODEL of a male gender assignment to a GOD...

A) Tend to give males automatic superiority over females?

and

B) Enable males to be lazier and more ignorant in actually developing and demonstrating their spiritual potential?

Seriously, I'm asking what are the impacts to human genders, of assigning a male gender to A SINGLE GOD?

What is the definition of male and female?

Gender assignment? Of the Supreme Being?

If God actually exists, He isn't assigned a gender by us...it's the other way around.

-Imp

Immanuel Can wrote:...

If God actually exists, He isn't assigned a gender by us...it's the other way around.

Whoosh! Goes the irony bird.

Walker wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 6:48 pm What is the definition of male and female?

Is there a god that you refer to as "he"? If so, why?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:20 pm Gender assignment? Of the Supreme Being?

Sounds ridiculous, right? So why do you refer to a god as "he"?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:20 pm If God actually exists, He isn't assigned a gender by us...it's the other way around.

Then where does the gender identification come from (if not from humans), and why would a god need a gender?

Lacewing wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 12:37 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:20 pm If God actually exists, He isn't assigned a gender by us...it's the other way around.

Then where does the gender identification come from (if not from humans), and why would a god need a gender?

My point is just that IF the Supreme Being exists, then nobody would have "assigned" anything to Him. He would not even have "assigned" it to Himself. It would be a claim about His fundamental nature, and our conception of two genders would be a contingent product of His creating.

In other words, He assigned US gender...we didn't "assign" Him anything.

However, IF it were the other way around, the way Nietzsche thought it was, for example, and God is merely a human invention, then it doesn't at all matter what gender we "assign" Him, because He wouldn't then exist anyway...and association with the "gender" artificially assigned to this fictive creation of human culture would not impart to maleness any special status -- nor would its disassociation with the feminine represent any substantial injustice to femaleness. Your question would amount to no more than, "Why is Santa Claus male?"

And then, who cares? It's no great loss to anybody if he is.

So if the "maleness" of God has any "impact" at all on human genders, as your question supposes, then you would also have to be supposing God actually exists. Otherwise, it doesn't matter a whit. Why complain about what is done in pure fiction?

If your objection has any "teeth," it can only be on the supposition that God actually exists...and the injustice, then, is that men are "assigning" to Him a quality He does not actually have. If, on the other hand, nobody has "assigned" God His "gender," then you can't really complain...and that would inevitably be the case if God does actually exist.

So what are you supposing here? That God exists? Then whatever "gender" He has, He has. That God does not actually exist? Then what are you complaining about?

Thus, the question needs some clarification as to its suppositional basis.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 12:37 am
Then where does the gender identification come from (if not from humans), and why would a god need a gender?

He needed a gender so that he could rape Mary and force her to have a baby out of wedlock and thus risk being stoned to death.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 2:42 am

Lacewing wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 12:37 am
Then where does the gender identification come from (if not from humans), and why would a god need a gender?

He needed a gender so that he could rape Mary and force her to have a baby out of wedlock and thus risk being stoned to death.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:32 am My point is just that IF the Supreme Being exists, then nobody would have "assigned" anything to Him.

Don't humans assign all kinds of ideas to things that exist?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:32 am In other words, He assigned US gender...we didn't "assign" Him anything.

What are you basing this claim on?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:32 amHowever, IF it were the other way around, the way Nietzsche thought it was, for example, and God is merely a human invention, then it doesn't at all matter what gender we "assign" Him, because He wouldn't then exist anyway...

So, are you saying that the imaginary things people assign ideas to, don't affect/impact anything/anyone else?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:32 amand association with the "gender" artificially assigned to this fictive creation of human culture would not impart to maleness any special status -- nor would its disassociation with the feminine represent any substantial injustice to femaleness.

Perhaps if NO ONE believes it is real. But that's not the case is it? Therefore, all sorts of beliefs are built upon it, and affect even those who don't believe it. Correct?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:32 am So if the "maleness" of God has any "impact" at all on human genders, as your question supposes, then you would also have to be supposing God actually exists.

Not at all. Again...this world and its people are bombarded by falseness and delusion all the time, which affects what they can be and do and think. The idea of a MALE god must surely have implications (elevating the male gender over all), moreso than a god that was neither a he or she.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:32 amIf your objection has any "teeth," it can only be on the supposition that God actually exists

You seem SO infatuated with asserting that other people's statements suggest that "god actually exists", that you don't even seem to recognize how much more you're obviously ignoring/avoiding in your counter-arguments. It's like you're gloriously drunk on your beliefs, and don't even care if you're slurring or not making sense.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 4:50 pm Does the MODEL of a male gender assignment to a GOD...

A) Tend to give males automatic superiority over females?

Well the very reason WHY God was assigned the male gender, in the beginning, was because the male gender thought that they had automatic superiority over the female gender.

If, after that assignment was first given, any of the male and/or female gender then thinks that that then gives the male gender automatic superiority over the female gender, then that just shows how easily people can be led, as well as just how illogical, stupid, idiotic, and irrational human beings can really be.

and

Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 4:50 pmB) Enable males to be lazier and more ignorant in actually developing and demonstrating their spiritual potential?

Is it really true that the male gender (all males) are lazier and more ignorant than the female gender (all females) in actually developing and demonstrating thee spiritual potential?

Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 4:50 pmSeriously, I'm asking what are the impacts to human genders, of assigning a male gender to A SINGLE GOD?

The impacts of assigning human genders to an obviously non gendered It are whatever the individual gives and/or allows.

There is absolute NO impact on me when assigning obviously wrong and incorrect things to some thing.

Also, if we want to LOOK AT the actual Truth of things, there is NO actual human gender, that is; other than the sexual organs on a human body. All other conceptions or perceptions of genders among human beings are just wrong. This view, however, could be proven wrong, when a description of what actually separates females FROM males, other than the sexual organs.

To me, it is ludicrous enough to assign genders to human beings and to then separate them and label them as being either a male or a female, let alone to assign assign a gender to some thing, which would OBVIOUSLY be non gendered.

God is given the male pronoun because referring to him as it would be deemed very disrespectful
Also its more difficult to relate to an it than to a he and that is another reason for the preference
But not all gods in history were he so while the male pronoun is very common its not exclusively so

Lacewing wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 4:23 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:32 am My point is just that IF the Supreme Being exists, then nobody would have "assigned" anything to Him.

Don't humans assign all kinds of ideas to things that exist?

They certainly do.

But then, is your supposition that God is one of these "things that exist"? I'm just asking, not mocking.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:32 am In other words, He assigned US gender...we didn't "assign" Him anything.

What are you basing this claim on?

God's sovereign pre-existence. IF God exists, then inescapably, we are the contingent and created beings, and He would be the self-existent and necessary One.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:32 amHowever, IF it were the other way around, the way Nietzsche thought it was, for example, and God is merely a human invention, then it doesn't at all matter what gender we "assign" Him, because He wouldn't then exist anyway...

So, are you saying that the imaginary things people assign ideas to, don't affect/impact anything/anyone else?

Not very much. The gender of Santa Claus or the Easter Rabbit cannot be of much consequence, if any at all. And and question about it can be offset by reference to the gender of Cinderella and Snow White.

Perhaps if NO ONE believes it is real. But that's not the case is it? Therefore, all sorts of beliefs are built upon it, and affect even those who don't believe it. Correct?

Ah. Now we get down to it.

So your question would be as follows:

There's no such thing as "God."
But some people believe there is, and this belief is of consequence to them.
Assigning God a masculine identity is a manipulation that serves a male agenda.
So we should manipulate it to assign a feminine or neutral identity, to serve a feminine agenda.

Is that your position? I just want to clarify before we go on. Again, I'm not mocking. Feel free to change the wording above until it reflects what you would really say, if you don't like my wording.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 12:44 pm God is given the male pronoun because referring to him as it would be deemed very disrespectful

Who and/or what would deem calling God an It very disrespectful?

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 12:44 pmAlso its more difficult to relate to an it than to a he and that is another reason for the preference

But not for me it is not. I find it much more simpler and easier to relate to some thing which it IS, rather than to which it is NOT.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 12:44 pmBut not all gods in history were he so while the male pronoun is very common its not exclusively so