Two of the most attractive aspects of Transhumanism to me are morphological freedom and cognitive liberty. Morphological freedom refers to the civil rights each person has—to maintain or modify their own body according to their autonomy by the use or refusal of medical technologies. Cognitive liberty is the freedom to have control over their own cognition and consciousness. I think of this pairing as freedom of body and mind. These concepts have a profound impact on how we view and adapt our bodies.
While topics related to transhumanism, religion, gender, and human
sexuality tend to be controversial, there is a case to be made that if you are
a Transhumanist, even a Mormon Transhumanist, you should be supportive of the
LGBTQ community.
Morphological Freedom
One aspect of morphological freedom is how we perceive and interact with
gender identities, performances, and sexual orientations. While many debates
have been had over binary notions of gender and sexuality, mainly
cisnormativity and monosexuality, I want to challenge these ideas further by
illuminating the complexities of plural genders and sexual orientation,
including fluidity. Gender and sexuality are not static or binary. All is in
flux, even if personal labels don’t fluctuate.
Some may advocate for a postgender society composed of homogenization,
but that hardly seems like a product of evolution, when evolution
generally favors increased diversification. Gender, when deconstructed of its
binary notions, is as unique as each individual. I’m in favor of a
future that understands, embraces, and celebrates the uniqueness and diversity
of gender. Postgenderism
should be about diversity, not homogeny or conformity. I’ve touched on the
diversity of gender in Queer,
Mormon, and Transhuman: Part I, and Queer,
Mormon, and Transhuman: Part II.
Not only is Transhumanism compatible with queer sexualities and diverse gender
identities, it also favors embracing diversity. The eighth point of the
Transhumanist Declaration states, “We favour allowing individuals wide personal
choice over how they enable their lives” including “human modification and
enhancement technologies.”
This indicates that diversity of morphological freedom, to the extent
that it’s not oppressive, is valued among transhumanists. Technologies are
already changing how we present our bodies, whether that’s minor cosmetic enhancements,
practical reconstructions, or gender confirmation surgery.
More dramatic changes, like gender confirmation surgery, are challenging
notions of morphological freedom. Does morphological freedom include freedom
over gender identity and expression? Nick Bostrom, one of the authors of the
Transhumanist Declaration, commented in his essay In Defense of Posthuman Dignity, “One example of how contemporary
technology can change important aspects of someone’s identity is sex
reassignment [gender confirmation surgery]. The experiences of transsexuals
[trans and non-binary identities] show that Western culture still has work to
do in becoming more accepting of
diversity. This is a task that we can begin to tackle today by fostering a climate of tolerance and acceptance
toward those who are different from ourselves. Painting alarmist pictures of
the threat from the future technologically modified people, or hurling
preemptive condemnations of their necessarily debased nature, is not the best
way to go about it.” He continues, “Our role in this process need not be that
of passive bystanders. We can work to create more inclusive social structures
that accord appropriate moral recognition and legal rights to all who need
them, be they male or female, black or white, flesh or silicon.”
The third point of the Mormon Transhumanist Affirmation states, “We seek
the spiritual and physical exaltation of individuals and their anatomies, as
well as communities and their environments, according to their wills, desires, and laws, to the extent they are
not oppressive.”
One oppressive form of morphology is non-consensual esthetic changes to
the intersex population. Intersex infants are often hormonally and surgically
altered to conform to socially accepted “norms” to perpetuate the gender binary.
These non-consensual, “normalizing,” esthetical interventions have little to no
evidence that treatment offers medical benefits other than perpetuation of
social gender constructs. The Council
of Europe became the first institution to state that intersex people have
the right to not undergo sex affirmation interventions. Other governments are
following suit by suspending non-consensual medical interventions.
I agree with Bostrom, we need to “create more inclusive social structures”
which includes accepting diverse and fluid genders, and a person’s right to
accept or refuse individual morphology. Under the Transhumanist Declaration and
Mormon Transhumanist Affirmation, the adaptation of a person’s gender identity,
performance, and physiology is a part of respecting morphological autonomy.
Cognitive Liberty
Deconstruction of the gender binary is also important as it relates to
sexual orientation. When gender is seen as something more diverse than simply
being binary and more fluid than being stagnant, issues related to
heterosexuality and homosexuality tend to become less relevant.
For example, if two people are in a relationship and one or both partners
is capable of changing their gender identity, performance, or physiology, the
sexual orientation of the couple cannot be defined as heterosexual, homosexual,
or even bisexual. Gender identity highlights the core issue of sexual
orientation and its fluidity.
If my husband were to change his gender identity and physiology to
socially ascribed femaleness, would our marriage now be immoral? No. I can see
no reason why his gender identity is the determining factor of whether our marriage
is moral or immoral. In fact, to suggest otherwise is oppress to his right to
morphological freedom, my right to love him, and continue our marriage
independent of his gender identity. Whether I agree or disagree with his
physical changes, we should recognize the value of commitment, or in this case,
marriage. Promises and commitments made between loving, committed persons
should not be carelessly thought as immoral on account of morphological and/or
cognitive changes. Some changes may be difficult to process. Our partner(s)
change in ways we prefer and don’t prefer. But commitment is also one small
aspect of cognitive liberty—to love radically, thoughtfully, freely, and
consensually—which includes staying committed during times of change.
It is immoral to limit the consensual love of humanity by gender. It is both
sexist and oppressive. I can find no reason why love should be suppressed
on account of gender. That’s not to say that everyone needs to identify as
pansexual. Quite the contrary, we all have preferences and desires that should
be respected, including monosexual labels. However, morphological freedom illustrates
that sexual orientation and gender identity is also a matter cognitive liberty.
We should be free to love beyond gendered borders. As stated above,
transhumanists “favour allowing individuals wide personal choice over how they enable
their lives.” I think this includes the freedom to be with the informed, consenting
adult(s) they love.
Again, the third point of the Mormon Transhumanist Affirmation states, “We
seek the spiritual and physical exaltation of individuals and their anatomies,
as well as communities and their environments, according to their wills,
desires, and laws, to the extent they are not oppressive.”
People tend to focus on oppression as a means of justifying morality. One
group may claim that one is oppressing the other, but in reality, a homosexual
marriage and relationship is no more inherently oppressive than a heterosexual
marriage. Just as a plural
marriage is no more inherently oppressive that a monogamous marriage.
Oppression is a state of unjust treatment and control, in this case, to thwart
a person’s cognitive liberty to love and enter into a relationship(s) with the
person(s) they love. Oppression, in this case, is pressing one person’s values
onto another without accepting diversity of values as a viable option. Diversity
of thought and love is at the root of cognitive liberty.
Alleviation of Grave Suffering
The fifth point of the Transhumanist Declaration states, “Reduction of
existential risks, and development of means for the preservation of life and
health, the alleviation of grave suffering, and the
improvement of human foresight and wisdom should be pursued as urgent
priorities, and heavily funded.” I’d like to focus briefly on the “preservation
of life and health, the alleviation of
grave suffering.”
The LGBTQ community as a whole has higher
levels of suicide attempts and self-harm than the non-queer population,
also confirmed by the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Of all gender identities, the transgender community has the highest
levels of suicide attempts with over 40
percent of the transgender community attempting suicide. That rate is
nearly nine times higher than the cisgender population in America. Transgender
mental health issues are likely caused by stigmatization, shame, distress,
social rejection, isolation, trauma, and discrimination. Deprivation of “self”
can also lead to a sense of meaninglessness.
Of all sexual orientations, the bisexual population experiences the highest
rates of depression, anxiety, and suicidal thoughts. Bisexual females
exhibit the highest
suicide scores. The Pew Research Center also shows that bisexuals are also significantly
less likely to disclose their sexual orientation than monosexuals. Much of
this is due to victimization, peer judgments, and family rejection. Bisexual
individuals also reported
higher rates of mental illness and substance abuse.
The queer community is in a state of “grave suffering.” As Transhumanists,
it is part of our declaration to work toward the “preservation of life and
health, and the alleviation of grave
suffering.” It sufficeth to say, the health and well-being of the queer
community falls under the fifth point of the Transhumanist Declaration. Not
only does the declaration state these are important matters, but also “should
be pursued as urgent priorities, and heavily funded.”
According
to the CDC, suicide prevention of the queer community is heavily influenced
by parental, family, and community support and acceptance. One
study showed that family acceptance of gender identity leads to lower
levels of anxiety and depression. Groups, such as the Family Acceptance Project (FAP),
are seeking constructive ways to improve the health and well-being of the queer
community.
Morphological freedom and cognitive liberty are not simply desires, they are
necessary in the pursuit of happiness. In this context, a person who struggles
with severe, chronic gender dysphoria has no hope of alleviation or happiness
without the consent of the existing community. A homosexual woman may perceive
life as meaningless without the hope of being with the woman who loves her. A
monogamous person may feel trapped in a monogamous marriage not because they
don’t love their current spouse, but because they have more love to give, yet
society disallows the expression of that love. Without our compassion, we have
condemned these individuals to a life of oppression and possible misery—a
lifetime of gender dysphoria, repression, or social condemnation. If there is
any value in life, love must be the highest value. To thwart love is to enable
death.
Humans are communal, no matter how highly we value our individuality. We
are at each other’s mercy. However, prosociality is not simply a matter of
conforming to the majority, but also accepting the legitimacy of the minority.
Prosociality cannot occur without freedom of diversity, because we have
different values, desires, and experiences. However, there isn’t much point to
freedom if there is no hope of happiness, or the potential of happiness.
Morphological freedom and cognitive liberty are necessary for individuals to
pursue different approaches to happiness and meaning.
Mormon Transhumanists
Some readers may be concerned the LDS Church has placed restriction on
LGBTQ participation, including their
offspring. While I, too, am concerned and saddened by various LDS policies,
I still maintain there is nothing
inherently anti-queer about Mormon theology, which is different than LDS
policy.
The first point of the Mormon Transhumanist Affirmation states, “We are
disciples of the Gospel of Jesus Christ” when we “fully immerse our bodies and minds in the role of Christ, to become
compassionate creators as exemplified and invited by Jesus.” As members of the
body of Christ, it is our responsibility to heal, console, and comfort
those in need. As illustrated above, the LGBTQ community is in need. We should
be “compassionate creators” in finding thoughtful solutions to diverse desires.
Illustrated in the sixth point of the Mormon Transhumanist Affirmation,
“We practice our discipleship when we offer friendship, that all may be many in one; when we receive truth, let
it come from whence it may; and when we send
relief, consolation and healing, that raises
each other together.” Raising each other up includes admittance of all
genders as worthy participants in religious rituals, not just cisgender
identities. Raising each other includes temple sealings of all loving,
committed marriages whether they be heterosexual, homosexual, or plural.
Raising each other up does not include rejecting LBGTQ and polygamous marriages
from temple blessings. I understand that some would see these relationships as
“sin,” but interracial marriages were once disallowed, reject, illegal, and
considered “sin”—until they weren’t. If all you can
offer is love and friendship, do it. Love is one form of “relief and consolation”
that is not in LDS dispute.
Conclusion
The third point of the Transhumanist Declaration states, “We recognize
that humanity faces serious risks, especially from the misuse of new
technologies. There are possible realistic scenarios
that lead to the loss of most, or even all, of what we hold valuable. Some of these scenarios are drastic,
others are subtle. Although all progress is change, not
all change is progress.”
I agree “not all change is progress.” The question is, what is it we hold
valuable? What makes us human? Patriarchy? Monogamy? Heteronormativity? Binary
divisions? Diversity? Plurality? Homogeny? Change? Evolution? The answers will
be as diverse as each person. This means humanity will ceaselessly debate what
we hold as valuable, and though I am only one voice in the matter, I will voice
my values.
The sixth point of the Transhumanist Declaration states “respecting
autonomy and individual rights, and showing solidarity with and concern for the
interests and dignity of all people around the globe.” To me, this includes respecting the right to love and engage committed
relationship(s) with a consenting adult(s) independent of their gender identity
or physiology. I don’t see how one could ascribe to the Transhumanist
Declaration or the principles of morphological freedom and cognitive liberty
without the acceptance of the queer community. It is possible to support these
communities, yet still live differently.
Morphological freedom and cognitive liberty includes far more than
matters related to gender and sexuality. I would like to see humanity evolve
beyond current trends of discrimination by defending human and posthuman
dignity in creating more inclusive and humane ethics. There are far more
complex problems on the horizon than gender identities and sexual orientations.
We must move forward with radical love at the core of our motives, desires, and
ethics.
*This
post is a personal commentary of my own desires and objectives, and I am
speaking as an individual and not as a spokesperson for the many non-profits
and advocacy groups that I lead and/or affiliate with.
