Welcome to Gaia! ::

Well, I am having trouble understanding the idea of reincarnation.

Especially when it comes to gender identity. I find the two incompatible. I researched some debates on this and what I found to be interesting was that someone claimed gender identity came solely from hormones and human conditioning and therefore had no effect whatsoever on the "spirit" or "essence". Another that one's "soul" has in fact some sort of gender itself. This leads to another question: is gender interchangable amoung the many lives?

What are your thoughts on this? How can gender identity fit into the belief of reincarnation?

To me, it is obvious that some "core personality" is a part of the soul.

However, the reason why most doesn't notice that, is because most Core personalities is very adaptable, and don't mind what gender they are born into, or what restrictions the culture they are born into, puts on them.

Insatialble Design just thought mentioned that "soul gender" would equal "soul personality".
I say it isn't so.
A soul may be at home in the designatéd gender, but not in the restrictions that the culture puts on that gender, and vice versa.

Essentially, a "male" soul may be ok in a male body, but may still dislike having to be "macho".

This is my impression/guess/opinion.

Genders are physical and are there to procreate. They do not translate into the spiritual realm because there is no need for them.

First, a response to your reply to me:
To me, gender is not automatically about procreation, especially not any percieved "soul gender".
Now to these wonderings/questions:

* Mind you, once it was considered "manly" to cry. Guess how often men cried during those times?
Once, red was a man's colour, and blue was a womans.
I rather think Gender Roles are based on society and culture, and not the reverse.

* Some do claim to remember past lives ... and those are usually fairly un-remarkable lives. Occasionally, those are of a different gender.

* According to the historical variants of the Abrahamic beliefs (Judasism, Islam, Christianity), souls are only possessed by humans, as far as i know.
I am not certain about "modern" interpetations, though.
However.
In Hinduism and Buddhism, the Religions/Mythologies that includes Reincarnation, a soul easily move both between gender and species.
So there, all animals have souls, includiing flies and worms.

Why would a soul need anything at all?
Why would it need to take the form into any kind of being, at all?

Technically, we might actually all be soul-less robots from that point of view.

If souls do exist, though, i can find these three reaons for them to have something that may resemble gender, and that is:
* Further variation.
* A sense of something outside of the physical realm, either because it contrasts too much against the physical gender, or because it is so well-matched.
* To learn the living that there are more variation to gender than is currently percieved.

I give you my impression.
I do not follow exactly Hinduistic or Abramic or any other currently official principles on what a soul is said to be.
How could i, when they aren't the same?
Also, my impression may not be the same as any of them, but rather a bit different, while still including both, in a way ... and still neither, depending on how one interpret it.

First off, i may have expreesed myself clumsily in my eager to descibe my impression of what a soul is, and thereby explain how it might work.

Second, a did not say "original gender roles", i mentioned "soul gender".

Now to try explain how i see it more fully:
I'm not sure if you will understand what i mean when i compare it to a painting, because i have noticed that some don't.
Anyway:
Your genetics, what you are born with, is the canvas, the area that you are supposed to paint on.
Where you are born, however culture, all influences, decide your tools, what brushes you use, and what paints.

But, the soul, is doing the painting, and it wants to put enough of itself in the painting, but sometimes the canvas don't fit, or the tools are wrong.
Like, the soul has "female" soulgender, byt the canvas is shapes for a male ... or the other way around. or that the soul is trury ungendered, but the canvas is distincly much male or femme.
This is just the shape, no personality, no "original gender roles", because those doesn't exist.
Then, there is personality traits, of which most may be more dependent on the tools .... it may be hard to find the proper brushes, if ones environment keeps handing one a certain kind ...

But still, the soul is doing the painting, as well as it can.

.... Cavemen is not a good example, as too much of ... "male viewpoints" ... has influenced archeology.

The rest ... i have either answered now, or i feel that i cannot, currently.

Studies on the Hazda people and the Australian aborigines suggests that sexual division of labor was much more flexible. This is an area of disagreement among paleologist since we know very little about how "caveman" societies were typically organized. Steven Kuhn from the University of Arizona seems to think that sexual division of labor didn't exist until the Upper Paleolithic era.