Replies

I think that it’s due to tradition on thinking how god, even being above human nature and such, is depicted as male due to the privileged ontoligcal position of men above women throughout history (thinking in terms of Simone de Beauvoir) but this process theology opens the door to going beyond a male-female-neutral distinction. He declares in another part the radical freedom of everything that’s beyond a given body of relations, and if gender reality is real in terms of our social constructs then god (in his incompleteness) has no account for this reality, or doesn’t need to.

This can kind of be read as de-personification of women as social-construct or performance-related concept, referring to them outside the fact that they’re women in the first place (like patriarchal societies tend to do with women in STEM for example), but in Whitehead’s metaphysics and relational reality we can study ontologies of gender as what they are, social constructs with fixed narratives that are maleable and restricted to human endeavors rather than some type of force of nature as some authors in the history of philosophy tend to do.

It’d be interesting to discuss later on about Whitehead and readings on gender, seeing how he has inspired authors such as Haraway and her influential Cyborg Manifesto