Joanna Brooks on NBC

Joanna Brooks didn’t say that… it was a bit of a misstatement from the reporter. Brooks was pleasant, engaging, and it was a great spot to show that Mormonism no longer requires extraordinary conformity.

Brooks: “Ever since I was a kid, I’ve had this core conviction that men and women are equal… equal in the sight of God, but I’ve also been raised in a church with very clearly delineated notions of what men should do and what women should do. I see young men passing the sacrament. My daughter says to me, ‘Mom, why don’t girls pass the sacrament.’ I say, ‘Well… this is the way things are.'”

Reporter (narrating about Brooks): “And she’s vocal on the subject of whether women can have equality in the Mormon Faith, if they cannot hold leadership positions.”

Brooks: “We wrestle, some of us, with the fact that women are not ordained to the priesthood. That’s not an issue for all Mormon feminists, it is for some of us. Many of us have questions about decision making authority in the church.”

Reporter (narrating): “But it says something that she can appear on national TV and be critical and still be a practicing Mormon. Twenty years ago, the church never would have stood for it. As recently as 1993, feminist scholars at Brigham Young University were excommunicated for expressing some of the same ideas.”

Brooks (smiling): “I sure hope the church doesn’t consider me a critic. I just want there to be a little more room for people like me.”

This is a great example of how urban legends get started and things get attributed to people who never said them. There’s a really important lesson in it about second-hand summaries, especially since it’s so stinking easy to miss the fact that they are second-hand summaries.

Just to throw this out there as an example, many members mistakenly think that most of what’s in the Book of Mormon actually represents first-hand accounts when, in reality, almost all of it after Omni is written in the form of second-hand (and sometimes third- or fourth-hand) summary. Understanding that simple fact alone can change SO much of how we see and interpret that record, including our tendency to treat it as our own version of the inerrant Bible.

[Let’s not make this thread about the Book of Mormon. I only used it to make the first point. It’s OK to continue the example to further that point, but let’s not change the overall focus of the post.]

This is a great example of how urban legends get started and things get attributed to people who never said them. There’s a really important lesson in it about second-hand summaries, especially since it’s so stinking easy to miss the fact that they are second-hand summaries.

Just to throw this out there as an example, many members mistakenly think that most of what’s in the Book of Mormon actually represents first-hand accounts when, in reality, almost all of it after Omni is written in the form of second-hand (and sometimes third- or fourth-hand) summary. Understanding that simple fact alone can change SO much of how we see and interpret that record, including our tendency to treat it as our own version of the inerrant Bible.

[Let’s not make this thread about the Book of Mormon. I only used it to make the first point. It’s OK to continue the example to further that point, but let’s not change the overall focus of the post.]

Yes this is “His-story”. 😆 my Orthdox Jewish friend often jokes about that with me. I think your right that it is ultimately one mans perspective on things that can get perpetuated and misquoted, even without intent and even in today’s world. How important it is(at least for me) to get as much view points as possible on a event or situation…etc. to get as close to the “truth” as possible. I’m not referencing the bible/BOM but all human history here. As others might jump to conclusions from a limited perpestive about us here, let us not jump to conclusions about others as well. As this interview shows.

I think my wife does. She just showed me the clip and it was the narrator that said it, not Joanna. After my wife reluctantly conceded the narrator was a voice-over and that Joanna may not have ever known the narrator was going to say there are “no leadership positions”, my wife then didn’t like it that she agreed there was no authority….I corrected her indicating it said no PRIESTHOOD authority, to which she changed the subject saying “Whatever”….so, I don’t think Joanna said anything wrong. Thanks guys.

I am in lovely cache valley tonight staying with DW’s relatives… Watched the NBC episode with a bunch of ultraTBMs…

I thought the thing was very positive… Yet this group pretty much hated it. To them Abby Huntsman had to be sinning to leave the church, and the hostility toward Joanna and the BoM cast member was palpable.

The figure of 77% activity rate perplexed me…and caffeine…

I kept a very low profile, but they got the sense I knew a lot about Joanna, and I had to point out that a lot of people leave because of Abby-like priesthood roulette experiences… “well how do you know that”…”a large study of thousands of people who leave shows interesting facts…”

This isn’t working out to be the best evening…I said too much, apparently.

Sigh.

The differnce(from my point of view) being that while you are well traveled and experienced life from many points of view.

Centralized society(large groups of like members of tribe) often leads to little tolerance to those outside of their sphere(tribe). Extreme tribalism results. It is far from being a TBM Mormon thing. One of the reasons(I personally) don’t like living in tribal communities(undiverse). On the plus side, Zion and Bryce national park is the 3rd most beautiful part of America that I have been to. Nice way to relieve the stress from TBM tribal life there. That’s what I did when I lived there.

f-c, that is great insight. tribalism is alive and well here…what frustrates me most is how my DW went tribal on me….

aargh…

Hmm mr. Isaac Newton had right. In object in motion tends to stay in motion. The external force and motion is with the tribe and your wife on this one. Of course to balance it out would mean a object of equal size and mass. I think you won’t find it there and I wouldn’t sudjest trying it. But ya we are by instinct and our natural state tribal, seance that’s what we have been doing for tens of thousands of years in our DNA. It takes conscious effort and a lot of hard work in a persons consciousness to counter act that natural state. I understand the frustration, I tend to silently withdraw from the scene when it happens leaving my then GF and church members perplexed. I have no wish for conflict nor do I want to encourage that behavior because it encourages people to view outsides as a threat. Christ mission seem to really be the prince of peace when ever someone didn’t follow establish customs and tradition and were persecuted as a result because they were seen as a threat to those. He liked to point out it wasn’t those people that were a threat, it was the tribal mentality out casting , judging them that was. That was probably(to me) because he himself was that outcast person not adhering to establish traditions watching all those who were not like minded being cast out of the community.

We are wired biologically to attack and defend whenever we perceive threat. Therefore, it’s easy (“natural”) to fight about things; it’s much harder to prove that you have no desire to attack – or defend forcefully.

In situations like that, I usually just grin broadly, let my eyes twinkle a bit and say, “I like you WAY too much to fight about this” (sometimes with a hand on the other person’s arm or shoulder, depending on the person) – then turn and walk away or start another, safer conversation.

It either calms them down or makes them even madder – but, in a group setting where everyone hears what I say, it’s impossible for the other person to keep arguing without coming across as a total jerk. I hope for the calming down response, but if the madder response is unavoidable, so be it. At least the argument ends – or doesn’t occur.