Loyal Opposition

Good luck suing for a “loyal opposition” when Elder Oaks recently seared that exact phrase as a forbidden no-no in the minds of the members. I know a few people that used his follow up of “questions are honored but opposition is not” to pat themselves on the back for being so far in the “in” group. They now had another arrow in their quiver to silence people that live in the margins.

I didn’t know that the Ensign had been focusing on the proclamation all year. That’s interesting. Starting with lesson 13 in this year’s Teachings of the Presidents (HWH) manual four out of five consecutive lessons dedicated a good portion of the lesson to things found in the proclamation. It was a real “enough already, we get it” moment for me. I’m starting to think that the church may not approve of gay marriage. I think I need a fifth lesson out of six before I go ahead and call it.

If there is to be no loyal opposition, if everyone only fills the role of a yes man, what is the purpose of doing things in council?

Do we need a mechanism for pushback or do we just need “yes men?”

Having nothing but yes men around can create an echo chamber and living in an echo chamber long enough leads to inbred thought that will not stand the test of time. Needing a mechanism for push back in one thing, actually getting it is something else entirely. I don’t see how a system of push back can be implemented in the church. It’s a top-down structure and at the local level there’s this assumption that the top leaders dictate the boundaries of safe conversation.

That said there is a mechanism for push back that’s already in place, it’s just not the best method. It’s called “wait for 30 or 40 years for the generational shift.” Maybe someone somewhere passes a law that speeds the process up but if it’s all top down eventually the people in the down slots age into the top slots.

Was the August lesson exactly what women needed to hear?

What is the lesson a woman should have gotten from the August lesson?

Why Ain’t My Shirt Ironed? – a Nibbler Tale 😈 As you can see, I’m the last person to ask.

On the one hand, people can find problems with any article that is written. On the other hand, this one was pretty bad. I don’t think it’s too much to ask that the articles for women be written by women. The General Relief Society President probably isn’t even the best person to ask each month because (and I’m guessing, generalizing, projecting, etc.) they probably come from backgrounds where they toed the line that a man drew for them. :silent:

I’ll say this much. Even though I understand the reasoning it’s one of the things that frustrates me about church. I have no voice. I shouldn’t complain, women do have less of a voice, but this is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. When I was baptized I took upon myself the name of Jesus Christ. That’s my name on the side of the building. That’s everyone’s name on the side of the building. Why don’t we all have a voice?

Why Ain’t My Shirt Ironed? – a Nibbler Tale 😈 As you can see, I’m the last person to ask.

😆

On the one hand, people can find problems with any article that is written. On the other hand, this one was pretty bad. I don’t think it’s too much to ask that the articles for women be written by women. The General Relief Society President probably isn’t even the best person to ask each month because (and I’m guessing, generalizing, projecting, etc.) they probably come from backgrounds where they toed the line that a man drew for them. :silent:

I also don’t think it’s too much to ask. I really think there might be some big ellipses in the ironing story, but I wasn’t as offended by it as others because it just sounds like something from another generation. (So, if the Ensign is aiming to be irrelevant, they’re off to a good start.) For me, the story is still about a husband who loved his wife the way he knew how.

From Carol Lynn Pearson’s new book about polygamy and how it echoes in the church today:

Still, within the church itself, there remains for women a tension that is always there – powerful-subordinate. It leads, I think, to some unhealthy emotions and behaviors. …Claudia Bushman writes in a recent issue of Exponent II, that except for one “huge move forward for women – lowering the missionary age for girls, I would say that there has been a net loss of opportunity and responsibility for women in the church in the last 40 years.” This is not lost on today’s young women, who in many ways feel of equal value in their world and … of lesser value in their church.

Does the church listen to women? Great post today with a spirited debate. Note the sex of the commenters if you want to see what people think of this issue.

To me it looks like the top Church leaders don’t really listen to any rank-and-file members that don’t already agree with them regardless of gender. Even with the existing basic organization and structure it would be nice if they had some suggestion boxes at church and/or encouraged bishops and stake presidents to actually report concerns up the chain of command but as it is it seems like the communication is mostly one direction (top-down) and practically the only vote Church members can really make at this point is with their feet, saying no to callings, temple recommends, etc.

And even in that case any objections dissatisfied Church members had about the Church will typically be dismissed or ignored anyway as if they were the ones with a problem, never the Church itself. Having tone deaf visiting teaching lessons looks like one of the least of the problems with this culture of institutionalized groupthink and the stated mantra of, “Follow the prophet (he knows the way)”. Basically this is one of the main reasons that the Church has a tendency to remain stuck in the past and has an especially hard time adapting to the current reality as the outside world changes so then we end up with results like the racial priesthood ban lasting as long as it did and the recent handbook exclusion policy PR blunder.

As a phone and F-bomb thrower, I have been ranting all year long about the VT messages. They are heavy handed, misogynistic, and insulting to the intelligence of women.

Hawkgrrl, thank you for sharing this. I’ll bet the author let his wife do some heavy editing before this was posted!