We read Helawoman chapter 1 tonight

Cool

That made me smile in a big grin!

I am impressed that it is you, not your wife, that seems to have taken the initiative on this. What is her take on this (if that isn’t probing too much)?

This exercise never would have occurred to me before I had a faith crisis. As it happens, having a piece of your identity torn out allows you to see that piece more clearly. I think that’s why I took the initiative.

My wife is still deciding what to think. We discussed it a little this morning, and I got a vibe that she feels a little threatened. Motherhood is hard, hard work, and it’s mostly done in the background. She very much enjoys that the Church recognizes her hard work and that I appreciate it. This recognition probably figures into her self-worth. I think she worries that overemphasizing other ways of being feminine will take away a chunk of recognition that’s rightfully hers. I think such worries would be well-founded, as the vocal feminists she’s heard the most from often ignore and sometimes denigrate full-time motherhood.

In short, I think she worries about swinging the pendulum too far the other way, and she has personal interest in whether it does.

We’ve discussed things like this before. For example, how do we make room for members to openly believe non-literally without marginalizing members who believe literally? Love, respect and understanding, of course, but it’s easy to fail, as evidenced by the RLDS leadership’s steamrolling their fundamentalist members in the 1970s, which fed the schism in the 1980s. In general, how can we change while nullifying losses, real and perceived, experienced by those who have historically benefitted the most from the status quo? When we can’t nullify losses, how do we minimize losses and mollify those who experience them?

I’d rather not feed resentment by trying to guilt the privileged into keeping quiet. I’ve had enough of that directed at me.

My son probably needs mollifying (without guilt) for his real and perceived losses. For the first time last night, he experienced the scriptures as his mother and sisters do – except he didn’t have the mental and emotional tools necessary to appreciate them and apply them despite gender mismatches, which the women in his family have developed since they were very young. I enjoyed it vicariously through my daughters, and by identifying my wife as a woman who is as strong as the ones we read about. But my son has never had to think like a girl, and being on the autism spectrum makes that even more difficult than it normally is for a boy his age. He’s also much less secure in his masculinity than I am.

For my part, this exercise isn’t just for fun, academic interest, or pursuit of an ideal – though all of those are partial reasons. My two oldest daughters (and maybe my youngest) don’t fit the common mold, and I worry that they’ll harm themselves trying. It’s true that the Church has backed off explicitly teaching that full-time motherhood is the only way. But it does explicitly teach only one feminine ideal and presents very few role models to girls who don’t follow that ideal.

We used to teach that God was happy with exactly one way of being and we denigrated the rest. Now, we teach that God is happy with that one way and might allow other ways depending on circumstances – but of course there’s only one way to be exalted and it’s sad when members lack that assurance of exaltation. I’m still working out how much less damaging this have-your-doctrinal-cake-and-eat-it-too position is. I suspect it depends on the ward and the member, and that for too many the answer lies somewhere between somewhat and not much.

the vocal feminists she’s heard the most from often ignore and sometimes denigrate full-time motherhood.

This is interesting.

I was reading about this just last night in Delusions of Gender by Cordelia Fine. Several social experiments show that women who enter predominantly male spaces (e.g. business, math, science fields) have often needed to distance themselves from female stereotypes to be taken seriously. This includes things like being vocal about not wanting kids, wearing pants rather than skirts (to downplay feminine appearance), wearing less makeup, or avoiding showing emotions. This is more common among second wave feminists (my age group) than younger feminists. Third wave feminists are more inclusive and acknowledge the real source of this pressure: the exclusion of women and the negative, choice-limiting messages associated with female stereotyping.

One of my employees at Amex was a woman in India who ran our Bangalore operations. She & I discussed this often when I did site visits. She was ambitious (as I was) and she said she always dressed and acted like a boy so that people would take her seriously. That’s the problem when one sex has the opportunities and power, but both sexes include people with ambition. The ambitious ones who were born into the “loser” team (womanhood) feel a need to distance themselves from it.

(We were both completely twitterpated when Kiran Mazumdar-Shaw walked into the hotel lobby where I was staying while we were meeting–and if you don’t know who that is, well, look it up because she’s an amazing feminist rock star!)

Love it. Simply love it.

I love the idea. I wouldn’t have thought of doing this in a million years.

I admit to being inspired by Dear Mormon Man, tell me what you would do.

Still going strong. We’ve started taking turns: every other night is “ladies’ night” and the rest are “gents’ night.” More fun:

“The Lady your Goddess”

“Behold, their men did toil and spin, and did make all manner of cloth…”

Son reminded us to use “Baberaham” as a substitute for “Abraham”

“The Daughter of Goddess”

The girls are still enjoying it. My wife’s sister and one of her daughters are visiting, and they’ve done this with us. Between this and my talking about how Uchtdorf was commenting on fear culture exemplified by the other talks, I’m sure my sister-in-law thinks I’ve gone off the deep end.