- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I will try to write this response with some restraint. I am not an OW proponent. That said the wheel for LDS women is turning slower than anything else.
If certain practices are a hold over I no longer feel I can blame BY or Eliza R. Snow – I blame the LDS women of today. I blame the present curriculum department. The top Women’s Leadership. The CEO of Deseret Book. The wives of GA’s. BYU hiring policies. The conversation about Women’s roles has been going on longer than OW. The path of Women’s Standing was quietly shut down with no reason given, i.e. retraction of laying of hands, and RS being a separate entity, not a Priesthood Auxiliary.
I also don’t believe OW helped as much as they would like to take credit for. I would give the credit for women praying in GC to FMH before OW. I think OW retrenched the problem. Their first attempt was bold. Too bold. If they really cared, they were smart enough to have set a different strategy. The top OW leadership loves to let us know their academic standing and career placement. All of that knowledge didn’t save them from stupidity.
We needed OW’s conversation, their choice to act robbed all of us of that.
Well stated Mom3! OW used tactics that are successful in special interest group politics, but not in religions.
I really appreciate your thoughts on this forum, Mom3 and AP, you’ve helped me a lot, but I think I respectfully disagree about OW. I hope you’ll show restraint with me as well. Let me say I’m not a member of it or anything like that. But I think their influence on what’s happened in the Church has actually been understated, at least in my circles. I am reminded of a feed on my social media not so long ago. It was the story that broke the news that the Church had added a few women to some upper leadership committees. I was floored that these committees already didn’t have any female representation at all, but I digress. The point is, I remember reading the comments on the news story from faithful TBM’s celebrating the appointment. They were excited to see women added. However, time and time again, I read something along the lines of, “I’m so grateful that the Lord does things on his own time. This proves that the Lord is not influenced by protests or the aggravations of groups.” I remember thinking to myself, “Thou Doth Protest too much.” Nearly every-other comment had some passive-aggressive, non-specific mention of OW.
I absolutely agree in some ways there has been a retrenchment reaction to OW. However, I also believe that these conversations that you, Mom3, mentioned us needing, have been happening. They’ve been happening for years. With no change or impact. These conversations have fallen on deaf years, if fallen on any ears in the church leadership at all. Before OW, I didn’t see any movement in regards to giving women more influence in the Church or correcting some of our more overt sexist policies. From my perspective, it was only getting worse.
We have a hierarchal church system that rewards yes-men and yes-women. This makes it very hard to change anything from the ground at all, especially if it’s about issues that the leaders of the Church don’t see or are personally affected by (as is the case with women’s roles in the Church). I honestly do believe that much of the movement we’ve seen in regards to women’s roles recently (as minimal as it’s been) is a direct response to OW. It took external pressure (in the form of OW), bringing in the media and scrutiny of ‘the outside world’ for the Church to be put in a defensive position about its treatment of women, and thus, quietly correct some of its “policies” while roaring from the pulpit that it will not change its doctrine. Naturally, there’s been a lot of retrenchment. But some things-that are the most overtly sexist and have no direct tie to Ordination—have been corrected a bit. The Church will swear up and down that this is not a reaction to OW. To me, it feels like an obvious reaction. Also, with all this uproar, more people have come out of the woodwork to talk about smaller issues about sexism in the church that isn’t doctrinal and can be “fixed” without going directly against Church Leadership. It also sounds less “apostate-like” when you’ve got OW to compare it to. So I think OW has helped to create more of these conversations, while at the same time, causing some retrenchment.
Of course, I come from a YSA Ward perspective, and I think YSA Wards are often quite different from traditional wards. They tend to be more liberal and I honestly do think YSA Wards are reflective of the future membership of the Church.
With that said, I don’t think OW will have a major impact on the advancement of women’s roles in the Church. I’m reminded of the Suffrage movement of American and English women as they attempted to secure the vote for women. I specifically think back to women in England. They fought for decades for the right to vote. They organized peaceful protests, went to prison, lost their jobs, lost their husbands and children, and to no avail. Women lived their whole lives doing everything they could to try and secure the right to vote and then died before any traction could be made. Leadership simply refused to move. I honestly see a lot of similarities. Some women said that they sympathized but didn’t see the need for the vote—they wanted more protections in the workplace from sexual assault, etc. Then some of the suffragists became radicalized in England, dividing the movement between suffragists and sufferagettes. Sufferagettes bombed buildings. Resorting to violence—anything to get the attention of the men in power. It still didn’t work.
I argue that it took WWI—when most of the men were gone and women had to step up to take their leadership roles—that women were able to secure the right to vote and the rights of women improved significantly in England. Sometimes I think God works in mysterious ways. Maybe this phenomenon of women outnumbering men in the church—and likely to continue to outnumber men in larger numbers, will bring some change. The fact that we can anticipate a larger generation of bright, single, adult women who are active participants in the church as a bigger percentage of church participants than ever before might help make some traction about the role of women in the church. You can only tell a congregation that a women’s role is “motherhood” so many times when a sizable portion of it is made up of single women and there aren’t enough men to fill all the callings traditionally reserved for men. But I suppose that’s wishful thinking on my part.
University – I will reply in a bit, I just had neighbors drop by as I started to type this. In short there is much in your post I agree with. Thanks – Young Blood is good for us. OW had a huge impact on the church. My previous comment was not trying to say that they did not. There were things within the church that were changed because of OW. Good things. OW also made some things more suspect. Not everything they touched was changed for the better. Their approach was the sort of approach that is seen in political actions — like the suffragettes. Or NOW. Within a religious community, it had very mixed results. The biggest problem, OW forgot about the huge PR machine that the church runs with essentially an unlimited budget. OW is now viewed with hate in too many circles. Their successes in embarrassing the church and pushing changes also managed to annihilate their own organization. Was it worth the price? Time will tell.
University, you mentioned that YSA wards tend to be more liberal. Do you think they are more liberal, or just more open about their beliefs at this point in their lives?
I ask because when someone hears that I went to BYU for my first degree and was married in the temple, I get filed away under TBM.. From those few little details of information, too often someone will fill in all the blanks in my life story without knowing me. They see a mom at church who is wearing church appropriate clothing. They don’t know me and they miss all the details that matter.
Okay, here is my shot at it. I have YSA age daughters and I agree that the age group will take things into a different course. Time will tell what that means. I see them having the internal tug of wars about many things. What I also see is this is a group who won’t be coerced into participation. One of the multiple challenges of comparing OW to Suffrage is the comparable history. The women of Suffrage were fighting a first time battle. They weren’t resurrecting lost privileges.
LDS Women’s Issue is a two pronged problem. It’s the fight for something we’ve never had and the fight to restore or acknowledge what was lost and why. In my opinion OW’s actions snuffed those out, for a long time.
You point out that Women’s issues have been in the debate center for a long time. I agree. I think the issues behind Suffrage had been in debate for a long time. I am referencing Abigail Adams as one example. As a woman who would like LDS women to feel empowered and live up to their own personal, God-given potential (and I don’t mean baby making), I didn’t appreciate the lack of consideration OW had for women itself. They were so bold and decided not only to storm the castle, but to annihilate other sisters, and other sisters voices along the way. It was that annihilation and disrespect for their sisters that cooled my respect for them.
Only after their bold moves had failed and the church took a heavy hand did they decide to do a more measured push. In my mind, if they cared about sister’s gaining the fulfillment of Joseph’s ideals they should have started with articles in Dialogue, the Christmas Billboards, the website about the past where they have quotes about RS women giving blessings. And not blasted a podcast of women who saw the issue differently. OW did not represent a large body of women.
I also stand in my original response that the problems of conversation and growth do also lie with present day women, who have the ear of male leaders. I am disheartened that Sheri Dew, a history major, former RS General Presidency councilor, and now CEO of Deseret book has chosen to overlook the type of work the Eliza R. Snow and others did to keep Joseph’s plan alive. We have journals, former RS magazines, etc. that tell the stories of the work, but they are not included in books or talks from her.
I am saddened that 2 women who were single for many years, who were bread winners and successful as single LDS women, but are now GA’s wives have just quietly morphed into props.
This entire mess is very complicated. It will take years to unhinge it.
The final reason I can’t give OW the full credit they like to take is because I know that blogs like BCC, Wheat and Tares, FMH, Zeleophad’s Daughters and others did a lot of ground work and posts that also affected the change of prayers in GC, and pants to church Sundays, Women’s history of laying on of hands, and more.
I don’t despise OW, even though this may sound that way. I am disappointed they could have brought something to the table. Something strong but not damaging. They chose differently. I wish they hadn’t.
I believe that in the context of a TED Talk she had to be able to point to some results of her efforts. She said that one of the things she is trying to combat is apathy on the side of the secular minded. They were saying stuff to her to the effect of “Religions will always be sexist/homophobic – just leave if you don’t like it.” She had to point to results … to progress in order to discredit that assertion.
Roy – You raise an accurate point. In life as well as in a 15 min TED talk, you look for and need concrete results. She is doing that, and those results did happen around the same time and I will never know what or who helped get it all done. I would like to know what everyone thinks is the evidence of OW’s impact on the church? How can we attribute the changes made to the composition of upper leadership committees, and other changes, to OW’s activism? Particularly when, as university said, we have brethren roaring from the pulpit to the contrary (or implied)? I would LOVE to know that it was the OW that made the impact. To me, that would breathe life into my relationship with the church, which I would see as a bit less authoritarian, and a bit more open-minded and temporal, as I believe it is (in spite of its roaring to the contrary). It would also show at least some recompense for Kate Kelly’s excommunication and the sacrifices other women had to make during that season.
It means more to me, MUCH more, that nearly all of the movement has come from regular members expressing their opinions in ways that are direct but balanced – like online at FMH, BCC, Times & Seasons, Wheat and Tares, StayLDS.com, etc. That gives me hope in a measured, charitable approach – and it fits the facts and chronology much better than attributing it to Ordain Women.
I tend to agree. I made a post elsewhere indicating that the bloggernacle provides a feedback mechanism for the church where they can get naked feedback without sacrificing the top down nature of the culture. Also it is dispersed and not really a coordinated movement, just comments without calls to action that might scare church leaders. Would u say there are clear leaders of the bloggernacle? At one time John dehlin seemed to be that figurehead, but I am not sure if that is so any longer. Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
SilentDawning wrote:I tend to agree. I made a post elsewhere indicating that the bloggernacle provides a feedback mechanism for the church where they can get naked feedback without sacrificing the top down nature of the culture. Also it is dispersed and not really a coordinated movement, just comments without calls to action that might scare church leaders. Would u say there are clear leaders of the bloggernacle? At one time John dehlin seemed to be that figurehead, but I am not sure if that is so any longer.
Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
I think it is important that there be no figurehead. John Dehlin was not somebody that the church could tolerate. Ordain Women was a “fringe activist group” that can be dismissed by church leadership. The bloggernacle when taken as a whole can give a read on the pulse of the membership (at least the LDS active and internet active membership). The church changes when the membership changes.
Quote:Would u say there are clear leaders of the bloggernacle? At one time John dehlin seemed to be that figurehead, but I am not sure if that is so any longer.
I have watched the bloggernacle for years and I don’t see a leader. Before or now. I believe we have some very long standing blogs that have been influential but I don’t see one person as ever being a figurehead. I think the leaders of blogs have changed or the prominent posters rotate in and out. I like that I see it as organic not an influenced by a team or person.
In my mind Dehlin was the podcast king. He really generated the podcast world. He started many of them and inspired others to add podcasts to their forums. And he was deeply influential. I believe many on the bloggernacle loved his work during the early years. It allowed topics to move farther, discussions to touch more distant places. You could listen to a podcast in the car, at the gym, doing chores. This allowed the blog messages and John’s work to go hand in hand. However that began to change around 5 years into it. The marriage didn’t always work, pretty soon they parted ways and now we know the rest of the story.
Looking at the recent history I find if I want to influence my religion I do best when I am not a threat to it or the people who practice it. When people don’t feel threatened they are more willing to consider. But if any of us feels threatened we defend. It doesn’t matter if our place is rational or not, we defend, at any cost. In the long run that hurts everyone.
I’m late in the game but read the replies and just wanted to add this thought: I agree with much of what most of you have said. I still believe that Ordain Woman forced the church (and it’s membership) to reflect more deeply on the role of women in the church by means of being so controversial and bringing in scrutiny from the media. Although, I do think some of you might agree with that. I think some of you are coming from the perspective that too much credit is given to OW. Where I am, and in my circles, they get
none–it’s still the same line about the Church not being influenced by protests at all. I get this reaction from TBM and non-mormons alike. However, It’s plain as day to me that OW has caused some movement (as well as major defensiveness) from the Church. They’ve forced some level of introspection. They’ve brought the conversation into the limelight. In a way, OW has alienated a lot of people. But that’s kind of the point with groups like this. It makes the less “extreme” views more tolerable. And I don’t believe these kinds of conversations would have happened without OW calling attention to women’s issues.
However, with that said, when it comes to OW, it’s kind of a chicken or the egg situation for me. I think with the way women are advancing in American society, in which we are coming closer to equality and respect in the workplace, and succeed quite well in higher education, contrasted with the way the Church talks about and views women, there was bound to be something like this. And it’s been long enough since the September Six for there need to be a release.
amateurparent wrote:
University, you mentioned that YSA wards tend to be more liberal. Do you think they are more liberal, or just more open about their beliefs at this point in their lives?I ask because when someone hears that I went to BYU for my first degree and was married in the temple, I get filed away under TBM.. From those few little details of information, too often someone will fill in all the blanks in my life story without knowing me. They see a mom at church who is wearing church appropriate clothing. They don’t know me and they miss all the details that matter.
Yes and no.
I mostly say this because, in my experience, YSA Mormons are generally more liberal than other demographics. This isn’t just limited to Mormons. For me, this is generally true of most Americans in the young adult demographic. It’s just a generational difference. Millennials are more tolerant. We have our flaws, yes, but in my opinion, our tolerance is a strength.
I do think my generation’s mantra in the Church is “Judge Less, Love More.” I’m reminded of the famous “Tattooed Mormon” Al Fox. I recall seeing some older Mormons, even just a decade or so older than me, rejoicing in the Church’s acceptance of her, as if this was a sign of progress. To me it was a no-brainer. I didn’t get what the fuss was about. I think she’s kind of the symbolic face of the future of the Church.
However, I also do believe the YSA generation, even in the Mormon circles, is influenced by the “You do you, I do me” culture, which focuses less on obedience and conformity. So perhaps, yes, we’re just more open with our beliefs.
I will say, though, that I had a remarkable YSA Bishop a few years ago who was there for me when I had the onset of my faith crisis (at the time it was very much a crisis). We had conversations about women’s roles in the Church–how he made efforts to make things more inclusive for women in the ward leadership. He even straight up told me once that the Church Leadership has to change and will change. We talked about how the Church is no longer a Church for white men in Utah and will eventually have to adapt to be more inclusive of women and the world–let me also say that he didn’t support female ordination and is against gay marriage. But do you see where I’m going with this? Of course, this man was a rarity, definitely won leadership roulette there, but in our conversations he expressed that some of the issues I mentioned came up a lot for him with a lot of other YSAs. I took his word for it.
With that said I think a lot of my generation is leaving or fading away from the Church. Maybe I’m just overestimating this but I really think this is true. Conversations with TBM’s who don’t know I’m kind of disaffected and have access to their “inactive” lists confirm that there is a really high rate of inactivity in my age group. Of course, I think this is kind of natural for YSA members but it may be more of a problem now than it’s been before. I have no way of knowing.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.