- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I came here specifically to post this and you beat me to it Mom. It’s another small step, and I like that women are even included in the renamed “priesthood executive committee.” I would have liked that stakes and wards were given instruction to do the same. Actually I think PEC in wards are redundant, things discussed there seem to be the same things discussed in ward council. With the emphasis on ward councils of late (at least in my area), it would make some sense to eliminate the extra meeting.
So instead of containing no women, each of these councils will contain one woman. Anyone know how many men sit on each of these councils? The article didn’t say. I think it’s kind of sad that the church is actually bragging about increasing the number of women from “none” to “still a very small percentage” on the governing councils of the church. Rather tone-deaf considering that it is, in fact, the 21st century.
I agree with DJ. PEC should be done away with. Lots of meetings need to be killed off. This will help a bit with the “burnout” and desire for sabbaticals noted in other thread. What was the first comment (at least when I looked)?
Quote:1. Colorado Reader
Littleton, CO,
Great! More meetings for women to attend! Thanks a lot to those who complain that things are not equal! Some of us don’t feel that way at all, in fact we enjoy it that way!!
So only men should be punished with meetings?
Like Joni mentions, I assume the range of responses go from above, to some that want to say, “look how progressive the church is” (not realizing that outside of a few other religions like JW’s and some Islamic sects we look VERY 1950’ish – maybe “late” 1950’ish with these “dramatic” changes). All the way to some saying, “nice BABY step, please hurry up and start walking towards the future because at this pace we are falling behind more and more.”
I just wish some of the women on the highest councils were more of a spunky Sister Chieko Okazaki. Someone not afraid to say (even to an apostle), “That sounds silly to me.” I fully suspect that these women are very accomplished, but have learned when/where/how to bow to authority and probably even feel some pressure not to come in and rock the boat and possibly get the change reversed.
Sigh
Joni wrote:So instead of containing no women, each of these councils will contain one woman. Anyone know how many men sit on each of these councils? The article didn’t say.
I think it’s kind of sad that the church is actually bragging about increasing the number of women from “none” to “still a very small percentage” on the governing councils of the church. Rather tone-deaf considering that it is, in fact, the 21st century.
Small steps. Expecting the church (or any other organization) to make sweeping wholesale changes all at once doesn’t usually go very well. These are committees that have met for years with men only, including one woman is a step in the right direction.
LookingHard wrote:I just wish some of the women on the highest councils were more of a spunky Sister Chieko Okazaki. Someone not afraid to say (even to an apostle), “That sounds silly to me.” I fully suspect that these women are very accomplished, but have learned when/where/how to bow to authority and probably even feel some pressure not to come in and rock the boat and possibly get the change reversed.
Callings that are lifetime appointments like an apostle or prophet can give people a little courage to rock boats without fear of reprisal. Perhaps we should create some of those types of callings for women… then in a few decades we can complain that they are all out of touch old-timers .
:angel: I’m poking fun at myself BTW, I’ve often been the first guy to raise his hand to make a comment about implementing an emeritus status or some such. I was just surprised that I came up with something to add to the pros column for lifetime appointment callings.
LookingHard wrote:I just wish some of the women on the highest councils were more of a spunky Sister Chieko Okazaki. Someone not afraid to say (even to an apostle), “That sounds silly to me.” I fully suspect that these women are very accomplished, but have learned when/where/how to bow to authority and probably even feel some pressure not to come in and rock the boat and possibly get the change reversed.
That was my thought as well. Hawk had referred to a study once that talked about how women in meetings dominated by men usually defer to the men. I imagine that in a church that is so steeped in honoring the priesthood that this effect would be even more pronounced. I miss Sister Okazaki.
😥 I agree that it is a necessary first step and is to be applauded.
Roy wrote:LookingHard wrote:I just wish some of the women on the highest councils were more of a spunky Sister Chieko Okazaki. Someone not afraid to say (even to an apostle), “That sounds silly to me.” I fully suspect that these women are very accomplished, but have learned when/where/how to bow to authority and probably even feel some pressure not to come in and rock the boat and possibly get the change reversed.
That was my thought as well. Hawk had referred to a study once that talked about how women in meetings dominated by men usually defer to the men. I imagine that in a church that is so steeped in honoring the priesthood that this effect would be even more pronounced. I miss Sister Okazaki.
😥 I agree that it is a necessary first step and is to be applauded.
That’s why our SP has essentially told us men to keep our mouths shut until after the women speak in our ward and stake councils.
Joni wrote:So instead of containing no women, each of these councils will contain one woman. Anyone know how many men sit on each of these councils? The article didn’t say.
I think it’s kind of sad that the church is actually bragging about increasing the number of women from “none” to “still a very small percentage” on the governing councils of the church. Rather tone-deaf considering that it is, in fact, the 21st century.
I do agree with the concern that the step isn’t enough, but it is a start. I’m not happy about how it has been. I can’t say that I’m exactly happy about the way it is now, but I’m more happy about it now than I was yesterday. Progress, even measured, is better than status quo.I look at this as a hugely needed step in the right direction. This should open the door for more and more of the same. Part of the issue with gender roles in the Church is the presumptive view that certain positions require the priesthood. Now, that it is clearly set aside as far as near-the-top decision-making. If the committee is 10 people, and one of them is a woman today, then it won’t seem strange before this decade is out for more of them to be women.
This was announced on Facebook. Weird. That seems to lessen the significance of it. Quote:This was announced on Facebook. Weird. That seems to lessen the significance of it.
But remember Shawn the PR department did reference the women on a committee last week at Fair. We should have understood that as the announcement.
Quote:I miss Sister Okazaki.
😥 Amen
Quote:
That’s why our SP has essentially told us men to keep our mouths shut until after the women speak in our ward and stake councils.and Amen.
Shawn – Not to worry Dallin Oaks was just as surprised as you were. Question is who is at the helm of this ship? https://www.facebook.com/lds.dallin.h.oaks?fref=tshttps://www.facebook.com/lds.dallin.h.oaks?fref=ts” class=”bbcode_url”> Quote:I fully suspect that these women are very accomplished, but have learned when/where/how to bow to authority and probably even feel some pressure not to come in and rock the boat and possibly get the change reversed.
Given the tendency among all church members to defer to hierarchy, this is an ongoing concern, BUT bear in mind that traditionally, women are better at exercising “soft power” than men are (because they haven’t had a voice or been in power). IOW, women rely less on having authority to get things done. The best thing I see here (and it is absolutely a baby step) is that it sets an example for the stake and ward level. They are saying “Look! None of us are getting cooties!”
mom3 wrote:Shawn – Not to worry Dallin Oaks was just as surprised as you were. Question is who is at the helm of this ship?
https://www.facebook.com/lds.dallin.h.oaks?fref=tshttps://www.facebook.com/lds.dallin.h.oaks?fref=ts” class=”bbcode_url”> Elder Oaks handled it pretty well though. The last thing that he wanted to do was to be seen as reprimanding a woman for speaking out of turn about an announcement that emphasizes the need of women’s voices in the church.
:clap: I wonder if these women are subject to Elder Ballard’s advice to women participating in ward councils – don’t talk TOO much, just correct the brethren and move on. And I think it’s interesting. This, and other small changes like letting women pray in General Conference, are CLEARLY being made in response to social pressure. Yet the Church leadership is able to maintain a straight face while insisting that the Church doesn’t respond to social pressure.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.