- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
The General Women’ Session is tonight. It snuck up on me this year, which isn’t surprising. It still feels like the dead of summer outside. Isn’t there supposed to be cooler weather in the northern hemisphere during October conference? Anyway…
I missed the first 20 minutes (I mentioned that it snuck up on me). There was one talk that shared an idea that I really want to unpack and get people’s ideas on. I’ll revisit it when there’s a transcript that I can quote from.
I’d recommend skipping Bonnie Oscarson’s talk. It’s going to be an “Everything People Don’t Like About the Modern Church 101” for some people.
We all hear different things, for me Uchtdorf’s talk was one step forward, two steps back. There were good parts, there were parts that left me scratching my head, and there were parts that I think may be counterproductive for some people.
I missed a few talks but of those I heard, the topic of a faith crisis was addressed by multiple speakers.
I have a side question, I think I’ve asked before but I forgot the answer. Why do they invite 8 year olds and above and not 12 year olds and above like the Priesthood Session? Keep it to the YW and RS organizations?
Thanks Nibbler for getting us rolling. I also forgot, too. Below is the Trib’s synopsis. A quick run through most of the major blogs shows we all took the weekend off. http://www.sltrib.com/home/4386825-155/defend-mormon-teachings-on-marriage-family ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://www.sltrib.com/home/4386825-155/defend-mormon-teachings-on-marriage-family And as to the 8 years old. I have never gotten it.
I commented on SD’s thread about Pres. Uchtdorf’s talk and will look at the session later because we missed it (we were on our way home from a wedding during the session). I don’t get the 8-year-old thing either – but I’m sure there are lots of 8, 9, 10, and 11 year old boys who are not the least bit upset about it. Including the 8 year olds is because women are seen as children and since there’s only one thing for women to do in this life (give birth to priesthood holders) why not include them from age 8 on up? Pres. Oscarson’s talk had me thinking. It’s like telling people “breakfast is the most important meal of the day,” and defining that as a hot breakfast including eggs, sausage or bacon, toast, hash browns and juice. We tell them this every single time we see them, no matter the time of day or whether they eat breakfast every day or not. We reinforce that a granola bar is not breakfast. Cold cereal is just cheating your family. No, the only real breakfast is a hot breakfast with eggs, sausage or bacon, toast, hash browns and juice. Some people like to think they can skip breakfast, but they missing out on the most important meal of the day. Some claim they have so-called gluten intolerance and can’t eat toast, but they are settling for Satan’s lies and counterfeits when they don’t eat toast. Ad nauseum. It’s putting me off my breakfast, I tell ya! I no longer want to eat anything.
So it is with this incessant drum beat of traditional family. I’m a heterosexual woman, married 25 years with 3 children. I honestly can’t stomach one more talk about it. SHUT UP ALREADY.
If we spent the amount of time talking about things Jesus actually talked about, maybe we’d win more converts and improve more lives. People aren’t avoiding marriage and children because we aren’t talking about it enough.
I asked my daughter (age 13) if she was going to watch the Women’s broadcast with some of our friends (I had a conflict). She said “What for? All they are going to talk about is how I’m supposed to be a mother.” Guess what? She’s totally on board with being a mother one day. She’s not avoiding the meeting because she doesn’t plan to have kids. She’s avoiding it because they never talk about anything else. It’s boring and pointless.
I’ll quote from an article in another thread because the talk hasn’t been transcribed yet: Quote:“I worry that we live in such an atmosphere of avoiding offense that we sometimes altogether avoid teaching correct principles,” Bonnie L. Oscarson, president of the church’s Young Women organization, told the general women’s session of the fall General Conference of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
“We fail to teach our young women that preparing to be a mother is of utmost importance because we don’t want to offend those who aren’t married, those who can’t have children or to be seen as stifling future choices. On the other hand, we may also fail to emphasize the importance of education because we don’t want to send the message that it is more important than marriage,” Oscarson said. “We avoid declaring that our Heavenly Father defines marriage as being between a man and woman because we don’t want to offend those who experience same-sex attraction. And we may find it uncomfortable to discus gender issues or healthy sexuality.”
It’s a matter of perspectives but I think we worry so much about teaching correct principles that we altogether avoid mourning with those who morn. It’s mourn with those who mourn, not Morm with those who Morm.
I don’t mean to talk politics but it feels like Oscarson is against the politically correct culture, she’s giving the Mormon flavor of what you’d typically hear coming from the ultra conservative right. I can’t say that I’ve ever heard someone in an official capacity talk about single women and infertile couples in a way that elevates them above the one size fits all family narrative. It’s rare to even hear about them at all and yet when we finally do speak of them from the general conference pulpit it is to remind everyone how they do not measure up to the ideal. It was a bad talk.
The church should be grateful that some people don’t share their opinions out of respect and a desire not to offend the saints.
😈 hawkgrrrl wrote:Including the 8 year olds is because women are seen as children and since there’s only one thing for women to do in this life (give birth to priesthood holders) why not include them from age 8 on up?
That may be our reason but I just can’t picture the Q15 sitting around a large table and using that as their justification. What is their reason?
hawkgrrrl wrote:If we spent the amount of time talking about things Jesus actually talked about, maybe we’d win more converts and improve more lives. People aren’t avoiding marriage and children because we aren’t talking about it enough.
:thumbup: This is my dream. There’s that other thread where we’re asked what would really flip the switch for each of us to love the church. For me this is it. Talk about the gospel Christ talked about. He spent three years talking about it, surely there’s enough material there for us to fill 11 1/2 hours.DH has a friend who converted to the church and then left it. He decided to be rebaptized 18 months ago. DH did the dunking. We all went out for brunch afterwards. It was odd to be involved as he was celebrating re-baptism while I was questioning my faith in the church. Friend moved to SLC later due to employment. These past few months, Uchtdorf has been meeting with this friend. Uchtdorf told friend that he wanted to use part of friend’s story for this conference session.
I am curious to see if Uchtdorf uses friend’s story and in what capacity.
It’s crazy when different people hear the same thing and take different ideas from it. This post appeared in a liberal friend of mine’s facebook. Quote:I loved tonight’s #womensmeeting focused Jesus Christ instead of on the family/nurturing/roles. Don’t get me wrong, I love my family, but I worship Jesus
I am like, huh. Yes he was referenced but I heard more of Nibbler’s take – Morm with those that Morm.
I have had to spend all day rehearsing Chieko Okazaki to keep myself balanced.
nibbler wrote:It’s mourn with those who mourn, not Morm with those who Morm.
Love it!:thumbup: :clap: Quote:“We fail to teach our young women that preparing to be a mother is of utmost importance because we don’t want to offend those who aren’t married, those who can’t have children or to be seen as stifling future choices.”
I am troubled by how this is worded. Do we really teach our girls that to become a mother is their life purpose. I get that it is important to “The plan” to populate the world. There just does not seem to be the same emphasis given to the young men. Imagine if this said, “We fail to teach our young men that preparing to be a father is of utmost importance because we don’t want to offend those who aren’t married, those who can’t sire children, or be seen as stifling future choices.”
Guys get to have a family and an education and a career and a presiding leadership role in the church community. Such things do not diminish their fatherhood.
Why is it that for women adding too much of any of these things is seen as usurping their role of motherhood?
Does she want to go back to preaching that women should not work outside the home?
nibbler wrote:“And we may find it uncomfortable to discus gender issues or healthy sexuality.”
I would love to be able to discuss gender issues and healthy sexuality….unfortunately I do not think Sister Oscarson and I are imagining the same things in opening this dialogue.
Roy wrote:nibbler wrote:“And we may find it uncomfortable to discus gender issues or healthy sexuality.”
I would love to be able to discuss gender issues and healthy sexuality….unfortunately I do not think Sister Oscarson and I are imagining the same things in opening this dialogue.
I was thinking the same thing! I sure wish we could.My eight year old son has consistently said that he wants to be a “parent” when he grows up. I never challenge him on it because he is only eight. What harm could it do if he wanted to be a cowboy or astronaut? Why not a parent? As a parent though, I do worry. What sort of push back might he receive from his social circle and from his church family if he sticks to his plan and becomes a stay-at-home dad? Would that be seen as a noble sacrifice to focus on what is of “utmost importance”?
Just the rigidity in the assumed gender roles bothers me.
As for my son, I take his aspiration as a compliment. Do they not say that emulation is the highest form of flattery?
Roy wrote:My eight year old son has consistently said that he wants to be a “parent” when he grows up. …
As for my son, I take his aspiration as a compliment. Do they not say that emulation is the highest form of flattery?
You should take it as a compliment. Not that having a kid that has a different aspiration says you are a bad parent. But it would seem to me that a kid that is saying he wants to be a parent almost has to see his parents as a good thing. Pat yourself on the back Roy!Until a new generation of non-Primary-voice talkers steps up, I would do much better to just read transcripts, but they’re not out yet, as far as I can see. Just my two cents:
Sis. Bingham. I’m not able to go back and listen closely again because I just can’t bear the style of presentation. The eight-year-olds are probably fine with it.
Sis. Stephens. I’ll read this when it comes out, but again, can’t listen a second time because of the style and some speaking “tics.” But I think the meat of the meeting is here.
Sis. Oscarson. I won’t get into the culture wars/Satan’s lies stuff, but here’s my question: Since when is it important for women
Quote:…to recognize that he [Joseph Smith] organized the women of the church after the organization that existed in Christ’s church anciently.
??😯 ?? It’s hard for me to take seriously someone who suggests this.Pres. Uchtdorf. I wasn’t encouraged to hear strugglers described as impatient, uncommitted and/or careless, but he manages to say enough that I find loving and sincere. I liked:
Quote:Perhaps you don’t even consider yourself a woman of faith.”
Thank you for being real. For including me in my down moments.Regarding the eight-and-up thing, I REALLY wish there was an official explanation. As it is, I take it as a completely unnecessary slight. We don’t already have enough problems convincing LDS women that they’re valued and heard? And the vocabulary has to be downgraded even more than it already is to include them. Please tell me the reason!
All that said, I am committing to reading when they come out. And I like going to this meeting with my daughters. But to be honest, they both said they were dreading it. So there’s that….
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.