- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
My friend wanted me to explain my stance, so I wrote him this letter. I thought I would share it here. Sorry that it’s kind of long… First, let me say that I have lived my entire life based on the principals of the gospel. I have always been a feminist, but I believed that the sexism I saw in our church was more of a cultural thing and I was able to shrug it off. I have studied all of the standard works in great depth and I have struggled with the sexism that is present there. We say we believe in the bible as far as it is translated correctly, so that was easy for me to dismiss. I love the Book of Mormon, and even though there are pretty much no female characters, I can dismiss it as a time when physical strength mattered more than it does now.
Around the time I got engaged I began studying a lot about church history and the temple. I was hoping to gain a stronger testimony of what was essentially an unknown to me. What I’ve learned has shifted my believe system quite a bit. When I pray, I feel the love of heavenly parents. I feel like an equal to any son or any daughter. When I look at the facts through out our church history until the present day I feel that I am less important, have less abilities and less of a potential to serve and help prosper the kingdom of God.
This is a real, deep pain in my soul. Sharing it makes me very vulnerable, but I am trusting you as a good friend with my deepest feelings on this. Here is a basic list of things that I find hurtful as a woman.
1) In the temple, I am asked to hearken to my husband, while he is asked to hearken to God. Throughout my entire life I have had a direct connection to God. I have listened to the prompting a of the spirit, I have obeyed the whispering e of my soul to choose the right. When I went through the temple it put a person between me and the God that I love. I have never felt so distant from God. What is tragic is that my whole life I have believed that the temple was to be the pinnacle of my spiritual experience. That it would bring me closer to God, that I would learn more of the nature of both my Heavenly Father and Mother. It really hurts that because I am a woman, I do not covenant to obey God directly.
2) In the early days of the church women were allowed to bless their children, they were allowed to bless their babies. That was somehow unexplicably taken away. In the early 1990s all the way through the early seventies the church leadership wrote talks saying that women did not hold the priesthood because they were spiritually lacking. With the feminist movements of those days came a shift of reason. We are now told that women are too spiritual, that they don’t need the priesthood, that they have it naturally. If this is the case, if we have it naturally, why are we not able to use it? Even to bless our own children? I’m not necessarily advocating for female ordination, but to learn that at one point in our history I could have blessed my babies and that it has now been taken away from me is tragic.
3) The lack of female leaders is painful to me for multiple reasons. In our lesson manuals we only receive talks and the vast majority of quotes are from priesthood leaders. I have read so many talks from priesthood leaders that say, ‘women are important, women are more spiritual, women are more in tune, women are revered.’ If this is true, why do we not have access to more of the blessings of the knowledge and spirituality these women have to share with us? If women are more spiritual, why are they not allowed to pray in general conference? If they are less spiritual, or less worthy than it means that those talks are completely patronizing. One reason I have heard for this, women need to take care of the children, so they don’t have time to serve in these callings. That does not make sense to me, as we have many time consuming callings for women in the auxiliaries of the church. It also does not make sense to me because if the men are supposed to go out and work full time, then time consuming callings would take them away from their families even more than they already were. To me, there is something in the fact that no women lead any men in our church. Women on,y lead other women. If we are truly equals and revered as so many talks claim-why are we not more fully able to assist in the leadership and service in the church?
4) The semantics of ‘head of household’ and ‘preside.’ I wrote a little bit about this on Facebook, but this whole thing seems pretty contradictory to me. We are now told over and over again how women and men are equal in the sight of God, equal in the home, equal in every way-even if we still believe in different roles. The quote that I wrote on your Facebook wall was this: Elder L. Tom Perry, an apostle of the LDS Church, said in 2004: “There is not a president and vice president in a family. We have co-presidents working together eternally for the good of their family . . . They are on equal footing. They plan and organize the affairs of the family jointly and unanimously as they move forward.” This said, I do not understand how one person can preside over the family, but still be on equal grounds. One co-president cannot preside over the other co-president or they are no longer co-presidents. I don’t understand why we still have this wording in everything we do. My name was changed on my tithing settlement without my name being legally changed yet. The church has recently changed the wording on the ward lists from saying Head of Household: Mans name Other Family members: wife and childrens names to Head of household: husband and wife’s names Other family members: Children’s names. So we are making progress, but this came only after a huge effort from male and female feminists inside of our church.
5) The fact that when my sons are 12, they will automatically have more church authority than I do. Whenever there is a meeting, a priesthood holder must be present. This means that all women must be supervised at all times.Even on missions, women who are relatively the same age, education and spirituality levels as their male counterparts are passed up for leadership roles simply because they are female and cannot hold the priesthood. If we all have direct access to spirituality, and if women don’t need the priesthood because we are more naturally spiritual, why would we not be qualified to serve in leadership positions and preside over meetings?
6) The few times we do learn about valiant women, it is mostly because they are the mothers of notable men. We have so many notable women in this world? The fact that the church only seems to praise women based on their ability to rear children is hurtful. Men are also so important in the upbringing of children. It is unfair to give all the credit to the mother, and it seems to me that it is only done because this is all the credit we are allowed. That feels so patronizing to me. Women are so much more than just child rearers, just as men are so much more than just providers. We never praise men for their ability to provide, we take it as a given, and yet we praise women for their ability to nuture as if it is the only thing they are capable of doing. If raising a family is the most important job in this life, then why do we not have more quotes from men about male successes in child rearing? More stories about it in our manuals? The way our lessons are currently structured, lessons with females all have to do with child bearing and rearing, lessons from men have to do with everything else.
7) Motherhood is divine. True. Fatherhood is divine. Also true. In our church we fail to emphasize the divinity of fatherhood. I have read countless studies about the importance of a child having a father figure. So why don’t we make a bigger deal about the divinity of fatherhood? In our church we are asked to accept that men hold the priesthood and as an equal but different type of blessing women can bear children. This has always felt like a poor comparison to me, and I am just beginning to see why. Any woman, no matter how unholy, no matter what religion, can bear children. It is a physical trait. Just like any man, no matter how unholy or what religion, can out perform women in sports, can more easily fend off an attacker, can lift things. No matter which physical traits are more important, they are both physical traits and are given to the genders automatically. The priesthood is something reserved for only worthy male church members. It is something that you are not automatically given as a man, but a priviledge earned by action. Women do not have anything comparable in the church. Anything else that is earned by our righteous actions is also earned by our male counterparts.
This whole pants thing was a very enlightening thing to me. I don’t think many people our ages know that women weren’t allowed to pray or speak in church until about 40 years ago. I also think that not many people realize that women still are not allowed to pray in general conference. Mormon feminists have made huge strides over the years. ( For example, they were the fire that made the presidency of the time pray about and create the two-piece garments. Are you happy about that one?) We have come a long way, but women, not all, but enough that it matters, are still hurting over these things. I know that I am strong and I know that I am capable. I know I receive revelation and promptings just as my male counterparts do. I am fully capable of being a leader and a mother, just as you are fully capable of being a leader and a father.
You don’t have to agree with me. I hope at the very least that this email will make you more compassionate to the pain that myself and other the members of our church are feeling.
This is fantastic. Seriously, you should start writing for the Mormon Feminist movement. They have a big inadequacy expressing their views, and this does it beautifully. Dear HSAB, As a father of teenage girls, I appreciate and support what you write. Gender inequality in the church bothers me, and while I think there are many good things about both the culture and the doctrines of the church, this is one thing that needs serious attention. One of my daughters wants to pursue a career in a male-dominated field, and I fear she’s facing an uphill slog both inside and outside the church. My personal pet peeve is that old (male) bishops can ask all kinds of details about the sexual activities of young teenagers. Not all do, but I’ve heard stories that border on perverted voyerism. Inequalities in program funding bother me a lot – scouts and YM typically get more $$ than Activity Days and YW.
That being said, I’d encourage you to share your opinion with your local leaders, who probably have quite a bit of control over some gender issues. I’ve encouraged our bishop to make annual budgets for YM and YW equal, and Activity Day Girls and Cub Scouts equal, which he’s done. Your bishop and other leaders can help make sure recognition of youth is equal (eagle scouts / personal progress). Local leaders determine YW activities, including camping, hiking, and “super activities” for YW that include more than crafts. RS presidents can help ensure that lessons and enrichment activities are positive and uplifting for women.
Some progress is being made although probably slower than it should be. One small example is that my local temple finally changed the baptistry policy for menstrating women. Of course the missionary age is another positive change. Big changes will unfortunately take years, like women having more access to leadership roles, but I like to think we’re pointing the right direction.
It’s hard and it’s frustrating sometimes. The whole idea of women are more righteous than men and don’t need the priesthood bothers me to no end. That fact that women don’t pray in general conference is simply unfathomable. I just have to share my opinion at the local level when it comes up and hopefully bit by bit we improve.
Interesting observations; thanks for sharing that. To me it almost looks like the Church is basically stuck in the 1950s because what was the norm back then (stay-at-home moms with a large number of children, white shirts, short hair, no beards, etc.) is still focused on as the Mormon ideal while the mainstream culture has mostly moved on. Personally I don’t think the Church Presidents and Apostles really mean any harm by this but the fact is that they are generally old and old-school and on top of that it would be awkward for the Church to make very many obvious changes because it’s almost like openly admitting that previous Church leaders were wrong which seriously undermines the idea of prophets never leading the Church astray that they are still trying to sell and support. Once I started to look at them as imperfect men first and inspired leaders second (if at all) then it all made a lot more sense to me. Now, when I read things like parts of the Gordon B. Hinckley book “Standing for Something” or Ezra Taft Benson’s talk “To the Mothers in Zion” it doesn’t sound that different than my grandpas complaining about recent trends and how things were supposedly so much better back in the good ol’ days. Right on and me too! This was very good. I am a man. I do no understand. I’m trying.
When I was pushed out of church and “banned” from leadership callings because of my “apostasy” and TR status. ..callings that I believed in and accepted only because I wanted to serve and help the folk of the branch, I was spiritually devasted. It hurt.
Jwald made the comment…”welcome to my world.”
Yeah.
I’m trying to understand.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2
Thanks, HSAB. Thanks HSAB! Being fairly recent in the middle way I remember all too well not understanding why feminist existed. I believed in equality…I just didn’t see where there was any inequality in the church. I considered you all just a bunch if whiners looking for something to complain about. After all, the “Brethren” were led by God and couldn’t lead us astray so the way things are must be Gods will and therefore feminist were on the road to apostasy. Sadly this blind faith, the brethren can do no harm mentality takes away the necessity to think things though and come to one’s own conclusion about things. Why risk thinking when it could put you at odds with the Church? Needless to say I’ve repented of my ways and have sought to understand feminist since my faith crisis. Makes me wonder what an awesome church this would be if we went back to personal revelation as the supreme source of spiritual guidance. How would the dynamics change if every member had to objectively consider what we are being taught or encouraged to do by the GAs? Oh well, it is what it is and we do what we can. Have to take the good with the bad and have faith (hope) things will change, if slowly. Thanks for helping me to further understand! Know that your voice and others like it do influence others, even TBMs. My TBM wife is even becoming more empathetic to feminism due to voices like Joanna Brooks. I wish your explanation was in a more public place where I could link to it for my TBM friends. :thumbup: Great post. I could not agree with you more and, as a woman, share your pain and frustration. For the men trying to understand, I really appreciate that. So many men are dismissive and defensive instead of actually looking through a woman’s perspective and how the experiences of men and women differ in the church. (Of course, the same could be said for some TBM women who refuse to acknowledge those that feel unequal and marginalized.) There are a couple items on the list I don’t agree with, but most of it is pretty accurate. Regardless, I think the inequalities in the church hurt men and woman alike.
http://www.i4m.com/think/lists/mormon_gender.htm Thanks everyone for all the kind feedback! I really appreciate it. A few of my friends are also encouraging me to post this somewhere public so they can link it. If I do I’ll let you know. Sailaway, are the items that you disagree with opinion, or is there anything I am mistaken about in the history. I would love to know if I made any mistakes on this-especially if I end up posting it somewhere public. CWald, I appreciate you trying to understand. I am curious, if you changed the word woman in my letter to black man would that make it easier to understand? I am trying to find a way to best help men understand and relate to this. I’ve found that the role reversals don’t seem to help too much. At least for the people I have showed them to. Also, Rebeccad, I would LOVE to write for the feminist movement, but I don’t know how to go about doing that really. I’ve emailed FMH a few times with no reply. Any suggestions? About the mission leadership. We were talking to the Sister Missionaries in our ward who said they are expecting the size of the mission to double in the next few months. 90% of those that are coming are women. They expect there to be mostly districts with Sister Missionaries except for one set of Elders to be District Leaders. Something is going to have to change there. Not related to feminism, but they also said that starting in March, anyone who has served in the field, no matter how short a length of time, will become a senior companion, just because they will basically double the missionary force overnight.
I wish I could help you with who to contact in the movement, but I don’t know anything about it.
HSAB wrote:Sailaway, are the items that you disagree with opinion, or is there anything I am mistaken about in the history. I would love to know if I made any mistakes on this-especially if I end up posting it somewhere public.
Sorry, I wasn’t referring to your list, just the link I posted!
I actually think the Church will change, or it will die. The Church is trying to conform to the world, yet trying not to. Actually the Church gets along because of the women, not the men.
The men have to preside to feel important. 1. The RS is probably more organized and stronger than the priesthood.
-The High Priests and Elders are mostly divided, and they just handle Presidency Meetings
-You cannot have men serve in primary w/out another man or woman. Women rule the Primary.
-The hardest calling in the Church is nursery and you have women in charge of it.
-In my ward women handle all of the cub scouts. In my ward only women teach gospel doctrine.
2. you probably have more visiting teaching getting done than home teaching.
3. The new age for missionaries is an indication that things are changing.
4. The world is not as male centric as it used to be. Sherry Dew is the head of Deseret Book.
5. Women generally get information more quickly than men do. My wife get’s revelation before I get it, b/c I wasn’t asking.
In my ward the RS President got news of my son’s illness before the Bishop did.
Changes I’ve had to make socially:
From havinga a totaly mysoginistic father growing up, I have envied my Dad’s position of working full-time, but now I think I am grateful for being a stay-at-home father since I have more time to influence my kids.
I read one of my ancestors (she’s female) patriarchal blessing, and it talked about how she could give blessings of comfort. I was taken aback by this and wondered why the church changed.
Over all we will see more changes to accomodate women it just wont be drastic, it will be little by little.
jamison, I agree, those are all good points. I also think that in generally terms, women are more in tune with the spirital world.
men are more in tune (or occupied) with the physical world.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.