I recently stumbled across this post at WAVE (Women Advocating Voice and Equality), and I just wanted to share it here because it is BRILLIANT. Many women and men have asked (with tones ranging from curious, to incredulous, to concerned, to enraged) why LDS feminists seem to harp on this “equality” issue. WAVE delivers a powerful response to this inquiry. I have pasted a portion of it here:
I recognize that some of these issues are church wide, some local, and some unchangeable. Some of them are simple and some of them are deeply ingrained. All of them, nevertheless, make me feel unequal and are worth talking about.
I feel unequal when there are more (a lot more) men’s voices in religious texts, meetings, leadership positions, and decision making bodies.
I feel unequal when callings that don’t necessitate the priesthood are given only to men: Sunday School Presidency, BYU, BYU-I and BYU-Hawaii Presidents, Church Education Commissioners, Ward Mission Leaders, recommend takers at the Temple, etc. (Similarly, men are not currently called in Primary Presidencies and could be.)
I feel unequal when women doing the same job are called by different titles (i.e. Sister vs. President) and/or are accessories to rather than serving equally with their husbands, i.e. Mission President’s wives.
I feel unequal when I have a calling as an auxiliary leader and have to get approval of every decision by men and/or when I am not invited to attend Priesthood Executive Committee meetings (PEC) which directly influence my stewardships.
I feel unequal when my value is primarily linked to being a wife and mother rather than by being a child of God.
I feel unequal when the men in my life acknowledge that they have no female spiritual leaders in their wards or communities.
I feel unequal when women have less prominent, prestigious, and public roles in the church, even before and after childrearing years.
I feel unequal because even one of the most inherently female-dominated time periods, having a new baby, is publically displayed at church in an all male ritual of the baby blessing.
I feel unequal when males handle 100% of the church finances.
I feel unequal when I am taught at church that my husband presides in my family, he is the head, and all things being equal, he has the final say.
I feel unequal when people preach that men and women are completely equal and in the same breath say the above sentence.
I feel unequal when I realize that at church all men have the final say. Good leaders might consult with female auxiliary leaders, but ultimately even after being called to a position via inspiration, men still make the final decisions.
I feel unequal when cub scouts and boy scouts have a larger budget (they are allowed to do fundraising- although this might be a local issue) than achievement days and Young Womens and thus, they often have better activities.
I feel unequal when the Young Women and Young Men’s programs have such different manuals, budgets, activities, etc.
I feel unequal when fathers and mothers are encouraged to fulfill primary roles to provide and nurture, but only the fathers are given the freedom to seek out the best way for them to provide, whereas, mothers are told the best way for them to nurture—to be stay at home moms.
I feel unequal when men teach me that being a stay at home mother is the most important thing a person could do, and yet most of them do not do it.
I feel unequal when people do not emphasize fatherhood as much as they do motherhood and when we have numerous annual lessons on the priesthood and I’m not taught anything about the woman’s role as a priestess.
I feel unequal in primary when most of the lessons and songs are about men although most of the teachers and leaders are women.
I feel unequal because church disciplinary courts are made up of solely men and there are no female voices in the very sensitive matters of church discipline.
I feel unequal when women have to talk to men about their sins, especially sexual ones, and have no other church sanctioned options.
I feel unequal because most men, even inspired ones, can’t fully understand or provide enough resources for sexual abuse.
I feel unequal when young girls are taught about modesty and chastity from older men, especially because females make decisions about these things for very different reasons than males.
I feel unequal because many of the official church declarations and proclamations have no female input, regardless of how drastically they affect women.
I feel unequal when there are no checks and balances for females who experience abuse in the system. While abuse may be rare, it is terrifying that women have no resources to go to outside of the male hierarchy.
I feel unequal because the Relief Society’s autonomy was taken away and it became an auxillery presided over by men.
I feel unequal when women’s financial autonomy isn’t encouraged as much as men’s at church and/or church schools.
I feel unequal because men conduct, men preach, men speak. Men teach us how to be women.
I feel unequal because local leaders rarely use gender inclusive language even though church manuals and General Conference talks try to do so.
I feel unequal when men speak at Relief Society and Young Women’s meetings, but women never speak in priesthood meetings.
I feel unequal when there are very few women’s voices in our official correlated church manuals.
I feel unequal when women don’t pray in General Conference and usually only give 2 or 3 of the many talks.
I feel unequal because men and women can be sealed to different numbers of people.
I feel unequal in the temple because women a have different script and role.
I feel unequal when female employees of the Church Educational System and temple ordinance workers are no longer allowed to keep their positions after they have children.
I feel unequal because we know very little about Heavenly Mother and her role in the Godhead and there doesn’t seem to be any emphasis on the part of our leaders to pray and find out more. I don’t know what my divine potential means as a female and that makes me feel less important.
I feel unequal because all of these concerns are mediated by male leaders and that they are only as important as these men deem them so. While most of our leaders are wonderful, there is very little in the structure or doctrine to prevent male leaders from misogyny or benevolent sexism.
I feel unequal when these gender inequalities are not acknowledged by leaders. It is difficult to be a female in a patriarchal church and we are trying our best to make it work. Acknowledgement of that difficulty would go a long way.
All of these reasons begs the following question: If women are really as equally valued as men why aren’t they given equal voice?
This is no way an exhausted list. So why do feminist harp on this issue? I can’t speak for all feminists, but I will speak for myself. I “harp” on this issue because it is real, because it is devastating, because children (male and female) deserve a better future in the Church. I may not have a place in the current LDS Church, but I believe there is good in the Church and that the Church has been a force of good in many people’s lives–and this is worth holding on to. At the same time, however, I believe the Church could do a much greater amount of good if they made changes and listened to their members more often. I love the quote behind the blog By Common Consent–I think it is tremendously applicable here:
“…all things shall be done by common consent in the church, by much prayer and faith, for all things you shall receive by faith” D&C 26:2
Eternal Progression is not just a teaching meant for members exclusively, its meant for the whole of the organization.
In the name of Jesus Christ, amen.
UPDATE
Here are some great, relevant podcasts:
“Mormon Women and Equality” at Mormon Matters
Responding to Michael Otterson’s article: “What Mormon Equality Looks Like” at Daughters of Mormonism
That’s so brilliant, Taylor. Thank you so much for pointing this out, I’d missed it at WAVE. I’m almost a little bit depressed at how simply they’ve laid all this out… It’s always so difficult for me to explain! I’m saving this so I can pull it out the next time the conversation comes up.
I don’t understand how people can claim any kind of equality in the church. Saying that you’re okay with the inequality, that I could understand—that’s an honest, logical answer (even if it’s one I could never give myself). But these things listed above, that ridiculously long list that isn’t even a complete list—those things are the opposite of equality, the very definition of not equal. To say that they are otherwise is to either lie or be very confused.
Exactly. I’ve heard so many excuses and interpretations about why things are the way they are. I’m happy that some people find them satisfying and uplifting, but I just can’t understand the arguments–no mater how hard I try. I’m realizing that it’s just better to follow my own conscience and allow people to follow theirs.
I missed this too! And it’s going up on Facebook! Thanks for sharing. We’ll see if it starts something.
Awesome. Let me know what happens!
What is your justification for believing that you should always “feel” equal? Where is that written? You are equal, and you are treated equally, though differently, within the LDS Church. Whether or not you “feel” equal is up to you.
And in all sincerity, how do you justify this assertion that you should feel the same as men when obviously women and men are different? Even if feminists like to falsely chalk up most of the differences between the sexes to “socialization” (which is absurd) you cannot dispute the stark physiological differences. How then can you suggest that both sexes shouldn’t be treated somewhat differently?
Have you ever stopped to consider that this feeling of inequality might not be accurate? That maybe it is based on an incorrect understanding of the underlying principles? That maybe feminism is teaching the incorrect principles, and not the LDS Church?
I’m afraid I agree more with LovelyLauren, Ryan. However, I want to thank you for your opinion and the way in which it was expressed. I think you pose good questions and I know many share your opinions and concerns. You’ve given me a lot of think about and you also gave me an idea for a new post–this issue is just too complicated to tackle in one comment. But I would like to answer your final paragraph:
Yes, I have stopped to consider that. For years, I’ve prayed about and pondered on my feelings of inequality. Yes, feelings are subjective, but they arise from numerous events that actually did occur–which is what I believe the original WAVE post is getting at. These feelings aren’t unfounded or irrational when they develop from seeing and experiencing inequitable treatment.
It’s true, I might not understand underlying principles completely (I assume you are speaking of eternal truths or doctrine), but I am trying to. I try to keep an open mind. I realize that I am not omniscient and that my understanding is imperfect. That being said, I am comfortable with the way currently I feel.
You also juxtapose the teachings of the LDS Church and the teachings of Feminism. I have been uncomfortable with the treatment of women in the church long before I even knew what Feminism meant (this brings up a whole another discussion about how the word Feminism is used, but I won’t get into that here). When I have seen or experienced less than equal treatment solely based on sex, I get the same feeling I get when I come across movies or TV shows I shouldn’t be watching. I believe that these impressions come from the Holy Ghost. Could I be mistaken? Of course. But these promptings have yet to lead me away from God.
Now, I’m rambling—this is why I’m going to devote at least one post to talking about these issues. I would like to say one more thing, however. Let’s say that the Priesthood is something exclusively held by males. Let’s say that this is how God wants it to be, at least for the time being. I can live with that. What I have most difficulty with is policies that I see which are completely disconnected from doctrine. There are many callings and tasks women are barred from or discouraged from simply because they are women, not because these callings or task are a part of the Priesthood. Many examples are enumerated in the post above—I want to discuss this more, but I will do so in a future post. There is just too much to express for this format.
I would like to pose a question to you, too: why do you believe my feelings in equality might not be accurate?
Taylor Berlin,
I have to say I think your sincere tone is appreciated and very unique among the LDS women I’ve spoken with who subscribe to feminism. Not to wrongly perpetuate a stereotype, but the normal response I get is usually one of bitterness and anger.
In answer to your question, I think it comes down to the reality that interpreting the LDS Church through a feminist lens, will necessarily create feelings of discontent and a perception of inequality. That is because the LDS Church follows the patriarchal order, and feminism, pretty much by definition as I understand it, is anti-patriarchal. Feminism says that if men can do anything, women can and should do it, too. So, when the LDS Church is structured such that only men receive the priesthood, and the leadership responsibilities that come with that, viewing this through a feminist lens will necessarily create a sense of inequality. So, there are only two real possibilities: (1) either feminism is correct and the LDS Church is wrong; or (2) the LDS Church is actually led by God and it is feminism that is wrong.
If you remove the feminist lens, it becomes almost absurd to suggest that women and men should be treated exactly the same in the Church. The Church is all about families, and with the innate, and undeniable (even most feminists agree) differences between men and women, both physiological and psychological, it would be ludicrous to suggest that they should have exactly the same roles and responsibilities in a family unit, which generally includes having and raising children. If you observe pretty much any mother and father interacting with children it is almost immediately apparent that they interact in very different ways, both good, but very different. How can someone suggest they should be doing exactly the same job when they have such different aptitudes and talents? It’s like everyone on a football team wanting to play the same position. A 450 pound lineman is great at what he does, but he would make a terrible wide receiver, and if he insisted on playing that position, the team would have no chance. To me, feminism is the playbook that says everyone should take turns playing every position so we’re all equal.
Thank you, I try to keep my tone civil. I have also run across those who hold an opposing view point to be unduly antagonist towards me sometimes, too.
I understand your point. Although I identify myself as a “feminist,” I don’t consider my opinions to be colored by a feminist lens. This notion is a bit difficult to explain, but I’ll try my best. Labels can be so problematic, I chose the label “feminist” because it seemed to be the best fit–but not a perfect fit. I’ve been meaning to spend some time to explain what my “brand” of feminism entails. That being said, I don’t aim to “fit” feminism. I fit it to myself, if that makes any sense. I view my life through my own lens, influenced by my personality and life-experiences. As I mentioned earlier, as a girl I was not viewing my experience through the lens of feminism because I didn’t even know that it existed. I don’t wear feminism like glasses. I could have never learned about feminist theory and still feel the way I do now. Labels are rather flimsy signifers of things that are much more complex and deep.
This is why I don’t think my views and the LDS Church are necessarily mutually exclusive. This is because I do not think women will be forever restricted from the Priesthood. I don’t believe God wants it that way, but this doesn’t necessitate that the Church is untrue. Like I mentioned in an earlier comment, I believe that the church is also progressing. Men are good, but they are fallible and always shaped by their personality and culture. I believe God does not (perhaps cannot) interfere with agency and because of this the Church is not always a perfect representation of divine truth.
Also, while I don’t deny the powerful forces of biology, I also don’t think that women are all alike, nor are all men alike. I for one have always had trouble getting along with women. In fact, I usually have more in common with men than women. I believe very few traits are inherently male or female–most are just human. For example, my husband would make an amazing stay-at-home parent, much better than I ever would. He is much more inclined to be more patient and nurturing than I am. Does that make him any less of a man, or me any less of a woman? I would like to think not. Another example that comes to mind is Christ. He possessed stereotypically “feminine” and stereotypically “masculine” traits.
I also agree with you that it’s silly to think everyone must fulfill the exact same roles. I just think the roles you choose to fulfill should be based on your own desires, talents, personality, and circumstances. Differences are important, as you suggest. I hate doing the dishes so my husband usually does them and I’m the one that cleans the bathroom. As a team, we divide duties along the line that best fit us and we make compromises when necessary. I do not ascribe to the notion that “feminism is the playbook that says everyone should take turns playing every position so we’re all equal”. At least, that’s not the type of feminism that I would like to be associated with. It doesn’t fit me. I just think agency is something to be respected. I believe God understands that we are individuals, and encourages us to make choices that best fit our situation.
Wow. Super long reply, sorry.
I just would like to comment on the nature of this discussion. So many times on websites like this people fight and argue and are defensive or antagonistic. I myself have taken part in those behaviors much more than I like. Yet here I find two people, Ryan and Taylor, conversing in a pleasant, discoursive tone, and even though they do not agree on many things the way they represent their ideas and opinions is something to be highly admired. As Taylor points out, the Church is progressing and so are we as individuals. I believe this progression, both institutional and individual, can only truly occur when we engage in polite discussion like you two have. The fact that you are discussing rather than arguing shows that you are interested in learning and progressing, and that you are not interested in fighting and arguing. I hope that in the future I can be more like you two are here. So cheers!!!!
Ryan, let’s re-phrase your comment in the civil rights views of the 1930s and 40s and see if it still flies:
“What is your justification for believing that you should always “feel” equal? Where is that written? You are equal, and you are treated equally, though differently, within the world. Whether or not you “feel” equal is up to you.
And in all sincerity, how do you justify this assertion that you should feel the same as whites when obviously blacks and whites are different? Even if civil rights advocates like to falsely chalk up most of the differences between the races to “socialization” (which is absurd) you cannot dispute the stark racial differences. How then can you suggest that both races shouldn’t be treated somewhat differently?
Have you ever stopped to consider that this feeling of inequality might not be accurate? That maybe it is based on an incorrect understanding of the underlying principles? That maybe civil rights advocates are teaching the incorrect principles, and not the world?”
Doesn’t work, does it? In fact, that’s downright insulting. As I felt your comment was, to be bluntly honest with you. As I feel the LDS church’s stand on this is. Very insulting. Here’s an example:
I was married young. My first husband and I divorced after a year. We were married in the temple.
7 years later I met a marvelous man and married him. We have now been married over 30 years. About 5 years ago we decided that we would go be sealed in the temple. Would you believe that I had to look up my ex whom I hadn’t seen in 25 years and wanted nothing to do with, and ask him for his permission to be sealed to my new husband? Well, actually, ask him if he would release the sealing, but you get the idea.
Thank goodness he was a gentleman about it. Wrote back immediately and wished me well. If he hadn’t, I wouldn’t have been able to be sealed to my wonderful husband. Tell me that’s right. I’ll tell you you’re wrong, wrong, wrong.
Ryan, we should feel equal because it’s a basic human right. We should feel equal because the current situation makes many women, including myself feel incredibly devalued.
Yes, there are psychological differences between men and women, but that is not a basis for different treatment not every. single. woman is going to possess the set of qualities that you deem “womanly.” Women aren’t an amorphous blob that you can assign qualities to because there are simply too many exceptions. Treating men and women the same is only an improvement.
Have you ever stopped to consider that what many women are feeling is valid? You can’t deny someone else’s feelings. You don’t “choose to feel” unequal. Did women “choose to feel unequal” before they could vote? How about before they could own their own property? How about when their husbands were legally allowed to beat them?
“Choosing to feel unequal” is the most ludicrous argument for widespread discrimination I have ever heard.
Lauren,
My question was directed at the author. However, I disagree with you that we all have a “basic human right” to FEEL equal. We have a basic human right to be equal, but that is different than “feeling” equal. The vast majority of women in the LDS Church feel equal. Why should the Church change because you don’t? And what if it did change to make you feel equal, but then someone else didn’t feel equal with the new change? Should it have to change again? I think the Church’s purpose is to teach us the correct doctrine. How we feel about it is up to us.
I agree with you that the word “feel” can be problematic. Unfortunately, it connotes a sense of subjectivity that is easy to brush aside. I think it would have been clearer if the original post from WAVE omitted the word “feel”. The author’s purpose would have been stronger if she had said, “I am equal when . . . “.
I would also like to point out the Church changes policies (and doctrines) constantly. What is a correct principle at one time isn’t at other. This demonstrates to me that the Church is meant to progress along with its members. I love this quote from Henry Eyring (the father of Elder Henry B. Eyring):
“We have to keep firmly in mind at all times the two aspects of the Church: its divinely inspired prefect side, and its human side . . . Perhaps I can say it another way. This Church would have been perfect if the Lord had not let people into it.”
That’s why I haven’t given up on the LDS Church. I’m getting way too ahead of myself. I’ll include my thoughts better in a future post.
*Also that quote is from Faith of a Scientist, page 53.
Please answer my question: Did women “feel” unequal before they could vote? How about before they could own their own property?
I “feel unequal” because I have been treated unequally, and yes, at some level being equal means being the treated the same. No, I don’t believe men and women aren’t the same, but assigning different treatment based on it isn’t right either because there is so much human variation that exists outside of gender.
Using the majority as a basis for argument is a logical fallacy, specifically, ad populum. The feelings of the majority do not cancel out my opinions and experiences anymore than it cancels out Taylor’s or numerous other women who have been socialized not to speak up about the inequality they feel.
Furthermore, how would opening up many areas to women make anyone feel unequal? If the priesthood were offered to women (which I believe it will someday) make women feel unequal if they would have a privilege they no longer held before? How would young girls feel less equal if they were offered equal funding in their programs? How would women feel less equal if they were offered positions like ward clerk or Sunday school presidency?
Frankly, I just don’t see what you’re getting at. How would offering more privileges to women (that are currently only held by men) make them feel less equal? If anything, if men and women had the same opportunities in the church, by definition, they would be more equal.
I think you make great point. It’s about extending the same opportunities–not making people the same. There are so many things (like the ones you listed) that would show me that the Church cares about women in action rather than just word. (I’m writing up post about this.) But for example, things like allowing women to pray in conference, allowing more women to speak in conference, use more quotes from women in teaching materials, etc. These are such easy things to do and show me that Church actually cares about women and values womens’ voices. It won’t fix everything, but it would be a great start.
I like the tone of the discussion! It is so nice to have apposing view points discussed without anger. Although I agree with Ryan that the vast majority of women feel equal within the church and that it should carefully consider changing to meet the “feeling” needs of the few. I “feel” like those apposing his views really considered them. I believe that this is, too often, not the case. Your civil responses have given me something to think about and I believe that you are not some crazy man haters that just want to run the ward!
It is unfortunate that in area where God has not dictated, doctrinally, men’s and women’s roles that women have been treated “unequally.” I would like to see a discussion sometime about how different roles can or cannot be “equal.”
There are different roles that need to be executed in life and families. It is clear that “God should not command in all things” and I believe our leaders are doing their best on issues where God hasn’t “spelled everything out yet.” In these area’s I think there is room for movement and difference of opinion to be worked out. Good discussion.
Thank you to reviving this post on WAVE. We wrote some lovely stuff when WAVE was first created, discussions about the very things that are being talked about here, but the nature of the internet is that sometimes things get lost and so I really appreciate your thoughtful post and discussion. As the author of the list of “I feel unequal when” I can attest to the point I was trying to make: too often the argument that men and women in the LDS church are equal is that LDS women “feel” equal (and the Otterson article is evidence of this). We have talked over and over about all of the structural, institutional, hierarchical inequalities between genders in the church– just look at the Ensign church leader centerfold or the fact that women are still not being allowed to pray in GC! (NONE of which has anything to do with physiology Ryan, I might add). But, shockingly, that clear and basic evidence does not seem to persuade many LDS men and women who continually harp that because (some) LDS women “feel” equal, they therefore are. Thus, hard evidence doesn’t count as proof, but “feelings” do. Hmmmm…..I wanted to make the point with this post that not every LDS woman feels equal! In fact, many of us don’t. Many of us constantly and consistently feel unequal-from our wards, to the temple, to GC, to the scriptures. Does that constitute evidence? If feelings are evidence, do our “feelings” of inequality legitimize the reality of the institutional imbalance the same way women’s “feelings” of equality made those disparities disappear? Or will we only take into account the women’s “feelings” that the LDS leaders and PR statements concur with?
I’m so glad you stumbled across this blog. It’s great to hear your take. I glad you explained your choice of the word “feel”–I’m sorry I missed that point. I also just want to say, I think you bought up great examples that attest to your assertion. I think the items which bother me the most are issues which have no doctrinal basis (which you brought up in your article)–such as women not asked to pray in GC, women barred from positions with do not require the Priesthood, etc. I cannot understand what these inequalities aren’t currently being corrected when the church is constantly promoting the value of women. Although this would be such an easy change, how wonderful would it be and what kind of message would it send if women prayed in GC and if half the speakers were women?
“How can someone suggest they should be doing exactly the same job when they have such different aptitudes and talents?”
Yes, Ryan, I agree with this. We are not equal. We each are given different talents, gifts and abilities. I have been blessed with a high level of intelligence, unending drive, determination, logic, and more. I use these gifts best when I am in positions of leadership and scholarship. I also happen to be a nurterer to my children.
My husband has been blessed with a high level of intelligence, the gift of healing, compassion and tenderness. He uses these gifts best when he is caring for and healing others. He also happens to be a nurterer to our children.
I “feel” unequal when he is lauded for being a parent and having a career, and I am told that I should fit into a narrowly defined “role” that would require me to ignore the reasons for which I was created and to ignore that I have “such different aptitutes and talents.”
God the father and God the mother would be very disappointed in me if I did not fulfill the full measure of my creation. I have spent endless hours on my knees to find out how THEY would have my fulfill my potential and it goes directly against the narrow teachings of the proclamation. So, I choose to follow God in this matter, not the words of the brethren. I “feel” unequal when my choices are treated as wrong or selfish when I know I am choosing the right.
________________________________________
Elder Scott has said:
“Your happiness now and for the eternities will unquestionably be determined by whether or not you follow the spiritual guidance of the Lord communicated through the Holy Ghost…” “The counsel of others and the programs of the Church are useful aids but not the best source of fundamental direction in your life. That guidance comes from the Lord through the Holy Ghost. Spirituality yields two fruits. The first is inspiration, that is, to know what to do. The second is power—the power of God or the capacity to do what one has been instructed to accomplish.” (Richard G. Scott, Finding Peace, Happiness, and Joy, p. 39-40)
_____________________________________________
Elder Uctdorf has said:
“It might be wise to look at … the scriptures not as checklists or detailed scripts but rather as opportunities to prepare our minds and hearts to receive divine inspiration for our responsibilities. Unfortunately, we sometimes don’t seek revelation or answers from the scriptures…because we think we know the answers already.
Brothers and sisters, as good as our previous experience may be, if we stop asking questions, stop thinking, stop pondering, we can thwart the revelations of the Spirit. Remember, it was the questions young Joseph asked that opened the door for the restoration of all things. We can block the growth and knowledge our Heavenly Father intends for us. How often has the Holy Spirit tried to tell us something we needed to know but couldn’t get past the massive iron gate of what we thought we already knew?”
____________________________________________
I “feel” unequal when men tell me that I am of so little value that I do not need to follow the counsel of these two wise brethren–that I do not need to question or think for myself. That I need to fit the mold and then, and only then, will my choices be validated.
Amen, Bones. Thank you for your wonderful and insightful comments.
Have you ever thought that maybe some men need more experience in leadership positions than women because of what they need to learn, not because they are considered better? I don’t understand when women try to feel empowered by ignoring their divine roles by trying to take on a man’s divine role. Women are doing more to lessen the importance of women than men.
Mandy, thank you for your comment. I think you bring up a good point and I understand where you’re coming from. However, I think we would define “divine roles” differently. I do not ascribe to the notion that men and women have only one legitimate path to follow (i.e., motherhood for women, priesthood for men). I think this proscription denies individual talents, desires, needs, and circumstances. Also, I see a divine role as something unique to each individual in which they (with the assistance of personal revelation) fulfill the measure of their creation–whatever that might mean. I’m not out to steal leadership opportunities and to be completely honest—I really could live without the Priesthood. The larger issue I have with the Church is the fact that we are not correcting non-doctrinally based inequalities—which are enumerated above and in many other places on the bloggernacle. I also take issue that my *only* purpose in life is to be a mother. Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s great if women want to be a SAHM. However, I want my others contributions to be valued. Also, I think of my amazing husband who would love to be a stay-at-home dad someday. His capacity to be a nurturer is just as great, if not more than mine. This is why I take issue with proscribed gender roles, they are too generalized and exclusive of those who do not fit the mold.
And if I may ask you a question: have you ever considered that woman might benefit/learn from presiding over a ward or that a man might benefit/learn from being a stay-at-home dad?
First off, I appreciate your kindness in response to my comment. I know things can get heated in these types of discussions.
I too believe that God wants each person to develop their unique talents for their own benefit and the benefit of others. What I love about being a mother (not necessarily a SAHM) is that I get to help my children with that development. I have a friend who, like you, feels that she and her husband can divide up the childcare and both work. Great! Each situation is unique and does not have to fit a cookie cut mold. The church states that wives and husbands are supposed to help each other as equal partners. That said, I feel like the issue may be with member of the church, not the church itself. I think the danger comes not when a woman finds a profession she can contribute in, but when she diminishes the importance of motherhood by placing more importance on the job than the child. A job may last a lifetime, but how the child is raised will affect everyone that child associates with. The same is true when a father places more importance on his job than his family.
A woman could definitely learn/benefit from being a bishop and a man could learn/benefit from being a stay-at-home dad. Each role teaches patience and charity. Do you think that women should have the priesthood?
Thank you for your thoughts. I would absolutely agree with you that children should be the priority for working parents. That being said, I do not hear in church the same tolerance you express. At least, that has been my experience growing up primarily in Utah and Idaho. I’ve found most correlated church material and publications tend to put forward an ideal family structure (mother stays at home tending children, father presides and provides). Lately I’ve heard more acceptance of working women, but only a begrudging one. A women who must work to support her family is more likely to be accepted, but I don’t hear much in the way of women who want to work being applauded. I mentioned my feelings about the Proclamation to the World’s wording on this issue. Recently, my 20-something visiting teacher basically told me women with children who want to work are selfish. Additionally, at my time at BYU, the section on university policy that is required to be printed on every syllabus now includes a paragraph asking students not to judge their female professors for working. Many of my female professors have told me that they often receive cruel and disrespectful comments in students’ reviews. Also, a recent conference talk asked women to not judge working women because you don’t know their situation–which I believe was referring to the issue of women who must work, not women who desire to work (although, I admit, I could be mistaken).
It has been my experience that the current rhetoric, even the rhetoric that comes from the top, is not very accepting of those who do not fit the mold: singles, women who can’t have children, women who don’t want children, etc. Many times these women feel alienated when the teachings are constantly focused on motherhood. I don’t think motherhood should be diminished in any way, I just believe it would be very helpful for the membership in general if other accomplishments women make were more valued. Also, I have trouble with the church’s rhetoric on equality between spouses when they simultaneously preach that a man should preside in the home. The notion is paradoxical to me (not to mention hurtful). If we must redefine “preside” for the concept to be acceptable, I think we have a problem that should be addressed.
However, I also must be fair and concede that many wards have been making great strides in these areas. But change is a bit too slow going for me.
And to finally answer your last question: I do believe women should hold the Priesthood. If God is as good and loving as I believe He is, I do not believe he would bar women from the authority to act in His name. I’ve heard all of the apologetic responses to this, but none of them are very satisfying to me. However, as I said earlier, I really could live without the Priesthood. Partly because I also believe that just giving women the Priesthood would not immediately correct all the problems of inequality in the church. What I would really appreciate is if church leaders corrected inequitable practices that have nothing to do with doctrine. For example, allowing women to pray in GC and asking more women to speak in GC.
Sorry that was such a long reply! Too many thoughts.
Mandy,
You are right, I have not considered that men need more experience in leadership positions. In fact, it has been my experience over the past 50 years that men are in many more leadership roles than women. This includes civic leadership, business leadership and church leadership. I’ve raised three boys and one girl, and I didn’t find that my boys were lacking in this area at all. They, along with my daughter, are all very capable leaders.
It is our daughters who need more experience in the role of leader. In general, the great talents and minds of women are largely ignored by our society and this is not serving anyone.
You mentioned that women “ignore” their divine roles. Can you please explain to me what it looks like when a woman “ignores” her divine role? I am not being rude, I really am curious.
In my life I have many roles. I am a daughter, a sister, a mother, a leader, a ________ (I choose not to give my profession, as I have a very globally-visible career.). I absolutely love being a mom. Am I ignoring my divine role of MOTHER when I also fulfill my other roles?
In my husband’s life, he also has many roles, including doctor, son, brother, husband, bishop and father. He loves being a father. Is he ignoring his divine role of FATHER when he is also fulfilling his other roles? Is he ignoring the responsibilities that come with the priesthood when he goes to work?
I know that having many roles does not, in any way, diminish the other roles in my life. I am no less a wonderful daughter because I am a wife. I am no less a wonderful mother, though I am also a sister. I am no less a great YW President though I am also in my chosen career.
Your response was much more eloquent than mine. You bring up some great points.
I’m afraid I offended you or that my words seemed judgmental. I was not trying to say that leadership skills were the reason for men having the priesthood, but that recently it occurred to me that maybe that is a benefit for men, to learn charity, patience, and other attributes that come from serving others. When I think of church leadership roles, I consider them to be a call to serve rather than a call to dictate. Though it is definitely not the only avenue for women to learn the same attributes, motherhood too teaches these.
I guess what concerns me is that women are may be sending the message that working is more important than raising a child, if you have children. Obviously this does not apply to those without children. I am not saying you cannot work and have children. Plenty of women need to in order to support their family. I have a college degree and plan on working after my last child goes to school. This is my preference because it is what I feel comfortable with. Because I had a child, I am responsible to God for how I raise them, so I choose to be home when they are home during the first fundamental years instead of sending them to preschool. I do this only because I want to know for certain that they are being raised in the most uplifting environment that encourages the development of their spirit, mind, and body. You may have done the same. Don’t misunderstand me, sending your children to preschool does not mean you are “ignoring” your divine role. I can’t describe what it looks like, because it is more of a state of mind. It is the mentality of “me first” in regards to placing priority on furthering your career over the development of your children. You could also be ignoring your divine role if you are a SAHM and spend all your time on the computer or watching TV rather than spending time teaching your child. You can ignore your divine role as a SAHM or as a working mother.
Because this is a state of mind, I can’t judge whether someone is ignoring their role as a woman. So I am sure that you are very capable in each role you listed. I’m guessing that since you said you love being a mom, that is evidence that you are not ignoring this role. Life is a balancing act, so it is just a matter of keeping things in proper balance. I think this should answer your question about you and your husband many different roles.
Also, I should note that I did not limit each genders’ divine role to fatherhood or motherhood. By divine role, I mean that in the most literal sense; we are meant to become like our heavenly parents.
I really like what you are saying here. I love your expansive definition of divine roles–it’s a beautiful way of looking at things. I’m afraid I jumped to another conclusion of what you meant–this is not how I usually hear divine roles discussed. It’s a very refreshing perspective.
“A job may last a lifetime, but how the child is raised will affect everyone that child associates with. The same is true when a father places more importance on his job than his family. A woman could definitely learn/benefit from being a bishop and a man could learn/benefit from being a stay-at-home dad. ”
Amen, Mandy. You should write the lessons on parenting for the church.
My beliefs on who should have the priesthood are personal and I, in no way, expect anyone to agree with me. (and my reasons are many.). In short, yes, I do think women should have the priesthood.
I believe in modern-day revelation and keep an open mind. I do not find it wrong to desire to have the “blessings of the fathers”. Abraham sought the priesthood and it was counted in his favor.
Thank you for sharing this
The church is always going to have men as a ruling ‘head’ because it is based on Patriarchy. I have never been one for that kind of governing over my conscience. On the other hand I am also not one for Matriarchy being a ruling head either. As the saying goes: Absolute rule rules absolutely. When enough people finally get tired of living in fear of their leaders judgements on them, (or not reaching the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom) then the church will HAVE to change. When the majority of the members get to the point of truly understanding what the ‘milk’ is, and hunger after the ‘meat’, then we will truly see change and equality. BTW – Women did hold the Priesthood when the church first started. If you want more information, I will give it to you.