Introduction
“We need women who are organized and women who can organize. We need women with executive ability who can plan and direct and administer; women who can teach, women who can speak out. …
and
We need women who are devoted to shepherding God’s children along the covenant path toward exaltation; women who know how to receive personal revelation, who understand the power and peace of the temple endowment; women who know how to call upon the powers of heaven to protect and strengthen children and families; women who teach fearlessly.
Ok.
Everyone has heard those words. For example:
- 2015 General Conference.
- The Maxwell Institute.
- 1976 General Conference.
Yet how many women do you know who feel free to speak out like Bryndis Roberts?
Name five women you know who are involved in demonstrating executive ability to plan and administer in the Church in your area? Now, name a couple bishops and your stake presidency. Easy to think of five or more men. Hard to think of five or fewer women.
The problem has many aspects.
- It leads to self fulfilling prophecies.
- It leads to resentment. Unmet expectations are the number 1 killer of relationships and the number 1 cause of resentment.
- It has steady, constant push-back from people who “know better.” (for example, this). I personally knew a stake president who got himself harshly rebuked by Elder Oaks because he was just certain that he outranked a female general board member and rose to correct her in a leadership training she was conducting.
The Issue.
President Hinckley (when he was encouraging Kathy Pullins in her stewardship over the BYU Womens’ conference) stressed the need for leadership from the women of the Church and the importance of what she was called to do. Yet you won’t find a reference to her at LDS.org. Until recently you didn’t see faces on the stand or pictures on the walls. He knew that the tools had to be built and a groundwork laid. He also knew there was a need.
The issue is that we do not have good role models, any good formal and clear path for local level implementation, and often anything that is intended to focus on women puts men’s faces first. E.g. if you use a cell phone “I was a Stranger” has its first non-illustration picture and its lead statement framed as three men speaking. It is a beautiful project, aimed at encouraging LDS women to take the lead and to minister, and setting up a world wide project aimed at changing hearts and attitudes and encouraging us to act like Christ. It is everything good about the Church. Yet, too many people first comment not on the enabling part but on the picture framing.
The Problem.
If you tell women that they are equal to men (as Paul, Joseph Smith and others have said) and then don’t treat them as equals, you have raised expectations that you do not meet. You are creating resentment where it would otherwise not exist.
We seem to have a huge gap between God, between our heavenly parents, and the way many local congregations run, where budgets for young men and young women are often lop-sided and where many feel constrained. Some are engaging everyone, other places engage few and alienate many.
The Solution.
I don’t have a solution. I am hopeful that things such as I was a Stranger and other initiatives (such as lowering the age for young women to serve as missionaries and church-wide implementation of sisters as mission assistants and zone leaders and the like) will have an impact that will allow us to grow in grace to grace and improve in knowledge and in our closeness to the Savior.
But what else can we do, one person, one family, one ward at a time to meet the needs and expectations of those whose skills and leadership we need and are failing to enable or allow?
Your suggestions?
One person at a time 
great things can be accomplished. Each one teach one has so many applications.
What suggestions do you have?
What have you done?
What do you plan to do?
What mistakes have I made in my approach and my conclusions?
Post Script
In mentioning Paul (all are alike unto God, Male and Female, Black and White) I am aware of other verses attributed to him, but not found in the earliest sources (so that many modern scholars think they were part of the plain and precious things that were lost when people started editing and rewriting the Bible — though there are alternative readings as well). That very example demonstrates just how pervasive and deep the problem is.
Wheat & Tares 
I am definitely a member of the Bryndis Roberts fan club. She is a great role model, but I don’t think that the vast majority of women or girls in the church are even aware of her or others like her.
As an added bonus, she doesn’t talk with a “Primary” voice 🙂
This is an LDS patriarchal cultural echo, it says nothing at all about women in general or their abilities. I work side by side with female peers the result is both complimentary and synergistic. And I’m involved in a number of charity organizations run completley by women and they are efficient and fun.
I agree with AHH lose the Primary voice!
Our stake has been involved with the JustServe program for a year, and it is the head of the stake Public Affairs Committee who seeks service opportunities and vettes those suggested by members. Oops, I don’t recall her exact name. But that position has been held by a woman in every stake and region I have lived in, although many members are not aware of what they do.
And depending on the welfare needs of a ward, the Relief Society president is administering a social service agency.
A few years back, a counselor in the bishopric came up to me and admitted he was terrified because the bishop was going out of town, and he was concerned about welfare issues and funerals. “I just found out about all the stuff you do,” he said, “and it is great to know that you will have my back on this stuff!”
His naivete in having his eyes opened was charming, but how is it that a returned missionary does not already know what the Relief Society does?
So I am not sure that is a lack of leadership opportunities but a lack of recognition for that work.
Also, running a large household which so many Mormon women do is a great training ground for learning management skills. It was the best preparation for being a project manager than any of the my graduate coursework. I have heard that moms returning to the workforce are much in demand as PMs in Austin and Silicon Valley.
I was just venting to my boyfriend a few days ago about this. “Remember they said ‘this this and this!’?” I told him in reference to some of those quotes from October 2015 conference. “Well, they don’t mean it! ‘Teach fearlessly — (as long as you use the materials we tell you can use and as long as you come to the conclusion we tell you to!’)”
I went on, “And I don’t get a voice in my ward. I don’t get to talk. If I start operating in my faith, I actually get shut down! Why don’t you think I don’t have any friends from my ward?”
We were driving somewhere. He was driving and I was talking, my hands moving a mile a minute. “You know the last time I bore my testimony? I was so excited about how I didn’t have to worry about this culture anymore. I come from an Evangelical background. I know what it means to call down the power of heaven by faith. I know what it means to teach fearlessly! I was wrong. They don’t mean it. I don’t even want to hear what they have to say this time around. What else are they going to say that they really don’t mean? I feel like a fool for standing in front of my congregation saying how supported I feel now by the organization and how I can finally be myself and stop worrying about the culture six months ago!”
My tirade and valid statements were met with attempts to encourage me in the fact that I will somehow get past this rough patch. Like it’s my fault? Really? Man. I tell you what. This organization is so manipulative I’ve just about had it. I don’t belong in the organization. I just don’t feel like it’s “time” for me to leave yet.
I’m “active” and endowed and attend mostly regularly.
Unmet expectations is indeed a huge problem in this area. We have set an expectation of equality in our rhetoric and increasingly the world has closed the gap for our girls, especially those in their 20s or younger. Many (thoigh not all) know what getting treated equally *feels* like. They expect it. They also know that *structural inequality matters*. The church will have a hard time selling equality to a younger generation without addressing structural inequality. And that is the problem. Local wards have very limited control over structure and no control over the biggest ones found within the church hierarchy. Such structual inquality is also o e of the biggest roadblocks to the local cultural changes sought (often by top leaders).
Steps that could be taken:
Creation of a female administrative structure parrellel to the 70s to directly connect the General Board to stake and local RS.
Expanded administrative support amd resources for the general board.
Fix the structurally unequal language in the temple.
Creation of an equivalent female high council at the stake level.
Give general board and local leaders some form of hard decision rights over something, anything.
Fix other obviously unequal policies, excommunication policies etc.
Grant longer tenure to female general board members and give them the right to select their succesors. Give them a significant and autonomous budget.
Give them back the legitimate use of blessings.
All this is totally doable without Priesthood ordination (thoigh I think that us ultimately required for true equality). This is just baseline to make it so our (American, developed country) women don’t experience the greatest inequality of their lives in their church.
Thank you all for the comments so far.
I really appreciate the honest statements.
I do think this is much like efforts to replace the Boy Scouts where all they can think of is a clone program (thinking of one guy who had the assignment and gave up) — serious problems getting out of the box.
@rah – great suggestions. Why is it so hard for even SOME of these suggestions get some traction? I am scratching my head on why at least some are not being moved upon. I mean it seriously erodes what is left of my testimony that the church, my church, is SOOOO slow to drop “foolish traditions of our fathers”. Very eroding.
“Many (thoigh not all) know what getting treated equally *feels* like.”
I absolutely know what being treated equally feels like. I would add though that treating others the same is not necessarily treating others equally. Sometimes it feels like getting screwed when others sincerely think they are treating me equally from their point of view.
I work at an institution that prides itself on being an equal opportunity employer, but that really means they force everyone to do things the same way men have. I have mostly been able to craft a part-time professional career as a soft-money researcher. But I have been only one of fewer than 10 (out of thousands) employees who has a part-time position with benefits (although I’ve talked to lots of parents who would prefer to do part-time for a season).
A few years ago I accepted a part-time research position on Friday, showed up on Monday and was told that they had changed my slot to be fulltime. “You can thank me later,” the professor said. “You’ll find out that your family doesn’t need you as much as you think.” And she really was sincere in trying to help me see the light of equality. When I refused to agree with her view, I was the target of bullying, and she lied to others about why I left that position. (Fortunately I survived and landed in a better place for me.)
So please understand that when someone claims equality, I look at the fine print.
For women learning to find their voices at church, call them to be gospel doctrine teachers. It has been my favorite calling ever, but I worked really hard to prepare and prayed to be able to speak forthrightly without fear. I was invited to teach a small section of GD when I was still in college and visiting my parents ward for the summer. It was really pivotal to teach for 5 min and help me find my voice.
In my current stake, we are amazed by how ridiculously well (occ. Over the top) the girls camp program is run. Was told outright the YCL training is “the best leadership training the church offers for girls” and to take advantage of it for our daughters where possible/desired.
On a personal level, my daughters are getting chances to speak out in church and they take turns to CO teach the lesson in YW or Sunday school. We talk frankly about the scriptures, gospel principles, etc. We gave our daughter a personal retreat for Christmas for spiritual development.
@Star:
Great suggestions! Thanks for pointing that out. In my personal ward, the GD teachers are pretty established and the class likes to hold to the manual. I visit other wards and participate in their classes more openly where it is welcomed. But I can’t “leave” my ward because I bought a house in the area. In any other Christian church, if after 10 months you still don’t feel like you fit in, and or are not welcomed for being knowledgeable about uncomfortable topics, you start looking for another church. Being a Mormon, I can’t actually do that.
I also think it’s messed up for being worried about getting into trouble when you start teaching things Christ blatantly teaches, yet aren’t in the “manual.” In any other relationship setting, if you’re afraid to speak freely and or get minimized and repeatedly shut down, it’s called “dysfunction” and may or may not be considered “abuse” depending on the length and severity of it.
I know not everyone experiences such things in their wards. Every ward is indeed different.
I’m just tired of it all. I know my value, my worth, what I’m capable of, what I know. I know the depths of my research and my own personal scripture studies both in the Bible and the Book of Mormon. I get far more out of my own personal studies than I do at church at anymore. And it sucks to feel “alone” in your ward.
I’ve made several attempts to fit in and try to proactively make friends and fellowship, attending activities and so forth over the last 10 months.
Sometimes the only “voice” I feel like I have is when I turn to the Internet to voice it. Terrible. (Sigh).
In order to create a church where there are as many women capable of being leaders as men, we need to drop the rhetoric that all mothers should stay at home with their kids unless they have extremely unusual circumstances. Women and men should be encouraged to work together to ensure that their families temporal and spiritual needs are taken care of. I’m not advocating that the Church should teach all women that they have to work, but we need to allow women to pursue what they think is best for them and their families without guilt.
They best way to learn executive ability: become an executive! While a believe that you can learn many important skills as a stay at home mother, raising children does not teach you all the skills you need to manage adults. It just doesn’t.
Continued…
I guess the only reason I responded to this article is because I was totally excited about that last conference talk about the Women. It described me well. And I wanted to believe the organization would allow it.
I have no hope of this actually coming to fruition anymore. It feels like a stale marriage or bad boyfriend that I’m trapped with. I hate feeling that way, especially when I feel I’ve put forth my best effort to not have it be this way.
Didn’t mean to hi-jack the thread. Sorry.
I would say the following things are slowing down movement in this area:
1) A rigid and highly risk-averse bureaucracy and unanimous decision making norms. Even if they wanted to do these things it would be slooooow.
2) Cultural inability to “see” structural inequality. I think the leadership honestly believes that structural inequality isn’t an actual thing. Everything can be fixed by “treating people” more equally on an interpersonal level.
3) Benevolent sexism that pervades Mormon culture and doctrine
4) Generational disconnects between leadership and the membership
5) No functioning feedback mechanism between members and leadership that isn’t moderated by men with organizational incentives and cultural blinders to minimize the problem. The remaining feedback mechanism trigger Mormons’ persecution/can’t be seen to be influenced by advocacy complexes
6) The invasion of US political conservative ideology into the church which I think plays a major role in explaining and driving (2)
7) Lack of ability/mechanism for institutional humility/repentance
8) Age and health-related issues among the Brethren that decrease the entire scope of what the organization can accomplish on any subject.
9) The lack of a pipeline of politically/educationally/life experience/network diverse leadership into the 70 and the 12 coupled with a leadership selection method which would slow the diversification of the pipeline even if a concerted effort was made to change it. (ie no emeritus-12 policy, death lottery selection for president etc.)
10) Increasing orientation towards evangelical peers and the Catholic church which support similar policies.
11) Economic dependence of women in traditional Mormon family structures.
All these dynamics reinforce each other just as they did for race and the priesthood meaning that it will take a HUGE, existential threat to the organization for serious headway to be made on structural inequality issues.
I think you will issues of tone, rhetoric and culture get better, maybe with increased pace, but to Stephen’s point its unclear if these changes will act to close the gap between expectations and reality or actually heighten it.
This all makes me really sad.
Just as a side note,note regularly came home and complained to my husband about the lack of women making comments in GD (coed) when we then went to RS and heard lots of lucid, well thought out comments relevant to the lesson, personal experience, etc. We are teaching our daughters otherwise.
Shai–no apology necessary. You’ve said some valuable things.
Naismith–I agree. People know what it feels like v
RAH–nice summary.
Star & EBK — thank you.
Star – when I was a GD teacher it felt like pulling teeth to get girls to comment (about a 1 to 5 ratio, even though the population of the class was roughly 50/50). Of all the female comments I had that year, about 80% were made by one woman who attended infrequently. The sad thing is that I was a woman teaching the class, so it’s not like they didn’t see a woman talking. I tried to change the type of questions I asked, changed the style of teaching… I didn’t make any headway. When I’d ask women about it, they’d just say that the scriptures weren’t really their thing, or that they just didn’t feel like they had any good contributions. Anyone who’s taught RS knows that women can start discussions at the drop of a hat. This is where I’m really hoping the greater proportion of girls going on missions might boost scriptural literacy and increase confidence when speaking in a room with men present.
Then I moved into a ward where I found out what is what like to have your comment dismissed with a former stake president getting lauded later for saying the same thing (the teacher made sure to point out that man’s calling and what a spiritual giant he was). Eventually I only remained comfortable responding to one of the three rotating GD teachers, and was happy to get a calling that took me away from the class. The irony was that my husband got noted and was requested to teach. He hates GD.
Mary Ann — it is terrible to be rendered invisible.
Mary Ann,
I used to be a huge commenter in GD until in my current ward. In this ward, a member of the bishopric will correct comments that he believes are contrary to the correlated gospel. I have noticed that he will only correct the comments of women, even if a man makes a completely off the wall comment. After being corrected for having the audacity to state that there are plenty of people who aren’t Mormon who will make it to the celestial kingdom, I gave up. The saddest part is that I have known this man since I was 3 years old and I quite like him, but I won’t make any comments in GD because of him.
Yes unmet expectations are a huge problem. The distance between my own testimony/relationship with God and the Church’s structure, policies, culture, etc. regarding women has been very painful. The imperfection of individuals is expected. However, the structural inequalities, mixed messages in correlated manuals, temple language, etc. not related to individuals is what is so hard for me. These things can’t be explained away by imperfection, rather they are held up as divine and perfect. Many elements of the church are divine. But am I really supposed to believe that God needs the type of women President Nelson talks about and then He fails to set up a system where they can use their talents and flourish? I recently spoke with a female church leader who was hindered for months in obtaining manuals for the women in her stewardship because of one person on the ward council who didn’t think the manuals were necessary. How can women speak out honestly if when they ask for something so basic as manuals, they are ignored? Yes this story contains an imperfect individual who contributed to a poor experience. However, this ridiculous scenario wouldn’t exist if women had the authority to order manuals. Why don’t they?
I recall reading one of Deborah Tannen’s books where she discussed some differences between the way men and women communicate, including how men generally dominate conversations in public settings and are less communicative in private settings. Here is a link to this part of her book:
http://www.anth.ucsb.edu/faculty/ptaber/VC%20Sp%202015web/Tannen,%20You%20Just%20Don't%20Understand.docx
Considering what Tannen presents it would appear perhaps the LDS culture reflects typical American culture.
But I don’t believe it is the same in other cultures–Sweden for example–which are more egalitarian, in nature.
If people didn’t bring expectations to church, then there would be no unmet expectations. Worship and an opportunity to serve others — that’s all I want and that’s why I attend. The Church has never met any of my social or esteem needs, but I don’t go to church for those purposes so I’m not disappointed.
I think we need to lower expectations, actually, especially for those working/hoping for change. I hope there’s enough change by the time I have a grand-daughter that there’s a difference. That’s what I’m working for.
I think one of the reasons our leadership doesn’t listen to issues from US/white feminist women is because they regularly travel around the world and speak and interact with women from other countries with oppressive/hostile patriarchy; to those women benevolent patriarchy is very empowering. It would help us to take the voices and experiences of those women into consideration when making our appeals for change. But unfortunately I feel that leaders ignore our hopes for change as much as possible because of it, I don’t think they find our positions valid.
As an aside on the women speaking up in conversations, BYU/Princeton did a study that found that women speak up in groups when their voices are valued equally (ie consensus decision must be made, not just majority rules). https://news.byu.edu/news/study-why-women-speak-less-when-theyre-outnumbered
“In order to create a church where there are as many women capable of being leaders as men, we need to drop the rhetoric that all mothers should stay at home with their kids unless they have extremely unusual circumstances.”
Since most members of the church are first-generation and live outside of the intermountain west, not sure how much rhetoric there is along those lines nowadays…
Rather, I see the church as offering full-time parenting as a viable option, something that I do not hear at all outside of church (although I appreciate that varies from place to place).
Many of the women in the I’M A MORMON campaign are employed. Andrea Thomas, a VP at Walmart and mother of three, served on the BYU business school advisory board and gave a forum address there. Amy Easton-Flake was hired to teach religion at BYU when she had a 2-year-old and 6 month old.
The only time I have been chastised for being an employed mom by Mormons was on the internet. Not in real life. When I was given a stake calling with three young children and a professional part-time job, the stake presidency gave me a lovely blessing that I could meet all the demands on my time.
I’ve had various non-LDS colleagues inform me that it is career suicide to have more than one child or take any time out. I think THAT is the kind of mindset that may concern some in the church.
I honestly don’t know any LDS woman under the age of 60 who has remained out of the workforce once their children were older. That includes the wives of our local stake presidency and AA70. My cohort of female friends from BYU (graduated 1980) have all returned to some form of paid employment and/or public service (mayor, school board).
So it is a matter of sequencing and focus for a season, rather than a long-term commitment one direction or another.
Please understand that some women physically cannot be employed during pregnancy. I even had to have childcare help when I was pregnant and ill. I recently counseled a younger woman who had to take an extended leave of absence from her job due to hyperemesis of pregnancy. The notion of a man supporting his wife somehow doesn’t seem quite so stupid and horrible-patriarchal when one is spending day after day leaning over a toilet bowl or curled up on the floor.
Totally agree with Kristine A’s comments on the worldwide church playing a role.
Naismith,
The point is not to require women to work. I feel like I made that clear in my comment. Most of the things you bring up to argue with my comment have nothing to do with what I actually said.
Pregnancy is not the only condition that can make it difficult to work and women aren’t the only people who often have to take long periods away from work. Why can’t we tell men and women to do what is best for their family?
I know that wherever you go to church happens to be a Mecca where none of the negative things others experience ever happen to you. That doesn’t mean there isn’t a real problem.
Kristine– I got that from listening to Gina Colvin — that outside the United States find the church structure very empowering and that in some ways much of what people need in the United States is cultural imperialism there.
That is something that struck me about her interview with Bryndis Roberts was the acknowledgment that many of the issues needed much more thought if we were to honestly consider needs other than our own.
It is one of the reasons I lack suggestions or solutions.
http://athoughtfulfaith.org/caroline-kline-mormon-feminist-theology/?_=1459479911448
That is a good place to start.
Naismith,
Lets agree to agree that “equality doesn’t necessarily mean sameness”. And definitely its not like “the world” has equality perfectly figured out and women don’t face forms of discrimination even in the modernized west. However, I hope we can agree that there is a spectrum of equal opportunity and equal levels of decision rights and by any measure the LDS church as an organization limits women’s participation and level of decision rights through policy in ways that don’t exist in most of the organizations our women operate in (in the modernized west). Ie there is no policy that says a women can’t be a CEO because she is a woman, or that she can’t be an auditor. In almost no extant organization (in America) is it guaranteed by policy that a man will ALWAYS have veto rights over a woman etc. Or where women are given limited tenure in the executive roles where men’s tenures are longer or untenured. The list goes on and on and on. It has nothing to do with whether women would do the same thing as a man or whatever. The inquality is *structural* not *cultural*.
Women’s experiences in the church are of course diverse. Some women experience the church as a place that empowers them more than the other organizations they have been a part of. Good for them! Many women, however, find that they are most likely to be treated unequally in the church than in other milieus in their lives. I think there are far, far too many of the latter and I think that is what Stephen is focusing the OP on.
Kristine,
“By the time I have a granddaughter”…. that feels about right, if we are lucky 😦
I do think it is really important to acknowledge the privilege of white 1st worlders that frames this discussion. In some way the “unmet expectations” framing can do this. It is fair to say that the church exceeds expectations in more hostile sexist cultures. However, I think we are both skeptical of the bar for Zion being set at “we don’t oppress women like they do in Saudia Arabia – go us!” Its not a good excuse since we are supposed to be reaching an ideal where Daughters and Sons of God are equal co-creators. That is the expectation that has been set – at least in our modern rhetoric.
The one thing I can say for myself is that we have simply found the church not meeting the expectations we have for the treatment of our daughters (or my wife).. We won’t subject them to lesson manuals and a temple theology still predicated on “priestess unto your husband” and a culture that pushes them towards economic dependence. We hope for change but have decided that due to all the forces I mentioned above that the probability that the church will meet our basic expectations before our girls reach mature adulthood is nil. We honor those that dedicate their lives and even their children’s formative years to helping the church meet expectations. We voted with our feet. Not that we think that will change anything in and of itself but it was best for us. Maybe that will change. Maybe we will be pleasantly surprised (yay Women’s Conference) but the gap is just too large for us. Keep up the good fight. You have our full support!
…the reasons our leadership doesn’t listen to issues from US/white feminist women is because they regularly travel around the world and speak and interact with women from other countries with oppressive/hostile patriarchy; to those women benevolent patriarchy is very empowering.
Sorry but this is an apologetic meme that was constructed recently (late in the LDS feminist debate) to rationalize the church’s deftness, male egocentricity, SLC 1950s cultural time warp and obsolete belief that a single rule must fit all.
Mary Ann “I found out what is what like to have your comment dismissed with a former stake president getting lauded later for saying the same thing”
Also experienced something similar (wasn’t a stake president though, just normal member of the class – a man). Galling. Though to be fair I did comment a lot in GD when I got to attend.
When I was set apart for my current calling, which I really enjoy (which surprises me, as that has not been my prior experience with callings), I was told not to be afraid to say what I think, which was a healing thing to hear, given my experience in a previous calling. In that previous calling I had been told point blank – “you need to do what the priesthood tell you” – a statement designed to raise my hackles if ever there was one.
Howard #31
Wouldn’t surprise me. I did hear/ read something a couple of years ago probably to the effect that some women in Africa had commented that they were tired of being used as the excuse for benevolent patriarchy.
Caroline Kline didn’t mention it coming up in her interviews though, talking to Gina Colvin… I guess it varies there, as here.
Howard. Listen to the podcast.
Hedgehog,
Yes I remember a story from Africa about the LDS church being a *woman’s church* because we don’t beat *our* woman!!! Applying that primitive logic as an apologetic to a third world setting seems pretty empty and unenlightened to me. All standards are to be set to the least common denomonator? Sorry that’s not Godlike, multilayered parables are Godlike. Btw, have you seen any new multilayered parables coming out of SLC lately? Ever?
Stephen,
Which is the podcast link? And briefly before I invest an hour, what is it going to tell me?
From the OP: “If you tell women that they are equal to men . . . and then don’t treat them as equals, you have raised expectations that you do not meet. You are creating resentment where it would otherwise not exist.” A minor quibble. Women don’t expect to be treated equally because someone told them to expect it. Nobody would ever say that men only expect to be treated equally because someone told them to expect it. While it’s true that someone who is abused is pleasantly surprised by kindness, that doesn’t mean that they don’t resent the abuse or feel they deserve it.
We are in a quandary here. RAH’s exhaustive list in #13 points out the obstacles to improvement pretty well. Combine that with E. Nelson’s talk about women needing to speak up which was on the heels of E. Ballard saying don’t speak up TOO MUCH. Women have a much more narrow acceptable range of behavior. Damned if you speak up (too much or in the wrong way) and now damned if you don’t. But there are certainly plenty of men leaders in the church who feel religiously justified in ignoring or dismissing women.
I feel a lot like Shai Hadassah.
And yet, I disagree with Stephen that it would be hard for me to come up with the names of 5 women in the ward who are running the show. In my experience, my bishops recognize that the women are often more reliable, better organizers, who have the pulse of the ward. By contrast, I would be harder pressed to find 5 men with the same abilities. 5 men who could look the part? Sure. Who could accomplish as much? That’s less likely. Some of that is probably because many women in the church have more free time than the men. I am not one of them.
I know blaming African’s for benevolent patriarchy isn’t the answer – but we have Elder and Sister Bednar traveling and speaking about the power of a young mormon convert in Africa who refused an arranged-dowry-paid-for-marriage because she wanted to marry a mormon man she loved. I’ve heard it a few times lately about how the church is challenging the dowry system there (imho mostly bc people can’t afford it so they delay marriage – not because they oppose the practice on feminist principles).
After having limited choices being treated as if “nearest to angels” would feel amazing. But progress is progress, and what was once liberating becomes a cage.
And no, I can’t frame it as only the international church loves benevolent patriarchy . . . . because by and large most active LDS women and I’d venture, nearly all of our leadership’s wives, support the system.
It is a double bind/double speak situation: you’re equal, but we have a different definition of equal; we’re patriarchs (servant leader), but we changed the definition of that so we can keep it wo looking like a bad guy; women are more valued than men, but we keep strict boundaries in place so that men, by far, are more necessary; wpeak up, but mostly to praise what we’re already doing or else we just trust you less and use you never. etc.
{sigh}
I think in some ways the discussion of how things work successfully obscures the expectations problem. Though it has caused me to look as the issues as related, which I had not connected before–that the third world (including central and South America) experience affects the perspective of leaders and creates issues.
The problem is multi fold then. How do we meet expectations across multiple cultures at the same time when they have very different needs and framing. How do we meet the needs of a large segment without harming others or disrupting them. How do we see the unmet needs and expectations of a significant group when there is also a large group where the status quo has their needs met very well?
How do we evolve processes to meet unmet expectations without the changes causing harm and without abandoning the message.
Good perspectives. Thank you all for them.
I know. I only have more questions and more complexity. I’m not going to chime in with an answer.
But I appreciate every one helping me to see the matter more broadly and with more depth.
And Hawk– thanks for disagreeing with me.
The church is remarkably narrow and therefore remarkably poor at soothing a naturally occurring variety of needs. It is designed around the concept of the individual changing to meet the church’s narrowness, not the other way arround. It is far more black and white than would be required to be accommodating to it’s members. The purpose of this to the extent that there is a purpose is tribe building, it has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the gospel.
Behold, this is my doctrine—whosoever repenteth and cometh unto me, the same is my church. Whosoever declareth more or less than this, the same is not of me, but is against me; therefore he is not of my church.
This is pretty cynical, but I’ve seen bishoprics intervene in female-headed auxiliaries (Primary and Relief Society) and shut down programs initiated by female leaders, with no real explanation (other than that they didn’t see a need for the program). In my last ward this happened all the time, and it kind of felt like the bishopric was reminding women that they really didn’t have autonomy over their own organizations. One bishopric in a past ward even had rules about how many meals the RS could arrange to bring to women with new babies. They also expressed discomfort over us holding Relief Society activities in which men were not present to supervise, supposedly as a matter of safety. In my last ward ward, the bishopric frequently released primary/nursery teachers without replacing them or informing the primary president. Some Sundays she’d show up and realize she didn’t have teachers for half her classes! I know many wards aren’t like this, but it was frustrating and disturbing to see smart, well-meaning, energetic women get undermined and pushed around this way. In short, I’ve given up trying to make changes, since nobody cares what I think. Unless male leaders take female leadership seriously enough to a) respect and allow differences of opinion, b) consult with women before making changes that affect them, and c) follow through when women leaders make reasonable requests for support or funding, there’s not much women can do.
M that is terrible.
Everyone– I really appreciate where people point out where I am wrong and need to rethink.
Those comments on this thread have been valuable to me.
M, I’ve only been in one ward where I saw the bishopric exert full control over who was considered and called to Primary positions. The president didn’t even get to pick her own counselors, let alone teachers (if I remember correctly). This shocked me, since I’d worked in a Primary presidency where we at least got to submit our own requests to fill callings (bishopric still had veto power, of course). I was a counselor to a very heavyhanded Primary President, though. You can definitely have domineering female leaders who place tight restrictions on what you thought was your stewardship and make you worry often about censure.
Howard, in the story of the woman in Ghana proclaiming this as a woman’s church, she also was happy about the *doctrines* of the church in addition to men being instructed that church “culture” does not permit men to beat their wives and kids (she specified culture). She was grateful that RS taught her both spiritual and temporal ways to improve her own life as well as her family’s. She was particularly grateful for the opportunity to be sealed to her husband and children (seven of her eleven children were deceased). There was more to it than just stopping abuse. We have empowering doctrine concerning women. We just also happen to have doctrine that contradicts that empowering message.
My pleasure
Unfortunately I’ve heard plenty of stories of male leaders exerting too heavy a hand over the female auxiliary leaders in the manner described by M. One Primary President who was a friend spent most Sundays scouring the halls for primary and nursery substitutes because the bishop kept shooting down her requests for specific people prioritizing all the other organizations over hers. She was at her wits end, yet with no one to turn to.
My husband pointed out that there’s really no good reason a ward should ever have two men as gospel doctrine teachers when there are so few callings open to women that also include men. When women are relegated to working with and teaching just women and children, they are largely invisible to male leadership. They definitely lack influence given the all male leadership structure. While councils are in place to change this the history exists.
My suggestion is not specific to fixing the Church’s gender biases, but would likely help. I work in a very large firm. At work, employees are encouraged to notice and report issues and suggestions. There’s a button on the homepage for reporting feedback. And the feedback is monitored and acted on at the highest levels. Just about every week an email comes out saying “You spoke raising these issues. We listened and here’s what we’ve changed.” Regularly between 4 and 10 issues are tackled. The company holds contests for who can find and fix the most customer experience problems. A program like this is sorely needed at church. It is sad that I feel my voice is more likely to affect change at work than in the kingdom.
Nullification = We have empowering doctrine concerning women. We just also happen to have doctrine that contradicts that empowering message.
MTodd — assuming just five comments a stake a week, do you have a suggestion for sorting and processing them?
Mtodd
Theocracy.