I am white and male. This gives me an advantage in American society. While shopping for a new house, I am shown more options than equally qualified racial minorities. I am quoted a lower price for a new car, and get twice as many call backs for job interviews.
It also extents to my membership in the Mormon Church, though it seems to be fading a little bit in recent years. It used to be that only I could give prayers in Sacrament Meeting, and my wife couldn’t. Now we both can. My wife can also be an official witness for baptisms which is new. Women can now go on a mission as a primary goal at 19, and not an afterthought at age 21. Women attend all the “leadership” meetings in a ward except Bishopric meeting. This was not the case when I was bishop.
But some things have not changed. There are still no women in that Bishopric meeting!
Growing up in the church, all my bishop’s looked like me. They were white and male. Even though I lived in the Fresno area of central California with lots of hispanics, I never saw a hispanic in any leadership role in the church until I went on my mission to Chile in 1976. I never saw a black man as a bishop until 6 years ago when one was called as my bishop. Up until a few years ago, all of the Q15 looked exactly like me, with multi-generational church membership, and Utah heritage.
My three daughters get none of my white male privilege. I married a cute Mexican girl, so they don’t even get the “white” privilege part, though they are pretty light skinned so maybe some.
I can never know what all the advantages that were afforded me because of my white maleness. Did I get that promotion over the Puerto Rican guy at work 25 years ago because of that privilege ? Did I save a few dollars on my latest new car purchase from the car dealership? Do I get better service when I complain at the hotel front desk on a problem in my room? I don’t know.
What ways have white male privilege helped or hurt you in society, the workforce, or Church?
Wheat & Tares 
I join William in issuing my strongest possible condemnation to racism and sexism of every kind. These things have no place in a civilized society or in a enlightened church.
The Church has not done enough to stamp out racism. It is hard to see how it can do so until it issues an apology for its past actions. Until then, it will remain much like the old time western movies in which even racial minorities were played by white people.
As to sexism, the Church has not even done the simple and obvious things to stamp it out. Passing the sacrament, counting attendance, and running the Sunday School are hardly things that require the Priesthood. Those changes could be made right away. Of course, they would not be enough.
The Church seems to be stuck in an all or nothing philosophy. Much like a hot dog commercial which says that either you put hogs dogs on the table for every meal, or you go hungry. That is obviously a false idea. A well balance diet recognizes that there are an infinite variety of unique foods that should be on the table. The same goes for the variety of people who should be in Church leadership.
My family couldn’t afford college for me, but even them there were race-based scholarships available. I did what anyone could have done, make or female, black or white. I joined the Army and put money away for education, back then called VEAP, or Veterans Educational Assistance Program. Not nearly as good as the current GI Bill and other support. For every one dollar I had deducted from my paycheck, the VEAP matched it with two dollars. This opportunity had nothing to do with my race or gender. Nor did my choice of major. My hiring for my career came without any in-person interview, or even a telephone interview–it was résumé and application package alone. While my first name might reveal my gender, I don’t think that anything revealed by race. At church, I don’t see blacks getting second class treatment. Black men can and do say prayers for the sacrament, and Black people give prayers in sacrament meeting and they give talks. We attend an inner city ward so we have a decent number of people of color, including a counselor in the bishopric and the RS president, and I think that we make it work. While I think that there are issues with race that we still need to overcome, I think that things are getting better. I think that a Black man being pulled over by policemen, or getting arrested, still generally does not get treated equally, and our police departments need to work on racism within their ranks.
Perhaps the ultimate sign of privilege is that you don’t ever really think about your gender / race That was the case for me in the Church, especially when my kids were young. It wasn’t something I ever contemplated. Meanwhile, various minorities (blacks and “Lamanites” for starters) are forced to think about it all the time. And of course women, who are told what their role is.
I have three adult daughters. That’s all I needed to start thinking about it.
One thing to think about with white male privilege is to consider if ever in your life, in order to get an education, earn a living or to contribute your opinion to leadership at church, you had to walk into a room filled with people who were of a different race &/or gender than yourself.
The demographics of the people in the room can impact social anxiety, a feeling of belonging, and can influence if a person dares to speak up at all. If they do speak up, do they dare share an idea that they aren’t sure will be supported by the majority of people in the room? Probably not.
Black people are only 15 percent of our population. In only a very few metropolitan communities are there more blacks than whites. They have to go to black colleges to be in classes with people with similar demographics. This does influence confidence and comfort in group situations. They have to be more confident in themselves to succeed than a white person walking into the same room.
The same goes for women at church. We are not only lower in the hierarchy and without priesthood veto power in any discussion, but there are typically more men than women in any group. Plus the bishop or SP running the conversation is always a man. So even if that man chooses to be benevolent and allow a woman the floor, women will often hesitate to share anything in that setting that they aren’t already sure every man in the room agrees with. They have to have a great deal of confidence to speak at all. This is how women are silenced in our community.
Women who do share an idea that is at odds with the man in charge, typically find themselves released not too long after. Of course the man in charge may gaslight them that “God” inspired them that the woman needs more time to spend at home and it’s someone else’s turn to serve. But really it’s about male female dynamics. Men are allowed to confidently disagree to a level. Women who do the same are seen negatively, so we rarely dare share our real thoughts in such a setting.
Iws329, Good points. I have a small inkling on what that might feel like. Years ago after attending my brothers wedding at the Oakland CA temple, my wife and I went to a mall in Oakland to get something to eat. I was the only white person in the mall. It didn’t bother me, but it was noticeable, and just made me feel different. I also get that same feeling when I take my wife the to local Mexican Market here in town. I’m usually the only gringo in the store. I’ve got used to it, and since I speak Spanish I get along, but it gives me just a small idea of what minorities must feel like all the time. I often wonder what the lone woman at a meeting at work must feel like surrounded by white men. What is the long term consequences of this?
I’m a white American male. I’ve traveled to China and I’ve traveled to Ethiopia. I have some sense of what it is like to stand out. Still, even there, I’m welcomed because I’m perceived to have money and access to opportunities.
In the church it is just seen as normal to exclude women in many aspects of leadership and ritual. But when viewed comparatively with other religions and organizations, it appears quite regressive. Women can’t even give blessings to sick children. I can’t imagine God would react negatively to that. And yet the leadership fears that too many bigger changes would rattle the membership. So they make small insignificant ones. Girls can hand out towels in the temple and be witnesses for baptisms. The members hail this as progress. But outsiders’ reactions tend to be quite different: “wait they couldn’t do that to begin with?” It’s kind of embarrassing.
Josh, I’m so glad to hear you started contemplating your privilege when you had three daughters. I just have to wonder why you never contemplated it while you had a mother and a wife.
Hi Josh-
Dot’s completely right but props anyway that you addressed it when it became clear to you.
Since God is “no respecter of persons” (Acts 10:34, Romans 2:11, 2 Nephi 30), church policies of discrimination based on factors we cannot control (e.g., race, gender) must come from church leadership who demand obedience to their words.
Since church-sponsored or church-approved suffering feels so, so wrong to my light of Christ, I cannot believe that it comes from God. And make no mistake: there is injury and suffering involved in discrimination. Such words, policies, and inconsistencies from church leaders eventually led me to walk away from the church.
lws329 Brilliant!
(Even the Catholics allow women to distribute the sacrament! They are quite often the presidents of their parish councils. And women can baptize in certain circumstances. Crikey! even the Catholics are less sexist than LDS?!?)
What ways have white male privilege helped or hurt you in society, the workforce, or Church?
Three examples how it has hurt in the Church
1) Old Testament Sunday School class where the text was particularly dense. Our instructor incorporated a modern translation of the Bible to help us understand what was being said in those verses. An older white, male, visitor jumped up and excoriated the teacher for using an unauthorized translation as the Church only uses the KJV. She was already hanging onto Church activity by her fingernails and this was one the the last nails in the coffin. Our loss.
2) New Testament Sunday School class when we discussed the birth of Christ. The male instructor pretty much passed over Mary’s role in the account. My friend then brought up some valuable insights about Mary. Immediately an older, white male countered “What about Joseph? We never talk about him.” The ONE time every four years we have the opportunity to discuss the MOTHER of God, hijacked. My friend who mentioned Mary also no longer attends, another nail in her coffin. Again, our loss.
3) A worldwide Saturday evening Women’s Conference when older white males had taken over 60% of the time with their speeches. The last speaker, the oldest white male, implored the women to speak up. The Church needs its women’s voices! The irony was lost on him, but not on women who would speak up if given an actual opportunity. And many have given up and left. Again, our loss.
About 10 years ago as a counselor in the Stake RS, I attended the monthly Stake Council meeting. The men were all sitting around their large oval table with the Stake Presidency at the head. There were some folding chairs set up along the wall at the foot of the table, and that’s where the three women from the RS, YW, and Primary were seated. After we gave our “reports” we were dismissed.
Yeah, my eyes were opened that day.
Maybe a lot of what people are calling white male privilege is really something else. I don’t know what the proper sociological term is. What Julie describes might, instead of white male privilege or even patriarchy might be our leadership style. Yes, that style diminishes what womem have to say, but do you think that all men are treated better? I do not think so. We have a lot of men who, with one look, it is quite apparent that they aren’t on a leader track. They are not heard, ever, by leaders. It isn’t race gender that makes a difference. Same for LHCA’s examples. 1 and 2 are due to buttheads, and they exist in both sexes and in all races. Ex. 3 sounds like Pres. Nelson.
We have an exclusive leadership clique. Some men pass in for while, but many more men will never, ever make it in, and personal worthiness is not a factor. Our leaders could try to do a better job to hear the concerns of the members. One example could be 5th Sundays, but I have only seen that used for one-way leader-to-people telling, but it could be a regular place where the bishop could sit in council with his ward adult members, and do much less talking and much more listening.
Georgi
There is a word for that leadership style. It’s called patriarchy. And yes, I realize that under such a system not all men get to be elite.
Georgis,
While I agree that many men’s voices are silenced, it remains a patriarchy. No man ever has to have a worthiness interview to discuss underwear and sexual sins with a woman. No man is ever called and released by a woman. Men have the opportunity to to be evaluated and judged by people of the same sex that have an understanding of what it is like to identify as a man. No man is ever called into a room full of women to be disciplined and judged for their sins. Men don’t have to sit and watch little girls be granted more authority than they have. Men don’t sit and see meetings run by women. Men aren’t part of an organization for men, run by women, down to the callings, lessons and budget. As a man you have a chance to be admitted to the clique, that a woman can never have. If there’s a problem in your family, often the priesthood leaders will talk with you before they address your wife or children.
The LDS church is run from a man’s perspective. I want you to imagine what it would be like to be a woman in the church. I don’t think you quite get it yet. This essay may help you if you read it carefully.
https://www.dearmormonman.com/
Amy McPhie Alebest, who wrote the piece referenced by @lsw, “Dear Mormon Man, Tell Me What You Would Do,” talks about how systems of patriarchy harm most men and all women. Many men who are not in power have difficulty understanding the complaints of women, recognizing that their power is also limited. It’s helpful to recognize that these systems harm most people and the vast majority of us would be better off with a partnership model. There small benefits most men gain from patriarchal systems are not worth it in the long run as most of the benefit goes to those at the top. Amy McPhie Alebest’s podcast, “Breaking Down Patriarchy” is informative, interesting, and she really does look toward solutions that would benefit us all in the long run and maybe even in the short term.
Male privilege has hurt me the most because I sometimes acted as if the males around me were “more privileged” and I listened to them when I shouldn’t have. I did not lean into my own moral authority and my subject matter expertise nearly as often as I should have – even though I was an “outspoken rebel” who owned my moral authority and expertise (at least on paper).
Male privilege has created “us vs them” situations sanctioned by 1 individual holding the priesthood and one person not.
Powerless Males propped on Male Privilege are hard to work with until you see that is what is going on – then you can shift the conversation to what they need to empower themselves (instead of robbing you) – sometimes. There are hoards of women who needed to disconnect from entitled men (the ones who were tone-deaf about what the impact of their choices was on others) and while that isn’t my story – I honor that can be their story and they made the choices they needed to make.
For all of his faults, Joseph Smith envisioned a theo-democratic (and IMO quite egalitarian) Zion. The problem arose when the church grew in population and in wealth. Like many organizations, the church became oligarchic (and more rigidly patriarchal) due to the development of a ruling class focused more on maintaining its power than delivering the promised Zion.
But common (i.e., non-leadership) people are frequently left out in the cold. The promised Zion was supposed to be FOR the common people. There simply is no concept of rights or respect for the common LDS member, particularly women, who saw a decrease in their power and rights within the institution over the last century or more. And there likely will never be power or voice granted to the common people strong enough to force the religious oligarchy to focus attention on the true welfare of these common people. That is the real reason that so many are leaving the Church. Even more are lingering on the edge, a form of quiet quitting. It will take some time for the ruling class to realize that they without us cannot build Zion.
Many women feel there is just no problem whatsoever with patriarchy in the church and that they have as much influence as a man in the church community. Usually these women are married to men that are heard and listened to in the church, and they have a good marriage where their partner hears their concerns and brings them forward in meetings. Because of their stable temple marriage, & their husband in leadership, they have a level of dignity and prestige in the church system. They have no need to be assertive, or speak up in such a way that priesthood leaders feel intimidated or uncomfortable with them. They have no need of feminism or an understanding why any woman would. This is the group of women, leaders in the church talk to and listen to when they consider the needs of women. Their wives.
These women they counsel with also do not have an understanding of the complete lack of voice women in the church may experience when they are single, in an unhappy marriage, married to a nonmember, married to a non leadership track man, or inactive member. Of course men in less than perfect and traditional circumstances tend to lose their position and power as well.
Women are dependents in this system, and who they are and their needs are seen through the lens of the man happily married in the temple to a wife whose needs are met in the community by his voice. It’s a subtle difference but it leaves the leadership and their wives without an understanding of the needs of people and families that aren’t part of the elect, confirming leadership group. It leaves them with little understanding, and lots of justification that God designed the system so it must be perfect for everyone.
Conforming, not confirming . An important distinction spell check cannot understand.
To the argument that male privilege is a misnomer since most males won’t even make it to the upper echelons of privilege and power in the church, I’ve heard a similar argument against the idea of white privilege as well. Which is that the problem isn’t that whites are inherently more privileged than blacks, although that was the case in the past, but that now there are simply too few who are privileged. Much like if we have blacks who enjoy more privilege than a number of lower class whites there is no white privilege in the US, if we have women who enjoy more privilege in the church than some lower rung males then there is no male privilege in the church.
It is a poor argument, and here’s why. The idea that racial or gender privilege exists isn’t based on the comparison of all blacks to whites, or all males to females. It is a comparison of whites and blacks within classes, and males and females within classes. The highest of the high classes of whites enjoy far more wealth and privilege than the highest of the high classes of blacks, even if the latter still enjoys a very large amount of wealth and privilege. Similarly, when when look at only the elite families and members of Mormonism, we see that males have more privilege. Leadership positions are almost entirely male. It is a similar pattern when we look at lower classes. Lower class whites have more wealth and privilege than lower class blacks. Is it hard for both? Yes. But harder for blacks. Similarly with Mormonism. In the lower ranking areas of ward administration, men have more say and privilege than women. All bishoprics and branch presidencies are structured so that men are interviewing and overseeing both males and females. There are no wards or branches where women interview and oversee males. At all. Women can’t even manage a building. They can’t even go on girls campouts without men involved. Gender is embedded into privilege at all levels. Much like race is embedded into privilege at all levels in the US.
The church practices religious coverture essentially. I got married in 2012, and the church sent us our marriage papers by addressing the envelope to Brother and Sister [husband’s first and last name]. Even though I kept my maiden name and added my husband’s, the church automatically update my records to only have my husband’s name. When I went to change this, it was done reluctantly and with commentary about how only celebrities have separate names. My husband was listed as head of household and his number automatically added even though we wanted my number listed.
This coverture extends with proscribed family structure in the Family Proclamation. It permeates the temple ceremonies where a woman’s identity is subsumed to her husband’s in her future role as queen and priestess. Adam is Lord of the Earth and names Eve.
Women are not true citizens of God’s kingdom just like historically how they weren’t true citizens of the United States, where they were their husband’s property. The property aspect has been greatly softened, and the church has been forced to marginally adapt to the surrounding culture of equality.
Once you look at church policies and practices through the lens of coverture, you can’t unsee it. The church is still operating in a 19th Century model. The combination of the coverture model and cherrypicked sexist scripture allows male privilege to completely flourish in the church.
@lws writes that “Many women feel there is just no problem whatsoever with patriarchy in the church and that they have as much influence as a man in the church community.”
This idea is explored in a blog post on The Exponent II blog. I found it to be a really interesting concept very much in line with the ideas you put forth.
https://exponentii.org/blog/mistresses-of-patriarchy/
There are women who benefit from the current system even when sexism is prevalent, although I would argue that even they would be better off in a more equal system. There’s a trade-off for the benefits they receive.
So if Trump is president the church can carry on with its patriarchy.
I think with a woman as president the atmosphere will be very different. It will be much more obvious how backward the church leadership are. Every woman who wants to see more equal future should vote for harris.
My wife and I were married 10 years ago. She had a son and I became his first real father figure after his birth father divorced his mother when he was 2 and his second step father committed suicide when he was 7 or 8. He turned 13 just after we were married. When he went on a mission, my wife wanted to take care of everything, which she did. The church leaders though would never talk to her without me and addresses everything to me. I even told them to talk to her because she felt as his mother, she had a right to know first. They still refused. He served a good mission. His mission presidents always addressed letters to me or email to me but after I told them to email her, they at least copied her on the emails. When he got home, the stake president only asked me questions which I referred to my wife but he didn’t get the hint. His wife was a little better towards the end of our discussion. It bothered her a lot. When he gave his homecoming neither of us were asked to talk but all missionaries in the ward before and after had both parents talk. They said with us there was something else going on and there wouldn’t be time. My wife didn’t go to his farwell, I did, but I haven’t been back very much. It was a sad end for me but no one has even come to our home for the church leadership since then, which is over 4 years.
@instereo
Wow. I’m sorry that all happened to you all.
Male privilege is when the sacred undergarments you are asked to wear mirror your regular undergarments, are similar in function to these, and create little change to your clothing requirements.