I am Proud to be a Mormon Woman

Lately, there has been a lot of noise surrounding women in the LDS church, and it hasn't been great noise.  It's no secret that feminists are often under condemning judgment for one reason or another, and I think I have written an abundance on why Mormons need feminism and how the culture makes me shake my head at times.

Today, I want to talk about why I am proud to be a Mormon woman.
(An aside:  Because this is the internet, I feel I should qualify that I know that these are not only characteristic of Mormon women and not all Mormon women fit these characteristics, nor does any one woman have all of these qualities.  I am certainly not, but I aspire to be.  However, I have seen more of these characteristics in higher concentrations since I have been surrounded by Mormon women.)

1. Mormon women love to learn.  I say this both in a formal sense and in an everyday practical sense.  When I first joined this patriarchal church, I got the feeling that all the barefoot and pregnant women were letting go of furthering college to have babies and keep home.  That is far from the truth.  At the time I was in the Young Women's Presidency, every single leader had at least a Bachelor's degree.  I have one friend who told me she gave birth to her daughter and then took a final exam within a couple weeks.  Hard core.
   But even more than formal education, these women love to learn to do anything, particularly if it will add to their ability to care for their family.  Whether it has to do with nutrition (such as gardening and food preparation) or keeping the house standing (such as plumbing and general maintenance) or being self-sufficient (such as making soap and knitting clothing), Mormon women want to know as much as they can.  Then, they turn around and have Relief Society gatherings to teach all the other women how to do it.  It is a whole world of learning!
2. Mormon women are go getters.  I have noticed that among my SAHM circle (which is all Mo women since I don't really have another social outlet currently), no one waits for anyone to go first.  If someone want to be a member of a produce co-op, they start a produce co-op.  The same goes for Joy School and Playgroup.  Our stake's mission slogan was:
   
   I do hard things.
   I do hard things first, 
   And I am the first to do hard things.  
   
   
   Most of the women I know have really taken this to heart.  I think this could also be see as taking personal responsibility.  I once explained the concept known as diffusion of responsibility (bone up on your diffusion of responsibility here) to a friend of mine.  Upon my explanation of Kitty Genovese and the Bystander Effect, she looked horrified and replied, "But who would do that?"  The answer is so many people, but Mormon women seem to take it upon themselves to be the responsible party which ends up meaning things get accomplished.  
3. Mormon women generally have a least one awesome recipe up their sleeve.  It's true.  Especially in the case of bread.  Another cool thing is that they create a sense of community by passing bread starter from friend to friend like in the case of Amish Friendship Bread, which leads me to another cool point: Mormon women like to share.
4. Mormon women don't waste.  I think the fact that Mormon women like to share is an expansion on this fact.  I have heard the phrase "Use it up, wear it out, make it do, or do without," but I believe Mormon women would add upon that with "and then give it to a friend."  I love recycling clothes and household goods (Okay, I love recycling in general) because it means less junk for the Earth.  I don't know if it's a money thing or a love the Earth thing or love your friends thing, but Mormon women swap goods like it's nobody's business.  In fact, they even organize swaps in which you can drop off stuff during a particular week and then pick up anything there that you fancy.
   Along the same lines, in the produce co-op I am a part of, we get a lot of oranges, which is awesome because who doesn't love oranges?  Here I am making my orange juice and throwing peels away when one sister posts on the Co-op board something along the lines of, "We don't have to throw away our orange peels anymore;  I found something to do with them!!"  (Find out what it was here.)  Silly me thinking those orange peels were meant for the trash....
5. Mormon women know that having a bunch of little kids running around is chaotic.  And they are okay with that.  J and I had dinner the other day with another family who have two kiddos who sandwich E in age.  Throughout dinner and visiting, our kids all ran around like there was no tomorrow.  The house chaotic and loud and messy.  And no one cared.  Of course the stress of kids is lessened by the culture of Mormon life being centered around families (and big ones at that).   
6. Mormon women focus on the good stuff and press forward through the bad.  Particularly women who have been through horrendous happenings, I constantly see them reaching out to other people and focusing on what they are on Earth to do.  This makes them pretty happy and uplifting people.

In conclusion, you ladies rock!

Priesthood Does Not Equate Motherhood (And other thoughts)

Something that I hear often is that Priesthood is the equivalent of Motherhood.  I think that a concept like that diminishes the role of father. A father should be just as active in the raising of children as the mother.  Just as interested. Just as involved.
I was reading an article over here at Empowering LDS Women and enjoyed this chart:

The blogger then goes on to equate a woman's ability to give physical birth to a man's ability to give spiritual birth via the saving ordinances of the Priesthood.  However, that doesn't add up for me either.  Giving birth doesn't require a worthiness check.  It doesn't require an entire youth program to advance through milestones of separate "job well done"s like receiving the Aaronic Priesthood and the Melchizedek Priesthood.  Giving birth doesn't even require being a mother.  Likewise, being a mother doesn't require giving birth.  An adoptive mother is as much a mother as any other (Say that five time fast!).  So.  That explanation is a dead end.  

I would say that the only thing the Priesthood can be equated to is Priestess-hood (my online dictionary doesn't even recognize that as a word *sigh*).   It has been said to me that Priesthood is the most important duty of a man and that motherhood is the most important duty of a woman, but I am not the only person who disagrees with this.  President Ezra Taft Benson said, "We bring children into the world to become kings and queens, priests and priestesses for our Lord."*  That would imply that we (women) come here first and foremost to become priestesses.  I can live with that.  I can even live with the fact that our (women's) status of Priestess is not going to be realized in this lifetime, even though I don't understand why.  

What does actually bother me is the endless explanations of why it doesn't speak poorly of me to not have the Priesthood, pretending it's equal to some other aspect of my womanly life.  I am not two-  I don't need a made up explanation.  What bothers me more is the perceived inequity from small children when being explained that girls and women will never receive the priesthood.  

And it's not just that, the female youth are not nearly as celebrated or empowered as the male youth.  The Young Men go to all sorts of Courts of Honor, Eagle Scout Awards, Priesthood progressions, etc.  The Young Women do Personal Progress, but even that receives much less recognition than an Eagle Scout award.  

At one ward I attended, the Young Women were not allowed to feed the homeless because it was in a bad part of town and dangerous whereas the Young Men went once a month.  This in no way teaches equitable empowerment.  Quite the contrary.  It teaches them they are not as capable.  Fear shouldn't win.

I really believe if we started boys and girls off with the same amount of support, if we celebrated both sexes (and genders, but that's another issue) equally, if we empowered Young Women and Young Men, the whole issue of woman not having the Priesthood in this lifetime would be a non-issue.  

*From the talk Because I Live, Ye Shall Live Also

Letter to a Friend

A dear friend of mine sent me a concerned email today about my relationship in the church and as a feminist.  This blog is an outlet for steam so often, I forget to include my positive feelings.  After some careful consideration, I have decided to post my response.  I think it's important to understand that I do consider myself solidly in this church.  


Hey Lady! It's good to hear from you!

I haven't stopped believing at all- In fact, quite the opposite, I find myself right now to be incredibly active. I believe in this Church- If I didn't, I wouldn't attack it; I would simply remove myself from it and dust off my hands.

My discrepancies mostly revolve around Mormon Culture. Here's a secret (okay, not so secret): I'm pretty liberal. While I don't fancy myself a Democrat (because I don't believe in binary politics), I'm VERY liberal as far as other Mormons are concerned.
There really hasn't been a point in the last three years that I haven't been Temple worthy, which to me means that I uphold the doctrine fairly well. However, I refuse to stand by while people judge me. I drink caffeine, wear shirts that sometimes show a little cleavage, watch the occasional rated R movie, and believe homosexuals should be able to marry. While all of these things make True Blue Mormons uncomfortable, they are not against what Christ taught. And they don't disqualify me from being Temple worthy. Ergo, I am fully active and in good standing.

I do not attend the Temple currently because it does not bring me peace. I have had some inner scuffles with my practices, wording, and teachings of the Church. I am currently trying (very hard, mind you) to bring peace through Christ to my life by finding joy in my work, keeping my home as a sanctuary from the world, and being the best mom I can be. I think Heavenly Father knows I am trying to please him, and He'll know when I am ready to take on more. For now, I take the basics one day at a time.

I do absolutely point out publicly (because that's the nature of a blog) when I think something has gone awry due to gender. I do this because it helps me to sort through my feelings, but also because if no one speaks up, nothing changes. Case in point: One time I went to a bishop distraught because in Sacrament Meeting it was very common for the Elders Quorum President to be referred to as "President" and the Relief Society President to be referred to as "Sister." That bishop said. "You're right; that should change." He explained that he never considered that "Sister" was below "President." Voila, change. It's small, but it matters.

Do I think there is inequality in the church? You betcha. Do I think it is fundamental? No. I think it has been created by the surrounding culture.

I hope this hasn't been too preachy or long! I'm really glad you asked, actually.

Love,
Blythe

Young Men and Boy Scouts

Hubby says often times that I look for trouble, and I can see what he means.  I find myself looking ahead in our life's journey for problematic issues that may/will arise, and then I proceed to worry until I figure out a solution or how I want to handle the situation.  Speaking only for myself, I will say that acting and following through on what I believe is So. Much. Easier when I have prepared ahead of time.  Prepare what? you may ask.
Here are a few examples of what and how I prepare:

1. How far I will let someone's condescension go before I verbally correct them.  An example of this would be a car salesman referring to my husband as "Sir" and me as "Wifey."  My solution is to assume the first time is an honest mistake, and that said salesman will get the hint from my look of derision that calling me "Wifey" is completely unacceptable.  The second time, I will verbally tell him, "My name is Blythe."  And trust me, he will not call me "Wifey" again without me walking out of the door (Yes, the first two actually happened).
2. How bad the environment is before I remove my family and myself from it.  Think a baseball game- How many F-bombs do I sit through before I decide my little kid's ears need to be protected?  I don't know, I think it depends on the frequency.  I can handle a sporadic curse here and there, but a slew of f-bombs?  I'm probably going to turn around and ask them to keep it at least PG 13.  If it continues, I will leave.   
3. How different an organization's ideals can be from mine before I separate myself (and consequently my family) from it.  An example is Boy Scouts of America (BSA).  The Church's Young Men's Program is very closely linked with BSA-  My husband's family, I am very proud to say, are all Eagle Scouts.    However, their declaration that openly gay youth may not participate in the program is discrimination at its finest.  It is my knowledge, and correct me if I am wrong, that the Church has no problem with same-sex attracted individuals.  It is the acting upon such attraction (thus breaking the law of chastity) that the Church opposes.  

This really has me worried because I haven't figured out my solution to this particular problem yet.    I know many openly gay and lesbian individuals who are in good standing in the Church.  How does a Church-sponsored program (this is coming straight out of CHI 2) exclude Young Men who haven't done anything wrong?  This is not an attack-  it's a genuine question.  

I applaud the work and discipline gained through BSA.  I think it is tremendous when an Eagle Scout Award is given.  On the other hand, I believe quite wholeheartedly that discrimination of this kind is wrong.  I do not condone it, and I cannot support it.  Therefore, now I feel the need to prepare for this situation that will be a big deal in my family and church life in the future.  

Will I deny my son the opportunity to be a part of BSA?  Will this mean he loses out on socializing with other Young Men?  Will this attach a stigma to him?  Will he feel left out?  

I know for certain Hubby will be upset.  Like I previously stated, I am so proud of him for being an Eagle Scout, but wouldn't I be just as proud of him if he did the work and didn't have the title of "Eagle Scout?"  Of course I would.  I have been bouncing around the idea of having Hubby independently do Scout activities with the boys so that they have the experience without giving support to BSA.  My hope is that in ten years when my little one is preparing for Young Men that this will have completely resolved itself.  Ten years is a long time.  So much can change.  I guess that's why my husband says I look for trouble...

Acknowledging that no one is going to change my mind about supporting Scouts, how do you think I should handle it?  What is the best way to make sure that my kiddo is not a weirdo in Young Men (Well...  to the best of my ability)?  Is it a huge deal to not be at Mutual three weeks out of four?  What you do think and what is your experience?

*Turns out I'm not the only one with this issue.  Check out this Doves and Serpents blog.

Modest is Hottest, and, If You're Not Modest, Get Ready For Wrath, You Hussie

When I began the process of becoming a Mormon, one of my first activities was to go through all of my clothing and evaluate it's appropriateness with questions like these:

1. Does is have sleeves?
2. Can any cleavage be seen?
3. Does it show my stomach at all?
4. If I lift my arms, will any skin show?
5. Does it fall below my knees?

I was really gungho about it at the time, convinced anything other than complete coverage was completely inappropriate.  After about three months of this, I tried on one of my old skirts that came three inches above my thigh-  I felt naked.  However, I did not feel naked because what I was wearing was an atrocity;  I felt naked because I had convinced and practiced myself into that mentality.  

I saw this on Facebook today, and I got fired up a bit.  Of course this calls for a dissection.

1. Please address me as something besides a girl.  I am not a prepubescent child.  Someone somewhere will rebut this saying this is addressed to young females.  I respond to that by saying that "Men" need not be giving attention to "girls."
2. This was posted by a Facebook group called "Mormons," so I can only conclude it is church members spreading this.  Dressing differently than dictated in the For Strength of Youth does not mean that a person is dirty, slutty, or anything else.  Certainly not that they have been rolling in manure.
3. The attention one receives when dressing without consulting LDS standards is pretty much the same.  Take it from someone who knows.  More on this later. 

The idea that one is either modest or immodest reinforces the Virgin/Whore Dichotomy in which one can be either the purest of pure or a whore.  This dichotomy is deprecating to women because it leaves out options of moderation and normalcy while instilling fear that once a line is crossed, there is no return.  Think Britney Spears.  Long, long ago, in a high school far away, Britney Spears started as the good girl next door.  Her resume included the Mickey Mouse Club and other Disney related fame.  However, the moment she took one step off the purity train there was nowhere to go except to get racier and racier because American pop culture only desires the Madonna figure or the stripper.  My point is this: Not wearing sleeves doesn't make you immodest.  

This is a picture of me (gasp!) the summer
after I turned 19. When I see this picture,
 I don't think modest or not, I simply
see a picture from a great week. 

One day while shopping with my MIL, she commented that I had probably dressed modestly before I converted.  "Nope!" was the only answer I provided.  The truth of the matter is, I did not wear sleeves.  Or cover my mid drift.  Or wear skirts down to my knees.  The men I attracted were pretty much the same:  a lot of guys that I had no interest in dating and a couple I was.  Ladies, I'm going to let you in on a little secret:  Straight men are attracted to women.  Here's another gem:  The type of man you attract is more about your actions than your outfit. 

I am against the idea that men can't control themselves or their thoughts when a woman dresses a certain way.  I'll tell you this, if that were the case, Mormons would never go swimming.  How is it that men can keep their hands off me in a bathing suit at the beach, but walking around the mall, a tank top is their self control evaporates?  Genuinely, I do not understand.  

Finally, I'd like put in a complaint about the general need people feel to police others.  The meme in the beginning is a prime example of (slut)shaming others into dressing the way another believes they should dress.  And this starts at the primary age**!  When children are taught that it is imperative to dress a certain way or they are bad, they learn to call others out on their dress.  Children need to be taught to police themselves based on their specific beliefs, and not to push that on others (whether within or without their religious establishment).  We teach children judgment.  In the words of Shawn Mullins (one of my favorites),

We're born to shimmer, we're born to shine, we're born to radiate.

  We born to live, we're born to love, we're born to never hate.  

And yet, it is practices like policing others where we begin to teach children to judge and hate.  Appropriateness is different depending on where where one is or the culture.  To think that one culture is the be all end all is incredibly arrogant.  

Now, before I get a thousand hate comments (feel free to leave them anyway, but read this paragraph first).  I think there is value in dressing appropriately for the situation.  I think there is value in teaching modest dress to children.  The problem I have is when we attach a person's worth to how they dress.    Rather than teach children that they are good when they cover up, perhaps we should teach them the principles that will help them learn respect for their bodies. 

And quit shoving your beliefs (whether LDS or not, whether high coverage or low coverage) on other people.

**To readers who belong to my home ward-  I am not talking specifically about our primary (I have the utmost respect for our Primary President).  My comments are based on an amalgamation of experiences in many wards, parental teachings, and group discussions.

The Difference Between God's Sons and Daughters

This was shown to me by my friend, Miri- check her out at her blog here. 

Before reading the rest of this post, compare the two for yourself.  What are your impressions?  

Let's examine the differences.

1. "Unlimited" vs "Amazing" potential:  "Amazing" is, well, amazing.  It's a great word and description- inspiring even.  However, it's not "unlimited."  This a great example of why it is hard to see inequalities sometimes.  Sexism is not an isolated incidence.   It is not this one thing this one time at this one place.  Sexism is a mentality, it's a force, it's an ideology.  It cannot, therefore, be viewed without the three-dimensional lens of comparison.  
2. "Amazing" vs  "Beautiful":  Argue if you will, but beautiful in my opinion is a much more passive word.  Upon looking "beautiful" up in the dictionary, the only definition I found that doesn't refer to appearances is this:  very pleasing or satisfying.  That definition insinuates that "beautiful" is determined by an external source, or in other words, someone outside of this girl has to decide that she is beautiful.  Descriptions like pleasing and satisfying cannot be attained without another person to which one can be pleasing and satisfying.  Being beautiful is passive and dependent.  Not that beautiful is a bad thing in and of itself, but when compared with "I am amazing," beautiful, it seems, is pretty flimsy.

What are your thoughts on the two?