Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Younger Mormons far more likely to be troubled by women’s roles in the LDS Church, study shows


Gray

Recommended Posts

What message do we suppose is inadvertently sent to women (if only subconsciously )about their value, the way we have always operated? 

There may be that one woman who takes the call in salt lake but just the fact that we use her as The Example...it reminds me of how I though because we had that one black friend in our school that it was evidence that we couldn’t possibly be racist.  I actually believed it.  Then I went to another state and realized I had no idea what I was talking about. 

I don’t see anyone discrediting women here on this thread at all.  At the same time I think none of us can see clearly into a system we are in the center of, some of us our entire lives. 

Edited by MustardSeed
Link to comment
3 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

it reminds me of how I though because we had that one black friend in our school that it was evidence that we couldn’t possibly be racist.  I actually believed it.  Then I went to another state and realized I had no idea what I was talking about. 

Are you saying you "caught" racism early on, but it only exhibited itself after you moved away from where you were raised?  Or are you imputing such to other people?

Link to comment
3 hours ago, stemelbow said:

Self-Identifying is an interesting thing when it comes to these surveys.  it says to me that many who are often not considered "active" or believers by other active members want to own their place in Mormonism.  

Some of them probably do. Some probably don't really want a place in the church but would like a forum to voice the things they did not like when they were participating members. (Both totally valid IMO)

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, USU78 said:

Are you saying you "caught" racism early on, but it only exhibited itself after you moved away from where you were raised?  Or are you imputing such to other people?

I’m saying that because I grew up in a whitewashed area, I assumed I was not a racist because I knew a black kid and liked him. Then as an adult I learned that my limited scope and experience had misled me. 

I had to challenge my own preduduces later in life when I experienced life and could see myself more clearly. 

I still do. 

I think when you are used to one way, it’s hard to see anything else.  I think we are used to women being less powerful than men and we accept that, in the church. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

Yep, this generation of the elderly complaining about the young is definitely unique:

“Whither are the manly vigor and athletic appearance of our forefathers flown? Can these be their legitimate heirs? Surely, no; a race of effeminate, self-admiring, emaciated fribbles can never have descended in a direct line from the heroes of Potiers and Agincourt” -1771

“The free access which many young people have to romances, novels, and plays has poisoned the mind and corrupted the morals of many a promising youth; and prevented others from improving their minds in useful knowledge. Parents take care to feed their children with wholesome diet; and yet how unconcerned about the provision for the mind, whether they are furnished with salutary food, or with trash, chaff, or poison?” -1790

“I find by sad Experience how the Towns and Streets are filled with lewd wicked Children, and many Children as they have played about the Streets have been heard to curse and swear and call one another Nick-names, and it would grieve ones Heart to hear what bawdy and filthy Communications proceeds from the Mouths of such” -1695

“Our sires' age was worse than our grandsires'. We, their sons, are more
worthless than they; so in our turn we shall give the world a progeny yet more
corrupt.” -20 BCE

“Probably there is no period in history in which young people have given such emphatic utterance to a tendency to reject that which is old and to wish for that which is new.” -1936

and for my generation:

“They have trouble making decisions. They would rather hike in the Himalayas than climb a corporate ladder. They have few heroes, no anthems, no style to call their own. They crave entertainment, but their attention span is as short as one zap of a TV dial.” -2001

 

And they are right. I do prefer hiking in mountains to climbing a corporate ladder. I plan not to complain about the young as I age. I want them to be able to write on my tombstone: “At least he was not a cliche”

If I could quadruple like this, I would.

This notion of blaming the young for the world’s problems and things getting worse and worse is at best short-sighted, and at worst a misinformed lie to make older people feel better about themselves by comparison. 

 

Link to comment
7 hours ago, Gray said:

https://religionnews.com/2018/11/26/younger-mormons-far-more-likely-to-be-troubled-by-womens-roles-in-the-lds-church-study-shows/

Important bit:

Quote

In the Mormon tradition, women are largely shut out from ritual authority

Not true.  Unlike other religious organizations, LDS women are authorized to perform complex and powerful priesthood functions in LDS temples.  Since those rites are not performed out in the open, they tend to be ignored or reduced in value by critics.  In addition, LDS women were at one time authorized to perform healing blessings on their own, so the potential authority is still there.

7 hours ago, Gray said:

Perhaps the church can at least take inspiration from the Catholic church if unwilling to consider either ordaining women or going with the more Biblical path of separating priesthood from leadership.

 

3G-Mormons-who-are-troubled-that-women-d

 

A chart which excludes a scale to 100% is a manifestly unfair scale.  Likely deliberately so.

Having said that, the stats seem to fit modern expectations and are predictable.  However, as in Roman Catholicism, ordination for women is very unlikely.  I am far more troubled by the foot-dragging by LDS men in accepting women as high level administrators or bosses in secular endeavors outside the Church.  I like to see women as high level executives in corporate hierarchies, as police chiefs, county sheriffs, mayors, deans, and university presidents (I love it that Utah Valley University has a female president).  We need secular, not religious equality.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, smac97 said:

Wow.  Applying the chiastic structure to the origins and eschatology of the descendants of Adam and Eve?  That's cool.

Thanks,

-Smac

The first advent of Christ would be the center or fulcrum point of the chiasmus.  The last shall be first, and the first last IS chiasmus.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, MustardSeed said:

What message do we suppose is inadvertently sent to women (if only subconsciously )about their value, the way we have always operated? 

There may be that one woman who takes the call in salt lake but just the fact that we use her as The Example...it reminds me of how I though because we had that one black friend in our school that it was evidence that we couldn’t possibly be racist.  I actually believed it.  Then I went to another state and realized I had no idea what I was talking about. 

I don’t see anyone discrediting women here on this thread at all.  At the same time I think none of us can see clearly into a system we are in the center of, some of us our entire lives. 

As a side note, I am a woman.  My individual response is I feel my role is devalued if inaccurately portrayed, whether that means it is inflated (which happens a lot in the culture in my experience) or places women do supervising, leading, planning, making decisions are ignored or treated as nonconsequential.

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, Calm said:

As a side note, I am a woman.  My individual response is I feel my role is devalued if inaccurately portrayed, whether that means it is inflated (which happens a lot in the culture in my experience) or places women do supervising, leading, planning, making decisions are ignored or treated as nonconsequential.

True.  ❤️

I’m thinking of my friend who recently expressed frustration that she never noticed that women used to not pray in GC.  Just took it for granted that women don’t pray there, never questioned it.  She is a faithful member but is fierce as well.  Her husband is a bishop and she scares him because she asks questions.  She is troubled with herself that she never noticed this simple silliness !  

I’m less troubled, because I see we are silly humans doing silly things.  But I get it, and wish we were less silly sometimes.  Women not being asked to pray is “information “. Even if inadvertent, IMO 

Link to comment
7 hours ago, USU78 said:

Woman is the first a child encounters.

Is Woman also the last the child encounters?

In Catholicism, Mary is viewed as the second Eve. So in a way, woman (Eve) started it, by bringing sin into the world, and woman (Mary) ends it, by bringing the Savior into the world.

On an individual level, the Hail Mary prayer says: "pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death." Our mother is the first a child encounters, and perhaps Mary is the last a child encounters. At least, I hope so. I have a very strong devotion to Our Lady, and I pray that she helps me across the threshold between life and death.

ETA: @Maidservant might be interested in this, too.

 

Edited by MiserereNobis
Link to comment
2 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

I’m saying that because I grew up in a whitewashed area, I assumed I was not a racist because I knew a black kid and liked him. Then as an adult I learned that my limited scope and experience had misled me. 

I had to challenge my own preduduces later in life when I experienced life and could see myself more clearly. 

I still do. 

I think when you are used to one way, it’s hard to see anything else.  I think we are used to women being less powerful than men and we accept that, in the church. 

My opinion? You're being manipulated into beating yourself up unnecessarily by hucksters for the most banal of purposes: to buy votes and to seek rent from the State.

Link to comment
Just now, MiserereNobis said:

In Catholicism, Mary is viewed as the second Eve. So in a way, woman (Eve) started it, by bringing sin into the world, and woman (Mary) ends it, by bringing the Savior into the world.

On an individual level, the Hail Mary prayer says: "pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death." Our mother is the first a child encounters, and perhaps Mary is the last a child encounters. At least, I hope so. I have a very strong devotion to Our Lady, and I pray that she helps me across the threshold between life and death.

 

I was thinking of the women's work performed at the Master's death: who showed up with the clean linens and spices?

Link to comment
5 hours ago, SouthernMo said:

In the past, I have heard some members (not authorities) say that one reason women do not hold the priesthood is because they have already been given the creative power of bearing children. Just like men cannot have children because that is their gift from and responsibility to God, women cannot hold the priesthood because that is men’s gift from and responsibility to God.

 

6 hours ago, smac97 said:

I don't think there is a one-to-one comparison "between men's responsibilities to priesthood as women's responsibilities to child birthing."

Women can be mothers, and men and be fathers.  

Holding the priesthood is not, I think, a corollary to motherhood.

This is what I was taught in my home, explicitly, by my mother actually.  Said out loud.  So until this moment reading this I don't think I have ever internally challenged that meme (many others, just hadn't gotten to this one I guess).

The idea is that priesthood is integral to a man's fatherhood, or the full, Christlike expression of it (baptizing their children, etc).

Hmmm, I shall have to think on it . . .

Link to comment
30 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

True.  ❤️

I’m thinking of my friend who recently expressed frustration that she never noticed that women used to not pray in GC.  Just took it for granted that women don’t pray there, never questioned it.  She is a faithful member but is fierce as well.  Her husband is a bishop and she scares him because she asks questions.  She is troubled with herself that she never noticed this simple silliness !  

I’m less troubled, because I see we are silly humans doing silly things.  But I get it, and wish we were less silly sometimes.  Women not being asked to pray is “information “. Even if inadvertent, IMO 

I grew up in a home where both parents strongly questioned tradition and any authority outside the home though both were fully committed to living the Gospel and being a part of the community, so I never had the perception as long as I can remember that the Church as an organization was perfect.  I remember being 5 or 6 and not particularly liking Joseph Smith because I got tired of people telling me how wonderful he was and the idealized pictures hanging around in the church.  And Mom was obsessed with examining the feminine role and what it meant, traditional and not.  (On the other hand, Dad had been taught by his mom he was the center of the universe probably because she lost a dearly loved toddler prior to his birth, so he had a very hard time processing why we would question him, poor guy).  So there are probably things I haven't noticed, but so far not been surprised by any criticisms I have seen brought up or particularly troubled as I figured it is part of being imperfect human in an organization of imperfect humans even if the Lord himself above it all is perfect.  As long as we are working on it and I think we are, I am generally okay with it.  But it is not like I have been deeply hurt by any church leaders, male or female, as some have though I have been annoyed at times by those who expected me to do things because they told me they were important to do when .I felt I had other, more important commitments or needs elsewhere.  Most leaders were perfectly happy to accept me on my terms.

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
4 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

woman (Eve) started it, by bringing sin into the world, and woman (Mary) ends it, by bringing the Savior into the world.

ETA: @Maidservant might be interested in this, too.

 

Love.  (Although I would reframe the Eve consequence, but still, here we are in the world, yea?)

By the way, was going to respond to that first line, before I even saw you'd called me at the end, so you got me! Ha ha.

Goes along with first man (adam), second man (Christ), too.

Also, come to think of it, Eve brought Adam into the world.

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, Calm said:

I grew up in a home where both parents strongly questioned tradition and any authority outside the home though both were fully committed to living the Gospel and being a part of the community, so I never had the perception as long as I can remember that the Church as an organization was perfect.  I remember being 5 or 6 and not particularly liking Joseph Smith because I got tired of people telling me how wonderful he was and the idealized pictures hanging around in the church.  And Mom was obsessed with examining the feminine role and what it meant, traditional and not.  (On the other hand, Dad had been taught by his mom he was the center of the universe probably because she lost a dearly loved toddler prior to his birth, so he had a very hard time processing why we would question him, poor guy).  So there are probably things I haven't noticed, but so far not been surprised by any criticisms I have seen brought up or particularly troubled as I figured it is part of being imperfect human in an organization of imperfect humans even if the Lord himself above it all is perfect.  As long as we are working on it and I think we are, I am generally okay with it.  But it is not like I have been deeply hurt as some have.

I don’t care much either.  Not much expectation from me.  But I do wonder....how would I be different, if power were equal in the church? I can’t know. 

Link to comment
Just now, MustardSeed said:

I don’t care much either.  Not much expectation from me.  But I do wonder....how would I be different, if power were equal in the church? I can’t know. 

Nope, what ifs are pretty meaningless for self exploration, imo.

Link to comment
18 hours ago, Gray said:
19 hours ago, smac97 said:

No, you have not answered my CFR.  You apparently don't understand how CFRs work.  You don't get to just summarily point to a huge swath of resources and say "It's in there."  

Again, you said: "Biblically, the priesthood was for temple rituals. Prophets and apostles generally didn't hold any kind of priesthood."

CFR, please.  Chapter and verse.  I'll even narrow it down for you: Please provide references for the proposition that "apostles generally didn't hold any kind of priesthood."  Citations, please.  Chapter and verse.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priesthood_(Ancient_Israel)

Perhaps you didn't read the link the first time.

Hi Gray, maybe I can help.

When random anonymous people make a claim about something on the internet, people wonder why they should care.  After all, the internet is full of random anonymous people making all sorts of claims.  And as we all know, a portion of them are clueless, ignorant, on drugs, wrong, off topic, or even lying.  The internet tends to just dismiss random claims that disagree with the reader out of hand.  If you want to be taken seriously when someone disagrees with you, you have to do more than just claim something, you have to persuade.  And key to that, is giving people a reason why you believe your claim is correct.  Hence, the Call for References.  It helps the internet know that they need to do more than just dismiss you as a random know-nothing, they actually need to interact with the defenses behind your claim.  

Basically, when someone makes a claim (Like "Biblically, the priesthood was for temple rituals. Prophets and apostles generally didn't hold any kind of priesthood."), they're expected to divulge why they believe their claim to be true.  

So, you've claimed prophets and apostles didn't hold the priesthood.  Your reference is a wikipedia article that says absolutely nothing about whether prophets or apostles held it or not.  Neither the word "prophet" nor "apostle" appears in the link you cited.  You might as well have given us a link to types of apples, or GDP of Malaysia, to support your point.  The link you gave doesn't support your point.  It says nothing about your point.  You haven't cited a source for your claim, you've cited a source that says nothing about your claim. 

As things stand now, the internet has no reason to consider your claim as anything other than the product of someone who doesn't have the faintest clue why they believe what they believe.   You're at risk of being thought of as "one of those guys who talk crap but can't back anything up." 

My suggestion: Don't be one of those guys.  Either back up your claim with a valid reference, or retract your claim.  There are many ego-saving ways to do it.  Something like "Sorry folks, I could have sworn that link directly mentioned apostles, but I guess I misread." 

Hope this helps.  

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...