"What Women Know"...

[selek]

Wow. I'm not sure where all of that came from, Selek. My point is that women have all sorts of talents and it is incumbent upon us to develop those talents and not hide them under a bushel.

I agreed with you up to this point.

If indeed a woman is a known genius at scientific research (a general example to prove the point that womens talents are unique and diverse) then if she goes home and changes a diaper she is not developing her talent of scientific research, is she?

This is where you are going off the rail, down the embankment, and into the ravine. Who are you to determine whether her time is more profitably spent in the laboratory or the nursery?

That's her call- and you have no right to demean it.

That was my point. I don't give a flying fig about accolades or babylon or fixations on temporal or transient. You made all of that crap up yourself.

I am a veritable font of bovine excrement, but the point remains. You are buying into the secular humanist notion that she can only make the full use of her talents outside the home and that she is somehow wasting her first fruits because her priorities are different than those of Babylon.

[bluebell]

It may well be, depending on your field. If you are a genius at scientific research, for instance, and choose instead to go home, change diapers and make applesauce, your skills at scientific research are going to stagnate. You will not have reached your potential within the scientific realm. So in that scenario, you have wasted brains and skills.

Who cares if someone doesn't reach their potenial in every 'realm' they have talents at?

What if you are a genius at science who is also a genius at molding your own children into adults that will change the world for generations to come?

If you choose science over your children-more has been wasted than was gained.

But, if you choose your children first and then go back, at a later time, and delve into science, little is wasted at all.

There is no such thing as a person who chooses to put all of their energy into one field who will NOT waste the talents they had in another.

Such is life.

And finally, thank goodness for mothers who see the benefits of changing diapers and making applesauce because they have contributed more to the world through-out time than women who have shunned such activities.

And i say that as a child of a working mother who has saved many a person's life, but who is under no delusion that there was any success that she could have in a career that would outshine the success she had as a mother.

[Teancum]

That's her call- and you have no right to demean it.

That is right Selek

It is her call. So if she opts a career as well as family, a career and no children, no career and lots of kids it is not up to you, me or Sister Beck to question her faithfulness now is it.

[selek]

It was Selek's typical hyperbole.

I object strenuously to the term "typical". I haven't gotten unwound like that in quite some time.

On the other hand, you've given us nothing but your usual "the Church is a bunch of vindictive, mysoginist, old men" routine.

I really wish someone would stop feeding nickles into your jukebox- there hasn't been anything new there since Chuck Berry was the going thing.

[Teancum]

I object strenuously to the term "typical". I haven't gotten unwound like that in quite some time.

On the other hand, you've given us nothing but your usual "the Church is a bunch of vindictive, mysoginist, old men" routine.

I really wish someone would stop feeding nickles into your jukebox- there hasn't been anything new there since Chuck Berry was the going thing.

As I said,

Typical hyperbole......

[selek]

That is right Selek

It is her call. So if she opts a career as well as family, a career and no children, no career and lots of kids it is not up to you, me or Sister Beck to question her faithfulness now is it.

No- it isn't our place to question her faithfulness. But then again, an informed decision is better than an ignorant one.

For the past fifty years, feminist ideology has essentially lied to women and demeaned them.

The two great lies of feminism are as follows:

You can have it all.

A woman can only be empowered and self-realized if she casts off her traditional role and acts like a man.

The truth is that you can't have it all. For every decision made there is a consequence. For every road taken, there is a road not taken. Ideology does not justify deceipt. How many women would have chosen differently had they not been lied to? How many women are burdened with unnecessary regrets?

Feminist ideology, by default, demands that women cast off the traditional roles and deny their natural impulses toward having and raising children.

It demands women cast off their nature and their tendencies in order to compete in an androgynous secular society.

It inherently and automatically demeans those who wish to stay at home and be mothers.

Feminist orthodoxy automatically and reflexively engages in the politics of personal destruction against those who do not embrace the "sisterhood"- belittling their efforts, their sacrifices, their contribution, and their tireless dedication because it does not fit their zeitgeist.

The reaction to Sister Beck is merely a highlighted case in point. They are attempting to destroy the messenger because they disagree with what they have been told.

In that sense alone, feminism is a jealous god- vindictive, cruel, and uncaring.

[jwhitlock]

It is her call. So if she opts a career as well as family, a career and no children, no career and lots of kids it is not up to you, me or Sister Beck to question her faithfulness now is it.

Would you like to point me to where Sister Beck questions her faithfulness?

[busybee]

My friend's husband says he wishes he could stay home and play all day. (This is when he is refusing to acknowledge that being a stay at home mom is hard work.) Kind of funny because he whines if he has to watch their kid for an hour while she goes to work out. *sigh*

Since when is being a mom lowly work anyway? Am I peon if I do laundry and dishes? I mean, I could make my husband do everything when he gets home from work, but that wouldn't be very much fun for either of us because he would be tired from laboring all day and then we wouldn't get to do anything fun together. Yeah, actually. We proved that really sucked when I was on crutches for four months. He was horribly stressed and I was stressed because he was stressed and I actually found myself wanting to do all the things I was previously sick of. The women who wrote that affirmation seem to state that women should work whether they need to or not because the men are more powerful than us if we don't. Whatever. My husband and I are a team. I'm not looking to prove that I can outdo him. We're working toward the same goal.

AMEN

[Teancum]

No- it isn't our place to question her faithfulness. But then again, an informed decision is better than an ignorant one.

For the past fifty years, feminist ideology has essentially lied to women and demeaned them.

The two great lies of feminism are as follows:

You can have it all.

A woman can only be empowered and self-realized if she casts off her traditional role and acts like a man.

The truth is that you can't have it all. For every decision made there is a consequence. For every road taken, there is a road not taken. Ideology does not justify deceipt. How many women would have chosen differently had they not been lied to? How many women are burdened with unnecessary regrets?

Feminist ideology, by default, demands that women cast off the traditional roles and deny their natural impulses toward having and raising children.

It demands women cast off their nature and their tendencies in order to compete in an androgynous secular society.

It inherently and automatically demeans those who wish to stay at home and be mothers.

Feminist orthodoxy automatically and reflexively engages in the politics of personal destruction against those who do not embrace the "sisterhood"- belittling their efforts, their sacrifices, their contribution, and their tireless dedication because it does not fit their zeitgeist.

The reaction to Sister Beck is merely a highlighted case in point. They are attempting to destroy the messenger because they disagree with what they have been told.

In that sense alone, feminism is a jealous god- vindictive, cruel, and uncaring.

I think feminist ideology is more you can have choices not that you can have it all.

[koakaipo]

Feminism is a big blanket term that can hold alot of different ideas, but the common thread is the idea of women having access to choice and opportunity. That aligns pretty swell like with our concept of agency and free will.

People sometimes in the church have a knee jerk reaction to feminism because they think of second wave feminism from the 60's-an era where alot of movements-not just gender but race,etc.-were responding to the social climate in more forceful and extreme ways to instigate change. And historically, the more extreme parts of a movement are VITAL for change-cause the Malcolm X's made it possible for the Martin Luther Kings(the more moderate voices) to actually negotiate with folks in power.

I have a real feeling honestly that someone who would want to sign that petition is less about thumbing her nose at Sister Beck and the powers that be---and more about widening the context of how we present the feminine experience as Mormon women. I think that's the big whammy here.

Now honestly, the way for this sort of thing to get some dialogue going here for the two camps of women(you guys can just watch from the sideline thanks-haha), is both sides start with the premise that THE OTHER SIDE IS NOT THE ENEMY. Honestly, if people would put down their defenses and trust that Sister Beck isn't trying to demean them-or that the women on the petition aren't trying to bring down the church, there is alot of room for both sides to find their commonalities and possibilities for creating a space for both types to coexist quite swell within our church community.

Unfortuntately, instead what I see is basically a mirror of the larger culture-where there's this useless divide between stay at home moms/working outside the home moms/more traditionally minded folks/less traditional folks. It's a false setup we bring upon ourselves honestly.

[Teancum]

Would you like to point me to where Sister Beck questions her faithfulness?

From Sister Beck:

Faithful daughters of God desire children. In the scriptures we read of Eve (see Moses 4:26), Sarah (see Genesis 17:16), Rebekah (see Genesis 24:60), and Mary (see 1 Nephi 11:13â??20), who were foreordained to be mothers before children were born to them. Some women are not given the responsibility of bearing children in mortality, but just as Hannah of the Old Testament prayed fervently for her child (see 1 Samuel 1:11), the value women place on motherhood in this life and the attributes of motherhood they attain here will rise with them in the Resurrection (see D&C 130:18). Women who desire and work toward that blessing in this life are promised they will receive it for all eternity, and eternity is much, much longer than mortality. There is eternal influence and power in motherhood.

The default is the faithless daughter of God do not desire children.

[jwhitlock]

From Sister Beck:

Faithful daughters of God desire children. In the scriptures we read of Eve (see Moses 4:26), Sarah (see Genesis 17:16), Rebekah (see Genesis 24:60), and Mary (see 1 Nephi 11:13â??20), who were foreordained to be mothers before children were born to them. Some women are not given the responsibility of bearing children in mortality, but just as Hannah of the Old Testament prayed fervently for her child (see 1 Samuel 1:11), the value women place on motherhood in this life and the attributes of motherhood they attain here will rise with them in the Resurrection (see D&C 130:18). Women who desire and work toward that blessing in this life are promised they will receive it for all eternity, and eternity is much, much longer than mortality. There is eternal influence and power in motherhood.

The default is the faithless daughter of God do not desire children.

Sorry, but Sister Beck is expressing the positives of certain characteristics of faithfulness. She makes no comment in here about the aspects of faithlessness.

The lack of a specific statement to support your claim means instead that your claim has to be inferred (interpreted) from her comments.

Your claim that faithlessness must be the default is your interpretation only - not Sister Beck's specific statement. Hence, your claim that Sister Beck says that such sisters as you describe are faithless is not supported by her talk.

And that, in effect, was the main tactic of the petition. It deals very little with actual statements from Sister Beck's talk, and instead gives free rein to interpretations / inferences that suit the liberal needs of those composing the petition.

[alter idem]

It may well be, depending on your field. If you are a genius at scientific research, for instance, and choose instead to go home, change diapers and make applesauce, your skills at scientific research are going to stagnate. You will not have reached your potential within the scientific realm. So in that scenario, you have wasted brains and skills.

As someone who spent years changing diapers and "making applesauce", I don't believe I've wasted my brains and skills. I also don't believe anyone else is in a position to determine how much of my educational skills I've used to raise my children and run my household. As for myself, I can say they haven't been wasted. Maybe they were put to a different use than originally intended, but they certainly have not been wasted.

It's frustrating to see stay-at-home mothers demeaned in order to elevate the choice of working moms. These kinds of comments only serve to widen the gap among women and pit the two groups against eachother.

[rpn]

Our purpose in life is to learn to submit our will to our Heavenly Father's. Whether that is by staying home and raising children, or by working and using the rest of our time to raise children, or whether we are an inventor or "just a mother", when we are each choosing to do what He wants us to do with our lives and our resources, then we are fulfilling the measure of our creation.

Take Esther. She came to understand that "for this cause was I born" ---- to be in the position as Queen to intercede for the people of God. Lots of decisions, including leaving home to go to another city --- not traditional woman behavior --- lead to her being in that place.

Take Ruth. If she hadn't first been married and widowed, and then left her homeland and all that was expected of her to do a kindness for her mother in law, she would not have eventually found herself with Boaz and the ancestor of Christ.

We spend a lot of energy analyzing our own and other's choices when the only important issue is whether we are living the life that He wants us to be living.

Can we not concede that any woman, whether Queen or washerwoman or scientist or stay at home mother, who is doing what they are inspired that God wants them to do should be lauded by all for it?

[juliann]

From Sister Beck:

Faithful daughters of God desire children. In the scriptures we read of Eve (see Moses 4:26), Sarah (see Genesis 17:16), Rebekah (see Genesis 24:60), and Mary (see 1 Nephi 11:13â??20), who were foreordained to be mothers before children were born to them. Some women are not given the responsibility of bearing children in mortality, but just as Hannah of the Old Testament prayed fervently for her child (see 1 Samuel 1:11), the value women place on motherhood in this life and the attributes of motherhood they attain here will rise with them in the Resurrection (see D&C 130:18). Women who desire and work toward that blessing in this life are promised they will receive it for all eternity, and eternity is much, much longer than mortality. There is eternal influence and power in motherhood.

The default is the faithless daughter of God do not desire children.

You are reading into this...is that necessary? Anyone who has been around Mormonism in the last decade knows that the attributes of motherhood do not require birthing children. That is why all women are given the stupid little handout gifts on Mother's Day now. Do you value motherhood? Do you have the attributes for it (which is basically what godhood consists of). All poor Sis. Beck has said here is that there needs to be a desire for this...and if someone has no desire to nuture and protect I do think they are in trouble in the character development department.

However she has had the luxury of a job that she controls totally.

Then why oh why are you defending working as a wonderful lifestyle for 99% of the women without that luxury? I also control my job...that is why I have such sympathy for women who cannot. Even at that there were times when I had to choose between my daughter's needs and my professional needs. I think it goes without saying that you would not want a life without your children. I think it also goes without saying that those who choose not to have children aren't making an informed choice...you can't do that without experiencing parenthood. Parenthood and the inexplicable bond is not something that can be observed, explained or transferred.

[juliann]

As someone who spent years changing diapers and "making applesauce", I don't believe I've wasted my brains and skills. I also don't believe anyone else is in a position to determine how much of my educational skills I've used to raise my children and run my household. As for myself, I can say they haven't been wasted. Maybe they were put to a different use than originally intended, but they certainly have not been wasted.

It's frustrating to see stay-at-home mothers demeaned in order to elevate the choice of working moms. These kinds of comments only serve to widen the gap among women and pit the two groups against eachother.

Not to mention motherhood is not "changing diapers". This is not just demeaning stay at home moms, it is demeaning motherhood which every informed Mormon knows has a much broader meaning.

This is exactly what disturbs me about this. They are trying to divide women, not unite them. They are using women to get to the real agenda. Shame on them.

My education was as vital in raising my child as it was in being able to support her. The extra burden on women is to find a career that is in high demand which is what provides flexibility.... and to stay current when not working. The idea that we stagnate is insulting beyond belief. Does Staccato think you are dead after your children are grown and you can't start up again...or even go a completely different direction?

I have never stopped taking classes or working towards certification or degrees. My daughter saw that so it never needed to be "taught". That is just what you do in our home. If it is supposed to be so easy and fulfilling to work 9 to 5 every day with your kids in daycare it is certainly easy to take a class or two.

[juliann]

Now honestly, the way for this sort of thing to get some dialogue going here for the two camps of women(you guys can just watch from the sideline thanks-haha), is both sides start with the premise that THE OTHER SIDE IS NOT THE ENEMY. Honestly, if people would put down their defenses and trust that Sister Beck isn't trying to demean them-or that the women on the petition aren't trying to bring down the church, there is alot of room for both sides to find their commonalities and possibilities for creating a space for both types to coexist quite swell within our church community.

I think the church needs to expand areas for women. I don't think "the priesthood" is really necessary for a lot of what goes on. Technically, it should only take one priesthood holder to provide that element anyway. But "the church" is not going to listen to outside agitators so bye bye to any influence. The women signing this can't help but know this which makes me question their real motive. Is it to improve LDS women's situtations.... or just to throw rocks? They know it divides, they know this method won't change anything, past experience has shown that it actually delays change. Guess that leaves the rock throwing.

[Drewm777]

God forbid that a woman should think for herself and express her opinion. Crazy women!!! So Drew wants to give the boot to anyone who Drew thinks is not in line. I hope you never have the power to give the boot. It is quite a complex and difficult task to be a judge in Israel and decide who should and should not be cast out when things come up. Really this is a small thing. My guess is most of these women have quite strong testimonies and are probably active pillars of their respective wards.

These women are more than a little out of line, my friend. They condemn statements made by the First Presidency (the Proclamation to the World) and also the Book of Mormon in their manifesto. They are apostates and I don't care if it's your mom, sister, or the relief society president.

No you wouldn't.

Actually, I would.

Though I don't agree with much of their petition, I have a greater distaste of self-righteous judgements...you are not their ecclesiastical leader, know nothing about any of these individuals and the exact road they are pursuing. Prior to making rash, and/or self-righteous judgements of others, I think it's usually best to revisit the mirror and look for the mote in our own eye.

There was nothing self-righteous about my email. This is the truth and I stated it to them, that's all:

1. They are opposing the Lord's anointed

2. They are publicly teaching false doctrine.

Both of those, according to the handbook, are grounds for excommunication if they do not repent.

[juliann]

Actually, I would.

No you wouldn't. You would have to be in a position to do so and with such an uncharitable attitude I think it is a safe bet you won't be.

[Drewm777]

No you wouldn't. You would have to be in a position to do so and with such an uncharitable attitude I think it is a safe bet you won't be.

I'm sorry, Juliann, but I really think you have misspoke. I absolutely would have a disciplinary council.

For what it's worth, I've already sat in several disciplinary councils (it was a student ward....). I've already served in a bishopric and been a branch president. I'm only 25 so I'll probably doomed to a life of such service. I'm guessing I might be a bishop some day, although that is not my personal ambition.

I think you're off base to pass judgment on whether my views are charitable or not. Ever heard of tough love? What about love for all the people out there that might be swayed by such apostates in the church? When leaders choose not to discipline someone who is in apostasy (or for other heinous sins), they indirectly condone the behavior in the sight of others. True charity requires discipline, and I would discipline any woman (or man) in my ward who signed her (his) name to such a document who is not willing to renounce it en toto. To do otherwise would be to jeopardize the spiritual lives of others. If someone chooses a route of apostasy, that's fine, but I would never let them do it at the possible risk of members of whom I am the shepherd without making a clear and resolute call of danger to all.

[annah]

As someone who spent years changing diapers and "making applesauce", I don't believe I've wasted my brains and skills. I also don't believe anyone else is in a position to determine how much of my educational skills I've used to raise my children and run my household. As for myself, I can say they haven't been wasted. Maybe they were put to a different use than originally intended, but they certainly have not been wasted.

It's frustrating to see stay-at-home mothers demeaned in order to elevate the choice of working moms. These kinds of comments only serve to widen the gap among women and pit the two groups against eachother.

Your comment reminds me of a movie -- "Mona Lisa Smile".

I was eager to watch this movie thinking it would be "women's-lib-ish." After watching it, I wasn't disappointed. It wasn't what I expected but was so much more. Definitely made me rethink my position with regard to women's roles.

IMO, a woman who freely chooses to do what she does is ACTUALLY liberated.

[katherine the great]

I'm sorry, Juliann, but I really think you have misspoke. I absolutely would have a disciplinary council.

Then I would bet that you wouldn't last in that calling. Good Bishops are loving, not spiteful. Your attitude just doesn't reflect love--just a desire to shut people up with a firm hand.

[Calm]

I remember her being told she was an "unfit" mother by the RS president back in the late 70's because she chose to work instead of stay home

And I was told many years ago I was not doing my job as a mother because I stayed at home too much and therefore was not inspiring my daughter to push herself by my RS president.

There is a difference between what the Church teaches and what individual members latch on to and push as their personal agenda. Isolating one talk or even one leader's comment and presenting them as if they were the sole position of the Church is counterproductive, both for those trying to encourage or even force change in the Church and for those thinking they are being supportive and protective of the core beliefs of it.

For me, this claim that the Church is a one size fits all production on any level pretty much tanks the credibility of the critic. Read the history of the church, read the journals of the men and women of it---the Church has always had a huge amount of variation within its walls and has allowed such variation to flourish. At times there are individuals that gain a voice that would decrease such variation, but they tend to be softened by the actions of those around them over time. It is unfortunate when people only pay attention to the squeaky wheel and assume that is all there is or that is what is considered most important.

[alter idem]

I'm sorry, Juliann. For what it's worth, I've sat in disciplinary councils. I've already served in a bishopric and been a branch president. I'm only 25 so I'll probably doomed to a life of such service. I'm guessing I might be a bishop some day, although that is not my personal ambition.

I think you're off base to pass judgment on whether my views are charitable or not. Ever heard of tough love? What about love for all the people out there that might be swayed by such apostates in the church? When leaders choose not to discipline someone who is in apostasy (or for other heinous sins), they indirectly condone the behavior in the sight of others. True charity requires discipline, and I would discipline any woman (or man) in my ward who signed her (his) name to such a document who is not willing to renounce it en toto.

Dreww, I think when priesthood leaders are actually in a position where they make these kinds of decisions, they are done with more of a spirit of love and concern, rather than using priesthood authority to try and force a member to renounce their feelings or face discipline.

When a man is called to preside over a ward or stake, they are expected to exercise priesthood authority as outlined in the 121st section of the D&C. I'm not sure making snap judgements would be the best way to follow these guidelines. I think that may be what others have objected to...that was my concern with your comments.

[koakaipo]

Drewn-in regards to women being out of line(hear me out...hahah):

People get out of line all the time. I think the point is though sometimes things course correct rather easily before we have to bring in the big guns.

I think that's where people are disagreeing with you heartily. Because it's going from point A to point X and not really acknowledging points b-w may hold the answer.

I think you may inadvertantly be making some people's point if the only answer we have for women signing a petition is to bring out the big guns. I feel really uncomfortable with that image honestly. I've signed petitions in the past myself(not this one mind you). I didn't always agree with the entirety of the postion of the petition, maybe not even with the authors, but I wanted to voice something in a way that seemed more relevant.

I have a feeling some if not many of the signatures on there by active members may be in a similar position. IF that is a possibility, there is alot of room for discussion then as to what is behind their choice to sign this petition.