"What Women Know"...

[Mark Beesley]

It been in place as long as I've been cognizant of such things, more than 3 decades (CHI, TeacherpPrep, Missionary prep etc.). It's recently been restated in a news release by the LDS Church called "Approaching Mormon Doctrine" in May of 2007.

Caveats would be "of latest date"..... An example would be what GBH said about evolution in the 1970's and what BRM stated (and clarified) in the 1980's....and "Presented as doctrine"...no example off-hand, but if it is stated in a Church publication that something is opinion or "Generally considered to be" etc. then it obviously is not doctrine.

I see absolutely nothing (nor have I for more than 5 decades ) that makes publication the touchstone for determining doctrine. Certainly, Approaching Mormon Doctrine does not make any such claim. Your statement was simplistic and overly-broad.

[Hammer]

Sister Beck is a leader. She was asked to speak at conference. I don't know whether her talk was vetted in advance of its delivery.

Sure, you go to conference to be taught, and the learning process is more than just believing whatever people in authority tell you.

Okay, the learning process is sealed through the Holy Ghost on the receiver's side. But I know those who are asked to speak at conference do a lot of fasting, praying, and spiritually preparing themselves to say what is required of them by the Lord to a huge listening audience.

Now I know not everything the Lord has them say is liked or even joyfully received, but I know that what this Sister Beck taught is what is needed in this century at this time where money comes first and children and family values comes last.

[alter idem]

Sister Beck is a leader. She was asked to speak at conference. I don't know whether her talk was vetted in advance of its delivery.

Sure, you go to conference to be taught, and the learning process is more than just believing whatever people in authority tell you.

I went on a tour of the restored Tabernacle and asked about whether the General Authority's talks were reviewed before they were given. I was told that they are not. They are also not given a topic. They are trusted to speak under the guidance of inspiration.

However, there is a small recording room with a podium (just like at the Conf. Center) where they run through their talk so that they are able to make sure they are exactly at the time alloted and so that they can practice using the prompting equipment.

[Hyrum Page]

Now I know not everything the Lord has them say is liked or even joyfully received, but I know that what this Sister Beck taught is what is needed in this century at this time where money comes first and children and family values comes last.

I respect that this is what you believe.

[harnwolf]

The very first thing Drew said was this:

Holding a disciplinary council, as Drew has said, is not automatic ex-communication, disfellowshipment, or even suspension from taking the sacrament. It isn't automatic discipline of any sort. It is a council to determine if any discipline should be taken. The only logical thing to do is to determine if discipline should be taken at all and of what nature, and that is exactly what a disciplinary council is for.

Drew did not say he would immediately chop off their heads.

Sargon

I think the basic problem many have with Drew's suggested actions is that even though he didn't say he would "immediately" chop off their heads, anyone being told they're going to a disciplinary council, might feel that way prior to the meeting. Wouldn't it make alot more sense as a bishop, if you read that manifesto, so a signature of a ward member, and were concerned about the matter, to ask to talk to the individual before jumping to any conclusions?

[harnwolf]

Why go to the 19th Century? There was plenty said during the 20th Century that has been disavowed. Just ask Elder McConkie . . .

Ezra Taft Benson was an avid anti-communist in the 50's and 60's. He also felt that the civil rights movement was infiltrated by communists and, thus, felt it should not be supported. Some of these personal views filtered through a few of his conference talks, which, in turn made some church members, and fellow quorom members, uncomfortable. I'm fairly certain, if he were alive today, his feelings, and, consequently, the tone of some of those talks would change. In fact, they changed by the time he was a prophet.

None of this is particularly disturbing to me, nor is Sister Beck's talk, though I personally felt a bit uncomfortable at the potential feelings of guilt it might instigate in some members. (For most of us, feelings of guilt are a good thing, but I've also observed it occuring undeservingly in certain church settings.) Probably my biggest discomfort with that talk is how it might be used accusingly, and in self-righteous judgement, by an individual in church towards another.

Having said that, I also acknowledge that Sister Beck's talk surely followed prayer and pondering in preparation, and the message was beneficial to certain individuals. In addition, if I gained nothing else from that talk, it was a reminder of where all our priorities ought to be--with our families. So, even though I can nit pick certain aspects of that talk in my mind, there was still something to be gained from the talk for me--not as much as some of the other talks--but that's normal.

The manifesto written in response to Sister Beck's talk, on the other hand, was nit-picking in what it implied, and ignorant, specifically, in it's interpretation of a certain B of M scripture. But would signing it make one worthy of a church court? Aside from the ignorance shown in regards to that B of M reference, I see one statement that comes the closest to a direct accusation against the church,

"Men are our fathers, sons, brothers, partners, lovers, and friends. Many of them also struggle within a system that equates leadership with hierarchy and domination. We distrust separate-but-equal rhetoric; anyone who is regularly reminded that she is â??equally importantâ? is probably not. Partnership is illusory without equal decision-making power."

This statement is carefully worded not to specifically mention the church, but there's little doubt what "system" it's talking about. Again, I think the use of the word "domination" is an exaggeration of reality, and male domination is not taught in the church--although I also realize there are those that equate the all-male priesthood with "male domination". Generally, those that feel that way move away from the church--I suppose some live with it. My guess is that the signers of the manifesto include those who see the priesthood as an excuse for domination (and probably aren't active in the church) to those who have at least been frustrated by actions by priesthood holders where they possibly "pulled rank". Again, church leaders have spoken against "pulling rank"--specifically in the home. So, I would think that there's a spectrum of degree in agreement within the ranks of signers of that manifesto. Again, if a bishop so chose to pursue anything, a chat would be an appropriate start--given no other reasons by the involved individual, a church court would be an over-reaction, imo.

[miles45]

Okay, the learning process is sealed through the Holy Ghost on the receiver's side. But I know those who are asked to speak at conference do a lot of fasting, praying, and spiritually preparing themselves to say what is required of them by the Lord to a huge listening audience.

Now I know not everything the Lord has them say is liked or even joyfully received, but I know that what this Sister Beck taught is what is needed in this century at this time where money comes first and children and family values comes last.

This does not mean that someone isnt capable of delivering a talk that is train wreck. Ive heard a few talks(very few) that made me openly wonder what on earth was that person thinking."

I'm pretty surprised by how divisive this talk has become. I've heard/read talks that I do not agree with. I have been able to acknowledge that and dismiss what doesnt apply to me in my life, without it twisting me up in knots.

I think about what I can learn and apply in a positive manner and if a speaker says something that I does not apply to my life..I just shrug it off and move on. I dont think like everybody and not everybody thinks like me.

Most of the women I know have reacted to this talk in the same way. Those who loved it will probably benefit greatly from it. Those who thought that it was largely hot air didnt pay it much mind and have gone about their lives.

[staccato]

I think the list of signatures has quadrupled since I last looked at it. And I am now curious as to what these folks are going to do with the list.

[Douglas Hunter]

A very late reply I know. But I wanted to thank the OP for bringing this letter to our attention. and I also wanted to mention that an LDS woman I know and have tremendous respect for is one of the authors of the letter. So I signed on in support of the sisters.

A number of people have accused the authors of being apostate, or of attacking sister Beck etc. . .

To be perfectly clear, the woman I know who authored the document is a VERY active and faithful LDS woman with an amazing personal story. So yes, active and faithful women wrote and signed their names to this document. It was not an attack on sister Beck and it is not the work of apostasy. If you think it is, please read it more closely and without the desire to find fault in difference.

[Buckeye]

A very late reply I know. But I wanted to thank the OP for bringing this letter to our attention. and I also wanted to mention that an LDS woman I know and have tremendous respect for is one of the authors of the letter. So I signed on in support of the sisters.

A number of people have accused the authors of being apostate, or of attacking sister Beck etc. . .

To be perfectly clear, the woman I know who authored the document is a VERY active and faithful LDS woman with an amazing personal story. So yes, active and faithful women wrote and signed their names to this document. It was not an attack on sister Beck and it is not the work of apostasy. If you think it is, please read it more closely and without the desire to find fault in difference.

The introduction to the letter includes the following language. Maybe "attack" is too strong a word, but the letter is clearly critical of President Beck's message.

Several ideas within the body of President Beck's talk conflict with our inspiration and experience. We are authors of our own lives, and this is the story we know to be true:

If you read through this thread, you will find evidence I compiled showing links between the letter and apostate and openly-critical members of the church. That is not to say that all of the authors (much less signators) are openly critical or apostate, but at least some are.

[Buckeye]

For example, the below was posted on exmo a few days after the letter went online.

A few days ago, I posted the following at the Exmormon Yahoo list:

Some of you may find it interesting that a very liberal, very feminist group of Mormon women (some are also "ex" or at least never attend, and some very fringe members) have constructed a response to Beck's talk. I've been involved with this process, and what they have come up with is just

outstanding. It will be posted on a website, and also press releases sent out, etc. We are discussing the option of also submitting it to the Tribune for an Op-Ed piece. They are collecting signatures of supporters, and that list of

signatures will be a permanent part of the website -- and submissions of signatures will be on-going.

********************************

And now I'm posting this here and elsewhere:

I mentioned a few days ago that a wonderful group of women were working on a response to "Sister Beck's" conference talk. Her talk was titled: "What Mothers Know", and in it she basically spoke to mothers only (which blows my

mind), and did a great job of saying things that took the women of the church back 30 years -- let alone guilting them in several areas!. We have put together a beautiful, strong response to her talk, and have been collecting

signatures of support from very close friends prior to launching the website. Yesterday, it was finally finished and launched. The bloggers are already talking about it, and we have collected many more signatures in just a

day.

I mentioned before that I told these women I would take this to my exmormon groups because so many of us have sisters, mothers, and female friends still dealing with all the ways in which the church proscribes their life path for

them. (There is a link to Beck's talk in the body of the text). I know many of you won't be the least bit interested, but I wanted you to see this because I think it's a major "happening" within the church. The woman in

this group who are still very active are taking a big chance.

Both women and men are invited to sign this document if they would like to support what has been declared. A couple of men asked me to add them to the list of signatures when it was ready to launch. You can add it yourself with

a link at the bottom of the text. Other than a couple of references to "church" stuff, this is a manifesto that would appeal to all women. I'm very, very proud to be associated with this effort.

The website is: www.whatwomenknow.org

Again, the link for sending in your name is just above the signatures. Enjoy!

Sue

[Mars]

Well, at least the active-faithful-staunchly-never-wavering authors are in good company.

As a parenthetical aside, I'm always dubious of motives when someone wants me to recognize their authority as a member in good standing when they want me to accept an idea that's on the whole foreign to what members in good standing tend to espouse.

Back to my alcove...

[emeliza]

I think the women missed out on what Sister Beck's talk was about. She wasn't condemning the things these ladies seem to think she was. She was speaking just towards the women and in generalities or the norms. That is often how the Church talks. They don't have the ability to address everyone.

I also thought their statement was just a bit too much on the defensive and too critical. I understand some of their points, but it is like all or nothing.....rather than all inclusive.

[The Nehor]

All the names on that list I know are borderline-inactive.

[Kenngo1969]

Women [Think They] Knowâ?]â?¦ [A]nyone who is regularly reminded that she is â??equally importantâ? is probably not.

Translation? â??The only way weâ??ll know we're important is if you donâ??t tell us weâ??re important. The way our brains work, if you tell us weâ??re important, then weâ??ll wonder why you felt like you had to say that, why it isnâ??t just tacitly understood, or if thereâ??s some subtext in which what you really feel belies what you actually say â?¦â?

As if anyone ever needed (more) proof that the leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ canâ??t win! Sigh!

No wonder Iâ??ve never understood women/gotten married â?¦

[KingZedekiah]

Thanks for your straightforward response Juliann. While we are not on the same page religion wise, I always enjoy your posts/responses. I too wonder why they didn't/don't attack a talk on this same topic/magnitude when given by a male? Interesting thought!

Because any male speaker would be a PRIESTHOOD HOLDER and likely a PROPHET. Any attack directed that way would be viewed as APOSTASY by all. But since Sister Beck does not hold the priesthood and is just like all other women, there is no direct attack on a church leader.

[Douglas Hunter]

Well, at least the active-faithful-staunchly-never-wavering authors are in good company.

As a parenthetical aside, I'm always dubious of motives when someone wants me to recognize their authority as a member in good standing when they want me to accept an idea that's on the whole foreign to what members in good standing tend to espouse.

Back to my alcove...

Mars, be careful, if you were addressing my statement, rest assured it was not an appeal to recognize authority, not at all. I was simply voicing my opinion about a friend who's life story, faith and intellect I think are pretty amazing. I'm glad that there are women like her in the Church, and she has helped strengthen my faith. What authority that would give her I do not know.

Buckeye, I think you are right the word "attack" is too strong, the statement is there for the sake of a contrast. That's a very different intent. In contrast to Beck's prescriptions they offered a different view. Obviously different individuals will understand that contrast differently and understand its intentions and utility differently. I tend to be glad when statements like this come out, if for no other reason than they encourage us to be honest about the diversity of opinions and faith that occur with the community, they remind us that there is no singularity when it comes to our experience of the gospel, of faith, and of God in our lives. and both Beck's talk and the letter point to the importance of women's voices in the Church and the challenges they present us with.

[Buckeye]

Buckeye, I think you are right the word "attack" is too strong, the statement is there for the sake of a contrast. That's a very different intent. In contrast to Beck's prescriptions they offered a different view. Obviously different individuals will understand that contrast differently and understand its intentions and utility differently. I tend to be glad when statements like this come out, if for no other reason than they encourage us to be honest about the diversity of opinions and faith that occur with the community, they remind us that there is no singularity when it comes to our experience of the gospel, of faith, and of God in our lives. and both Beck's talk and the letter point to the importance of women's voices in the Church and the challenges they present us with.

As with the letter itself (with the exception of the off-the-wall comment on Sons of Helaman), I don't really disagree with your statement. But I do care a lot about the source of statements. In this case, at least up until now, I was under the impression that the letter was drafted by sisters opposed to church. It is good to hear that at least one of the drafters is an active testimony-holding member.

[Duncan]

Or better yet, "should" an active LDS woman sign it? I stumbled upon this site through a link from another board. Being from the Ann Arbor MI area I know a few of the women who have signed this. In fact one is the wife of my former bishop. I wonder if they could face some sort of rebuking? What do any of you think of this? I personally think it is fine but then again I am no longer a member.

http://whatwomenknow.org/whatwomenknow/index.html

edited to correct spelling error.

I know one of the woman who signed this petition and she bore her testimony on Sunday. Very nice too!

[Douglas Hunter]

In this case, at least up until now, I was under the impression that the letter was drafted by sisters opposed to church. It is good to hear that at least one of the drafters is an active testimony-holding member.

Ah, I see. That's an important bit of context.

[Mormon Vader]

I sent them an email as follows:

I encourage you to also express your distaste with what they're doing by emailing them at : whatwomenknow(AT)gmail.com

I think I'll send them an e-mail, too, but only to apologize for the e-mails they get from the Mormons they probably were disgusted by in the first place.

I don't know about you, but I think the self-appointed Mormon judges do more harm than good.

[Avatar4321]

A very late reply I know. But I wanted to thank the OP for bringing this letter to our attention. and I also wanted to mention that an LDS woman I know and have tremendous respect for is one of the authors of the letter. So I signed on in support of the sisters.

A number of people have accused the authors of being apostate, or of attacking sister Beck etc. . .

To be perfectly clear, the woman I know who authored the document is a VERY active and faithful LDS woman with an amazing personal story. So yes, active and faithful women wrote and signed their names to this document. It was not an attack on sister Beck and it is not the work of apostasy. If you think it is, please read it more closely and without the desire to find fault in difference.

Active and faithful are not the same. And a key to know whether one is heading towards Apostasy is to see whether they will criticize their leaders.

[Pahoran]

Because any male speaker would be a PRIESTHOOD HOLDER and likely a PROPHET. Any attack directed that way would be viewed as APOSTASY by all. But since Sister Beck does not hold the priesthood and is just like all other women, there is no direct attack on a church leader.

You're not actually a Mormon, are you Zeddy?

Sister Beck is sustained by the entire body of Church membership as the General President of the Relief Society. The Relief Society is the Church's organisation for women, after the pattern of the Priesthood. If she's not a Church leader, no-one is.

And yes, publicly attacking her position is unquestionably an act of apostasy.

While we hear that some of those associated with this petition still claim to be active, faithful members, the prime movers and shakers are apostates known of old. So their still-LDS henchwomen are affiliating, associating and agreeing with the teachings of people out of fellowship with the Church.

As regards Sister Beck's talk: I am reminded of something that (I think) Elder Oaks said, to the effect that it is the responsibility of Church leaders to teach the ideal, and not dilute the message by enumerating all the possible exceptions, qualifications and provisos that might attach; that is for individuals to work out for themselves. With that in mind, Sister Beck's talk is right on the money: she has described the ideal.

And now it is up to all LDS women, whether petition signatories or not, to decide just how it applies to them.

Likewise, it is up to LDS men to decide whether they are doing all they can to ensure that their wives have the best opportunity to realise that ideal. For instance, some of us might have grown a little too used to a dual-income lifestyle, complacently allowing our wives to keep working without asking them whether it is really what they would rather be doing.

Regards,

Pahoran

[MorningStar]

There are two women on that list that claim to be in my stake and neither of them are in the stake directory. Something's fishy ...

[LifeOnaPlate]

What a girl wants, what a girl needs,

Whatever makes me happy and sets you free.

What a girl wants, what a girl needs,

Whatever keeps me in your arms.

And I'm thanking you for being there for me.

Like a rock you waited so patiently, while I got it together.

While I figured it out, I only looked but I never touched,

'Cause in my heart was a picture of us:

Holding hands, making plans,

And it's lucky for me, you understand.

What a girl wants, what a girl needs,

Whatever makes me happy and sets you free.

And I'm thanking you for knowing exactly...

What a girl wants, what a girl needs,

Whatever keeps me in your arms.

And I'm thanking you for being there for me.

A weaker man might have walked away, but you had faith

Strong enough to move over and understand, while I got it together.

While I figured it out, they say, "If you love something let it go.

If it comes back it's yours, and that's how you know.

It's for keeps, yeah, it's for sure."

And you're ready and willing to give me more (than)....

What a girl wants, what a girl needs,

Whatever makes me happy and sets you free.

And I'm thanking you for knowing exactly...

What a girl wants, what a girl needs,

Whatever keeps me in your arms.

And I'm thanking you for being there for me.

Somebody sensitive and tough;

Somebody there when the going gets rough;

Every night, he'll be giving his love

To just one girl... one girl... one.

Somebody cool but real tender too;

Somebody, baby, just like you

Can keep me hangin' around with the one who always knew.

I'm thankin' you for being there for me.

What a girl wants, what a girl needs,

Whatever makes me happy and sets you free.

And I'm thanking you for knowing exactly...

What a girl wants, what a girl needs,

Whatever keeps me in your arms.

And I'm thanking you for being there for me.