Feminist Inroads Into Mormonism

[Calm]

Well, you seemed to be in favour of the wife being able to call some portion of the money "really her own."

Only if the husband insists on having some portion of the money "really his own". I think their positions in the partnership should be equal as much as possible to avoid either feeling inferior or resentment to the other, but that equality depends on what the individuals want and may or may not be financial equality....it certainly doesn't in my own relationship.

And I have known very few women who feel they have "undiluted control" over their home. In fact, I've known some whose husbands dictate what bought, what is eaten, what she can buy as far as furniture, what the kids are involved in, etc. Assuming just because someone is home all day unsupervised equates to being in control is an unjustified assumption.

Edited January 10, 2012 by calmoriah

[bluebell]

but then, as the OP argues, men are expected to put themselves dead last -- and women are not.

Regards,

Pahoran

That some men, such as yourself, think that women feel that way is obvious. As far as this thread is concerned, it's completely a construct of your own making though.

[Pahoran]

In my case my husband just got up one morning packed his stuff and left the state after sitting the kids on the couch and telling them he was leaving because "he wasn't loved enough." Of course he left out the part about his never having a kind word to say. Being left in limbo and not knowing if we'd ever see him again I filed for divorce. so I agree if the woman is filing for divorce she probably has good reason. Had it not been for that I would have stuck it out even though I was totally miserable.

Well, you can't extrapolate from one to many, much less from one to all. Some women won't get divorced unless they've got a good reason; for others the "good reason" is that they get up in the morning and "feel like a new man."

But I agree that abandoning his family was a lousy thing to do.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Pahoran]

That some men, such as yourself, think that women feel that way is obvious. As far as this thread is concerned, it's completely a construct of your own making though.

How strange. A construct of my own making?

Did you actually click the link?

Regards,

Pahoran

[Calm]

This post seems to have been lost in the ether:

Pahoran, you keep assuming that when I say "compensation" I mean "financial compensation".

I do not. I never have. Compensation can take a variety of forms. Such compensation should come from those most benefiting from her sacrifice....family members. If society wants to encourage such behaviour for the benefit of having healthier and most productive children and family members...thus cutting down on costs to the community due to health issues and screwed up kids as well as creating future income/service producing citizens, it might get involved in some areas of support but it should never attempt to substitute for the compensation coming from the family and shouldn't be based on "making things fair" but only promoting behaviour beneficial for society overall.

[thesometimesaint]

calmoriah:

The stats are about equal. It is the timing that is different. Women commit adultary early in the marriage and the men later.

[bluebell]

....for what might arguably be seen as the luxury to having undiluted control over her own home and family environment, without constant demands coming from outside of the home.

Regards,

Pahoran

I'm sorry, i know there's absolutely no point in arguing with you but this is so laughable i just couldn't ignore it.

First, as a stay at home mom i have very little control over my home and family environment. When i hitched my star to my husband's wagon and we decided together that i would be a stay at home mom, i agreed to give my control over my home and family environment to him, he being the sole person bringing in money. I must use whatever he provides, and if he doesn't provide enough, i have no control over that whatsoever.

If he's lazy or won't work and can't support us, i have no control over that whatsoever. If he loses his job and we lose our home, i have no control over that whatsoever. If the only place he can find a new job is in some state that i would never choose to live, i have no control over that whatsoever. (these are merely examples and not things i have had to deal with personally but they are things i've seen other stay at home moms deal with and not made up scenerios. Also, I'm not suggesting that the man has complete control over these things either, i'm just stating that neither does the stay at home mom).

Being a stay at home mom means giving up control in many things.

Second, anyone who believes that being a stay at home mom means there are not constant demands coming from outside of the home has no idea what it means to be a good stay at home mom.

[Pahoran]

Only if the husband insists on having some portion of the money "really his own".

Only because I was wondering where your putative "compensation" was supposed to be coming from.

I think their positions in the partnership should be equal as much as possible to avoid either feeling inferior or resentment to the other, but that equality depends on what the individuals want and may or may not be financial equality....it certainly doesn't in my own relationship.

And I have known very few women who feel they have "undiluted control" over their home. In fact, I've known some whose husbands dictate what bought, what is eaten, what she can buy as far as furniture, what the kids are involved in, etc. Assuming just because someone is home all day unsupervised equates to being in control is an unjustified assumption.

Well there you are, you see. I don't know any husband who would presume to do any more than diffidently suggest a preference, with no real expectation that it would influence any decision. The standing joke in my part of the world is, "I have the last say in our house, and it's 'yes dear'."

This post seems to have been lost in the ether:

Pahoran, you keep assuming that when I say "compensation" I mean "financial compensation".

I do not. I never have. Compensation can take a variety of forms. Such compensation should come from those most benefiting from her sacrifice....family members. If society wants to encourage such behaviour for the benefit of having healthier and most productive children and family members...thus cutting down on costs to the community due to health issues and screwed up kids as well as creating future income/service producing citizens, it might get involved in some areas of support but it should never attempt to substitute for the compensation coming from the family and shouldn't be based on "making things fair" but only promoting behaviour beneficial for society overall.

If I keep "assuming" it, it's because the whole context of this was the claim that society doesn't "value" women enough because women get paid less. Now you finally get around to telling me you weren't talking about money at all? Thanks for the clarification.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Calm]

So you, as a woman, are allowed to ascribe a single "point of view" to men, but if any man has the temerity to return the favour, you huff and puff in high dudgeon.

I was being sarcastic, should have put a smiley face I guess. I do not believe that every man holds the same view as LB on the value of certains apsects of "women's work". I know for a fact my husband, who is a business prof, has encouraged women who have worked in their home to count as significant aspects of their work in the home as having value when they go out into the business market (he works with entrepreneurs, including a lot of women who start their own businesses after being housewives).

Were you being serious? I couldn't tell.

Edited January 10, 2012 by calmoriah

[bluebell]

How strange. A construct of my own making?

Did you actually click the link?

Regards,

Pahoran

Did you miss the part where i said "as far as this thread is concerned"? That's an important part of my post because it helps to clarify my point.

The statement you made was in absolutes and i used this thread as evidence to show that the absolute nature of your statement was a construct and not reality.

[Calm]

The standing joke in my part of the world is, "I have the last say in our house, and it's 'yes dear'."

I know a lot of guys who say that. Perhaps they don't realize that they manage to have quite a bit of input into what is going on in the house, even if they don't come right out and state their preferences.

They have a lot of control over how they make money available to their wife to do the shopping, how they talk about finances to her (if they act like money is always tight, her response will be different than if they talk in specifics about what is available and what isn't), if they are willing to support her in any out of the home activity or if instead they choose to sulk or complain about being stuck at home themselves, if they make plans that involve only themselves outside the home, if the wife asks for help around the house and they refuse or say they will do it but then allow something else to come up so they end up not contributing, etc. Nothing is said outright, but in hundreds of way a husband can make his preferences known. Wife can do the same exact thing so please don't think I'm claiming it's only men who manipulate this way. Sometimes it's unconscious and totally unintentional (that it manipulates). Sometimes it's conscious and intentional and if so, I find it despicable. I know plenty of women who do and then act all coy and claim they have always been totally supportive of others and act like total martyrs when they are the most manipulative, self centered witches around.

Edited January 10, 2012 by calmoriah

[Calm]

so I agree if the woman is filing for divorce she probably has good reason.

This happened to my brother in law, the divorce out of the blue that is. His wife came to him, said 'I only married you because you were going to be a doctor and I thought that and you loving me would be enough, but I don't love you and it's not what I want after all so goodbye'. However, since it appeared a happy marriage before that, at least he hadn't been suffering before.

It would be nice to be able to claim that men screw up women's lives so much more than women screwing up men's lives, but I am afraid that women are just as good at doing it as men, just in different ways....our culture having given men and women a different set of tools for torturing each other.

[Pahoran]

I'm sorry, i know there's absolutely no point in arguing with you but this is so laughable i just couldn't ignore it.

Uh-huh. Do you often do things that are absolutely pointless?

First, as a stay at home mom i have very little control over my home and family environment. When i hitched my star to my husband's wagon and we decided together that i would be a stay at home mom, i agreed to give my control over my home and family environment to him, he being the sole person bringing in money.

Oh, so let me get this straight. You are telling me that, when he comes home from work at the end of the day, what he finds is entirely as he determines it, and you have no influence over the environment at all?

Umm, okay.

I must use whatever he provides, and if he doesn't provide enough, i have no control over that whatsoever.

While he retains complete control over how you use it?

He simply doles out an allowance based upon what he assumes you need, I take it? He tells you what to buy, what laundry to wash, what rooms to clean, what daytime soaps to watch?

If he's lazy or won't work and can't support us, i have no control over that whatsoever. If he loses his job and we lose our home, i have no control over that whatsoever.

You are telling us you would sit at home and wring your hands and do absolutely nothing about it? You must be a nervous wreck.

Actually Bluebell, I don't believe you're anywhere near as helpless as that. I'm certain that you are an intelligent, resourceful person who would do something positive about it, if it needed to be done.

If the only place he can find a new job is in some state that i would never choose to live, i have no control over that whatsoever. (these are merely examples and not things i have had to deal with personally but they are things i've seen other stay at home moms deal with and not made up scenerios. Also, I'm not suggesting that the man has complete control over these things either, i'm just stating that neither does the stay at home mom).

Being a stay at home mom means giving up control in many things.

And as the feminists have taught us, there is nothing -- nothing! -- more important than a woman being in control.

But in reality, your "giving up control" is really just a scarehead name for trusting someone. In your own sphere, you are entirely independent; your own boss, you plan your work, your rest breaks, your daytime social engagements and everything else according to your priorities -- no-one else's -- while you make your work environment into what you want it to be.

Can your husband say the same?

Second, anyone who believes that being a stay at home mom means there are not constant demands coming from outside of the home has no idea what it means to be a good stay at home mom.

But again, those "constant demands" fall a long way short of being required, on pain of losing your job, to show up, day after day, week after week, year after year, until you're too old to be of any use to anyone. They are "demands" that you manage according to your own priorities.

Did you miss the part where i said "as far as this thread is concerned"? That's an important part of my post because it helps to clarify my point.

The statement you made was in absolutes and i used this thread as evidence to show that the absolute nature of your statement was a construct and not reality.

A discussion board thread is a commentary on the OP. To the extent that any post in this thread does not deal with the OP, it is off-topic.

What you counterfactally described as a construct of my own making is nothing less than what the OP was about. Therefore it is not my construct "as far as this thread is concerned."

Regards,

Pahoran

Edited January 10, 2012 by Pahoran

[Calm]

calmoriah:

The stats are about equal. It is the timing that is different. Women commit adultary early in the marriage and the men later.

Got a reference?

[bluebell]

Uh-huh. Do you often do things that are absolutely pointless?

That i'm having this conversation with you proves that sometimes i do. I wouldn't say often though.

Oh, so let me get this straight. You are telling me that, when he comes home from work at the end of the day, what he finds is entirely as he determines it, and you have no influence over the environment at all?

Nope, i never said i didn't have any influence.

He simply doles out an allowance based upon what he assumes you need, I take it? He tells you what to buy, what laundry to wash, what rooms to clean, what daytime soaps to watch?

His choice of profession, for example, his choice of work ethic, his choice of the amount of schooling he has, etc. determines the amount of money i have to run the household. (and if your point isn't to make men sound like arrogant condescending jerks who demean women, then the day time soap opera comment is a case of friendly fire that you might want to avoid in the future )

You are telling us you would sit at home and wring your hands and do absolutely nothing about it? You must be a nervous wreck.

You are really bad at this.

Actually Bluebell, I don't believe you're anywhere near as helpless as that. I'm certain that you are an intelligent, resourceful person who would do something positive about it, if it needed to be done.

I would do my best, but if i was in that situation and had to do my best, that wouldn't negate the fact that i had no control over those issues i mentioned to begin with.

And as the feminists have taught us, there is nothing -- nothing! -- more important than a woman being in control.

Some feminist do believe that. Just like some men believe there is nothing--nothing!--worse than a woman being in control. Let's just agree that both men and women can be jerks and we won't have to belabor the point.

But in reality, your "giving up control" is really just a scarehead name for trusting someone.

Exactly. (And i only used the word control because you used it-if it's 'just' a scarehead name for something else then maybe you shouldn't have used it. )

I chose to give up my control and i don't regret it. I only ever need to bring it up when someone, such as yourself, gets confused about what being a stay at home mom really means in terms of 'control'.

In your own sphere, you are entirely independent; your own boss, you plan your work, your rest breaks, your daytime social engagements and everything else according to your priorities -- no-one else's -- while you make your work environment into what you want it to be.

Can your husband say the same?

Yes. He can. In his sphere he is as independent as he choses to be, just as i am.

He knows though that if he's going to be a good husband and father, he's going to have to give up some of that independance, just as I know that if i'm going to be a good stay at home mom and wife, i'm going to have to do the same.

And there's the rub. Being a 'good' husband and father isn't any easier than being a 'good' stay at home mom. Neither sphere is completely independant, completely in control, or completely without benefits and negatives to deal with.

But again, those "constant demands" fall a long way short of being required, on pain of losing your job, to show up, day after day, week after week, year after year, until you're too old to be of any use to anyone. They are "demands" that you manage according to your own priorities.

Men have the same freedom to manage their demands according to their priorities. Men are not victims of their gender any more than women are.

A discussion board thread is a commentary on the OP. To the extent that any post in this thread does not deal with the OP, it is off-topic.

I've been here long enough and followed you on enough threads Pahoran to know that you have no issues whatsoever with following tangents so this shouldn't be a problem for you.

What you counterfactally described as a construct of my own making is nothing less than what the OP was about. Therefore it is not my construct "as far as this thread is concerned."

Regards,

Pahoran

Nope, definitely a construct of your own making, as far as this thread is concerned.

[Pahoran]

That i'm having this conversation with you proves that sometimes i do. I wouldn't say often though.

Nope, i never said i didn't have any influence.

His choice of profession, for example, his choice of work ethic, his choice of the amount of schooling he has, etc. determines the amount of money i have to run the household.

All of which presumably you knew before you chose to give up work and stay home, yes?

(and if your point isn't to make men sound like arrogant condescending jerks who demean women, then the day time soap opera comment is a case of friendly fire that you might want to avoid in the future )

It was an example of readily available recreational entertainment. If you tell me no women ever watch them, I'll believe you.

You are really bad at this.

I'm sure you can show me how it is done.

I would do my best, but if i was in that situation and had to do my best, that wouldn't negate the fact that i had no control over those issues i mentioned to begin with.

I didn't say you had "control" over every possible aspect of your life; nobody does. I said, and I'll say it again, that you have undiluted control over your own working environment. Women in the home are called "home makers" for a reason. By contrast, I'm not called an "office maker." My work environment is what someone else determines.

Some feminist do believe that. Just like some men believe there is nothing--nothing!--worse than a woman being in control. Let's just agree that both men and women can be jerks and we won't have to belabor the point.

I'll admit I can't imagine much worse than being under the thumb of some women of my acquaintance.

Exactly. (And i only used the word control because you used it-if it's 'just' a scarehead name for something else then maybe you shouldn't have used it. )

In which case you equivocated. As I'm sure you realise, when I said you have control over your own home and family environment, I was not imputing to you power to control the weather. I was pointing out the (rather uncontroversial) truism that your day-to-day working environment is what you make it, and not what you just have to accept because "the boss" decides all the offices are going to be painted in sand beige this year. You're the boss.

I chose to give up my control and i don't regret it. I only ever need to bring it up when someone, such as yourself, gets confused about what being a stay at home mom really means in terms of 'control'.

I don't think I'm the one who is confused.

Yes. He can. In his sphere he is as independent as he choses to be, just as i am.

Then he's a remarkably privileged individual. I arrive at the time the boss decrees, work at the desk he appoints on the tasks he assigns me, completes those tasks to his satisfaction, not mine, go home at the hour he determines, and get to take time off for my family when he says so; and that is the common lot of men -- and women -- in most workplaces.

He knows though that if he's going to be a good husband and father, he's going to have to give up some of that independance, just as I know that if i'm going to be a good stay at home mom and wife, i'm going to have to do the same.

And there's the rub. Being a 'good' husband and father isn't any easier than being a 'good' stay at home mom. Neither sphere is completely independant, completely in control, or completely without benefits and negatives to deal with.

Yes, we choose to be good at something, so we ipso facto choose do do things a certain way. And in a corporate environment that's a whole lot more constrained than it is at home.

Men have the same freedom to manage their demands according to their priorities.

No. We do not.

We don't get to set our own priorities; during the working day, we have to accept the priorities of others.

Men are not victims of their gender any more than women are.

Now you're being ridiculous. I never said that men were "victims of their gender." I merely pointed out the rather obvious truism that the price of a reliable income is a considerably reduced degree of control over the day-to-day conditions in which we work; we (and I of course include working women in this) simply have to accept whatever the boss decides is good enough.

By contrast, people (usually women, but sometimes men) who have the luxury of staying at home have considerably more control -- indeed, to all intents and purposes, undiluted control -- over the conditions in which they work; namely, their home environment. They order their day according to what matters to them, and not according to the corporate requirements of Nulb, Inc.

I've been here long enough and followed you on enough threads Pahoran to know that you have no issues whatsoever with following tangents so this shouldn't be a problem for you.

I'm sure you have. I follow tangents when they interest me and/or seem relevant enough to the topic of the thread.

Nope, definitely a construct of your own making, as far as this thread is concerned.

I regret, Bluebell, that I am unable to accept that you have any grounds for a good faith belief in what you assert.

Here is the link referenced in the OP:

http://youtu.be/vp8tToFv-bA

This is what the thread is about, Bluebell. Now, go ahead and try to tell me that that doesn't argue that "men are expected to put themselves dead last -- and women are not."

Go on, Bluebell: just try.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Deborah]

It would be nice to be able to claim that men screw up women's lives so much more than women screwing up men's lives, but I am afraid that women are just as good at doing it as men, just in different ways....our culture having given men and women a different set of tools for torturing each other.

No doubt. I've known women who treat their husbands abominably. I think one of the problems for women is when the man leaves out of the blue, and she has been a stay-at-home mom she's pretty much screwed, even with an education if she's been out of the work place for a number of years. Not so with the man who is already established, though for him the challenge is now having to give up a great deal of income to support two households if she's not working (unless like my ex he just doesn't pay child support).

[katherine the great]

That i'm having this conversation with you proves that sometimes i do. I wouldn't say often though.

You're doing great Bluebell! I "unfriended" most of the haters on this board quite a while ago so I usually don't even see Pahoran's posts, but since he blasphemed my name in this thread, (can't hide the quotes) my curiosity was piqued, and so I've been following it. Carry on!

[Pahoran]

You're doing great Bluebell! I "unfriended" most of the haters on this board quite a while ago so I usually don't even see Pahoran's posts,

I'm sorry, I fail to see the connection between the two things.

but since he blasphemed my name in this thread, (can't hide the quotes) my curiosity was piqued, and so I've been following it. Carry on!

Carry on what? Brazenly misrepresenting the state of the discussion?

Regards,

Pahoran

Pahoran has left the building.

[Duncan]

You're doing great Bluebell! I "unfriended" most of the haters on this board quite a while ago so I usually don't even see Pahoran's posts, but since he blasphemed my name in this thread, (can't hide the quotes) my curiosity was piqued, and so I've been following it. Carry on!

nuts, I ran out of rep. points

[bluebell]

All of which presumably you knew before you chose to give up work and stay home, yes?

As i said before, i chose to stay home, so yes, some of the things i did know before. Not all of them though. Some things are impossible to understand without trying to do them first (as your posts illustrate).

It was an example of readily available recreational entertainment. If you tell me no women ever watch them, I'll believe you.

My mother used to watch them (but then again, she was never a stay at home mom-she always worked full time and still does).

I don't personally know any women who watch them though. I've never seen one.

I'm sure you can show me how it is done.

Watch and learn then.

I didn't say you had "control" over every possible aspect of your life; nobody does.

Well, good. We both agree then that you never said that.

I said, and I'll say it again, that you have undiluted control over your own working environment. Women in the home are called "home makers" for a reason. By contrast, I'm not called an "office maker." My work environment is what someone else determines.

As is mine. The environment that i work in is determined by the choices of someone else.

I'll admit I can't imagine much worse than being under the thumb of some women of my acquaintance.

I'm sure the feeling is mutual.

However, i agree with your point. Some people make horrible bosses, whether they are the 'boss' of a family or the boss of a work situation, and in such cases, everyone suffers.

In which case you equivocated. As I'm sure you realise, when I said you have control over your own home and family environment, I was not imputing to you power to control the weather.

Yes, thank you for stating the obvious.

I was pointing out the (rather uncontroversial) truism that your day-to-day working environment is what you make it, and not what you just have to accept because "the boss" decides all the offices are going to be painted in sand beige this year. You're the boss.

I have to work within the parameters that someone else has determined, just like the person who must work in an all beige office.

[bluebell]

I don't think I'm the one who is confused.

I realize that.

Then he's a remarkably privileged individual. I arrive at the time the boss decrees, work at the desk he appoints on the tasks he assigns me, completes those tasks to his satisfaction, not mine, go home at the hour he determines, and get to take time off for my family when he says so; and that is the common lot of men -- and women -- in most workplaces

Then quit. That's always an option available to you.

Just like being a really bad stay at home mom and wife is always an option for me (or not being one at all). Like i said, we are both as independant as we chose to be. I never claimed that my loss of control was against my will. Your's isn't against your will either.

Yes, we choose to be good at something, so we ipso facto choose do do things a certain way. And in a corporate environment that's a whole lot more constrained than it is at home.

Not really. If i want to be good at 'being at home' then i have to do things a certain way as well. I take my cues from outside sources, just like you do.

No. We do not.

Yep, you do.

We don't get to set our own priorities; during the working day, we have to accept the priorities of others.

And accepting the priorities of someone else is the priority that you have set for yourself.

Work, at the specific job you are working at and under the constraints it entails, is the priority you have chosen. You obviously can't choose the consequences of setting the priority that you have, but that's not the same as not being able to choose what your priorities will be.

Now you're being ridiculous. I never said that men were "victims of their gender."

It seemed to be implied, sorry.

I merely pointed out the rather obvious truism that the price of a reliable income is a considerably reduced degree of control over the day-to-day conditions in which we work; we (and I of course include working women in this) simply have to accept whatever the boss decides is good enough

You really don't.

It speaks well of you that you will do a job that isn't awesomely great just to support your family (i'm married to the same type of man and i can't say enough how grateful i'm am for his sacrifices) but you don't have to. You can do something else.

Yes, your family will suffer, but the choice is there (and i know a couple of active LDS guys who have made that choice, so i'm speaking for their wives right now, moreso than for myself).

Like i said, it's the decision of whether or not we will be a good husband/wife and good father/mother that limits our choices, not whether or not we work in an office or at home.

By contrast, people (usually women, but sometimes men) who have the luxury of staying at home have considerably more control -- indeed, to all intents and purposes, undiluted control -- over the conditions in which they work; namely, their home environment. They order their day according to what matters to them, and not according to the corporate requirements of Nulb, Inc.

I have a friend who has a husband who refuses to work (because he's too good for the jobs available to him). If you could go over and see her 'home environment' you would understand just how unrealistic your concept of control and being a stay at home mom is. Her home environment is what he choses for her, through his actions.

I regret, Bluebell, that I am unable to accept that you have any grounds for a good faith belief in what you assert.

I agree, it is sad.

Here is the link referenced in the OP:

http://youtu.be/vp8tToFv-bA

This is what the thread is about, Bluebell. Now, go ahead and try to tell me that that doesn't argue that "men are expected to put themselves dead last -- and women are not."

Go on, Bluebell: just try.

Regards,

Pahoran

Are you double dog daring me?

The link does argue that. But you stated it as a fact and that's the construct you created. Like i said, it was the absolutes in your statement that i disagreed with.

[MorningStar]

Men and women both work hard all day whether the mom stays at home or not. When husband and wife are home, the work isn't done. A man shouldn't get to declare his day over with when there are children to bathe, feed, put to bed, and help with homework. To declare that women cook, clean, and take care of the children and that the dad only brings home the bacon leaves the mom doing more work. It's like saying Dad's hours are 9-5 while Mom's hours are 5am-9pm, or sometimes 24 hours a day depending on the children.

Also, I do believe some toddlers are harder than a full-time job. Depends on the toddler.

[Cobalt-70]

It isn't patriarchy, which apparently to some must be a dirty word, even though we look to Heavenly Father as the patriarch. Perhaps society chooses words to mean what they want them to mean? Feminism can indeed confine women. I have seen how women who chose to raise their children at home were considered "less" than those working. Is that partriarchy? Or is it feminism? It is an aspect of feminism that is wrong and bad for all concerned.

As to men being the supreme authority, I would state that righteous men do not use their position in such a way.

According to feminism, that the patriarchy is nice doesn't make it less of a patriarchy, just as a nice dictator doesn't convert the political structure to a democracy. Indeed, focus on the Heavenly Father, with neglect of the Heavenly Mother (because she is subordinate, subservient, too fragile, too much on a "pedestal," or whatever other Mormon rationales exist out there in the wild) is a theological patriarchy. The Bible and the Book of Mormon are soundly patriarchal, and hardly ever mention the unique concerns or perspectives of women. Is that an undesired result? Your answer to that question depends on whether or not you are theological feminist.

[Cobalt-70]

I think what needs to be kept in mind here as well is that while first wave feminism was a social and cultural movement having broad support and balanced, reasoned aims and goals, second and third wave feminism is an ideolgy, and an ideology in the modern sense, and hence in direct competition with the gospel for intellectual/psychological alligience.

It, like other 20th century ideologies, takes few, if any prisoners.

If you call efforts to reduce the subjugation of women an ideology, then maybe so. But patriarchy, the effort to keep women within their "proper role," is an ideology as well.