Unintended Consequences Of Gender Bias In The Lds Church

[mercyngrace]

Are women more spiritual, more charitable, smarter than men? It is clear that some members of the church so believe. Yesterday in church, this idea was taught not once but three times by three different individuals, two of whom were male. As a mother of sons, this gender bias in favor of women disturbs me greatly. I actually composed an email to send to one of the speakers but decided to err on the side of mercy since I've put my foot in my mouth at the pulpit and in front of the classroom more times than I care to remember.

Below is the content of the email, it explains my position. The questions for discussion are these:

Do you believe that women are innately smarter, more charitable, and more spiritual than men?

What authoritative evidence validates your position (statements by GAs, scriptures, etc, not anecdotes)?

Have you heard this sentiment expressed in church by others to the extent that it may indicate a widespread belief?

Brother HCSpeaker,

I appreciate your visit to our ward today and the sentiments you expressed about the divine nature of women. I was hoping to catch you after the meeting to share a few thoughts but missed you. I hope you don't mind that I got your email from the online stake directory and reached out in this manner.

Please know that I am sharing my thoughts with you as a mother of three priceless and amazing young men and one beautiful and beloved daughter.

There seems to have developed a cultural notion in the church that women are more spiritual than men. I have spent a little time studying the genesis of this idea in LDS thought and know that statements by some church authorities, slight, gender-based, distinctions in temple rites, and cultural treatment of Heavenly Mother have all been used to justify this elevated view of womanhood. I wholeheartedly agree with your father that the women of the church are key to its growth and spiritual health - mothers are generally the keepers of the hearth, even those who work outside the home.

Acknowledging the elevated role of women however, does not necessitate denigrating men. Saying that women are "more" spiritual, "more" compassionate, or "more" charitable, and certainly saying outright, as you did today, that "men are stupid" not only unjustly exalts women but it sends the message to impressionable young men such as my sons that they are less than their sisters.

This is simply untrue. And as a mother of sons, it is heartbreaking to hear this message in church.

I devote my days to teaching my sons that they are a priceless heritage, a royal priesthood, and of incalculable worth. I try to teach them that all of God's children, rich, poor, Jew, Greek, bond, free, and yes, male and female are entitled to the same privileges, and worthy to access the same spiritual gifts.

We may be different by nature in some aspects but not in our ability to reach the divine, not in our ability to make righteous choices, and certainly not in our ability to be charitable. Charity incarnate was housed in the body of a young, Jewish male.

Please know that, as a woman, I appreciate the efforts of men in the church to value my gender and role. But I beg of you, as a mother, please do not do this at the expense of my sons. Please do not send the subtle or explicit message that they are stupid and less able to be Christ-like because of some imagined gender related flaw in nature. This message plants a small seed of self-doubt that has the potential to bloom in later years to self-justification in sin. After all, boys will be boys, right? They really can't help themselves. This ideological relic of Victorian society also places an unrealistic expectation upon our young women, the weight of which can be overbearing and counterproductive causing them to feel a disparate excess of guilt and shame when they err because they suppose themselves to have fallen from the height of a pedestal that was unreasonably high at the start. Yet another unintended consequence of this notion is that it potentially lowers expectations of male behavior in the minds of the women they later marry. You can imagine what an unhealthy and lopsided relationship such a theology would create in a marriage.

No. Stupidity is a human condition and men are no more prone to the weaknesses of mortality than women. They are every bit as capable of being loving. nurturing, kind, and charitable. They are just as valuable and their role is just as significant.

Sin has no gender bias. Temptations are not limited to men. And the fall, mortal stupidity included, applies to the whole of humankind.

Thank you for the time, talent, and energy you devote to the Lord's kingdom. May God continue to bless you and your family,

Sister Mercyngrace

PS Brother HCSpeaker, I want you to know that my son's deacon quorum advisor today, following in the same line of thought you expressed, told my son and his peers that "Women are better than men" and that the sealer who married him and his wife explicitly said the same. Ordinarily, I do not write to speakers or teachers to express disagreement but this belief seems to be widespread and I feel strongly that it sends a damaging message to our sons, sets a low bar, and creates an environment where sin may be justifiable and spiritual mediocrity expected. Rather, let us open the minds of all God's children to their divine potential and recount to them the story of their creation in the image of God, for "male and female created He them."

Edited May 3, 2012 by mercyngrace

[Hamba Tuhan]

Do you believe that women are innately smarter, more charitable, and more spiritual than men?

No.

Have you heard this sentiment expressed in church by others to the extent that it may indicate a widespread belief?

I heard it last year for the first time in ages, spoken by our mission president and a member of our area presidency in the same fireside. Having driven 300km to take some of my stalwart priests to the fireside, I was beyond disappointed. Both men, however, are American, and it seems possible that this is an American cultural phenomenon?

[stelf]

I have to say that I wholeheartedly agree with you. I myself have expressed this view in the past when teaching in my priesthood quorum or speaking in sacrament meeting. Of course, it was meant simply to teach that we should respect women and the gifts that they have, but I agree that it can place a burden on women. If a woman struggles, does that now mean that there is something wrong with her. Similarly, it implies that men, no matter what they do, will never have that spirituality.

Thank you for expressing these ideas so clearly.

[CA Steve]

Excellent post M&G.

[Buzzard]

Don't underestimate the fact that us men can skillfully use such stereotypes to justify behavior that would not be condoned, because, "hey were just guys, we can't help it".

I see SOME of this in the church. I see a ton of these sentiments in the world.

[thesometimesaint]

[wenglund]

Do you believe that women are innately smarter, more charitable, and more spiritual than men?

I believe women tend to be smarter in terms of the "whats" of life, whereas men tend to be smarter in terms of the "whys." For this reason I also believe that women tend to be more charitable and spiritual in a superficial sense, whereas men tend to be more charitable and spiritual in an in-depth sense--as may be demonstrated by the reactions to this post.

What authoritative evidence validates your position (statements by GAs, scriptures, etc, not anecdotes)?

No LDS sources come to mind. However, according to the Talmud, women have greater faith, greater powers of discernment, and are more tenderhearted than men. (see HERE)

"According to traditional Judaism, women are endowed with a greater degree of "binah" (intuition, understanding, intelligence) than men. The rabbis inferred this from the fact that woman was "built" (Gen. 2:22) rather than "formed" (Gen. 2:7), and the Hebrew root of "build" has the same consonants as the word "binah." It has been said that the matriarchs (Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel and Leah) were superior to the patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) in prophecy. Women did not participate in the idolatry regarding the Golden Calf. See Rosh Chodesh below. Some traditional sources suggest that women are closer to G-d's ideal than men."(The Role of Women in Judaism)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Log]

Make of this what you will.

A few remarks on woman. She is the glory of the man, but she is not at the head in all the creations of God. Pertaining to his children on this earth, she is not accountable for the sins that are in the world. God requires obedience for man, he is Lord of creation, and at his hand the sins of the world will be required. Could the female portions of the human family fully understand this, they would see that they are objects of tender mercy, and greatly blessed. This no doubt on a casual view appears to my sisters a glorious doctrine for them; and some might be tempted in their ignorance to take unwarrantable liberties, corrupt themselves with sin, and then take shelter under the doctrine that man alone is culpable for the sins they commit.

There are, however, restrictions placed upon woman. I will quote a passage of scripture to illustrate this. "And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbor's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death." When the crime was thus atoned for, then was she free, and prepared to receive in full the blessings she otherwise would have received had she not committed sin. Women must atone for sins committed by the volition of her own choice, but she will never become an angel to the Devil, and sin so far as to place herself beyond the reach of mercy. She will suffer all that she has strength to suffer according to the venality of her sins.

[Duncan]

http://www.lds.org/general-conference/1985/10/spirituality?lang=eng

I love this talk by Elder Oaks about spirituality! I have a question how would you diplomatically say that their is no gender difference when it comes to spirituality? as a guy you could be branded as a mysogynist

[Senator]

Make of this what you will.

He was speaking as a man.

Whether there is any truth to his ideas?,,...well as you say, make of it as you will.

[wenglund]

He was speaking as a man.

I am not sure. However, I have no doubt that you are here speaking as a man.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[bluebell]

He was speaking as a man.

Whether there is any truth to his ideas?,,...well as you say, make of it as you will.

I'm inclined to agree with you. His words seem to very much match the gender notions of his time period, but beyond that, has any other prophet of God taught such? Do the teachings of church right now mirror his words (do they teach that only men can become sons of perdition, for example)?

If not, then that would seem to me to be strong evidence that this was BY's opinion, and not doctrine.

[thesometimesaint]

Women no less or more than men live in a fallen world.

[JDave]

mercyngrace,

I agree and thought you did a marvelous job putting it in words.

I think that the teaching is a manifestation of an over-correction from earlier cultural views that were harsher and more denigrating for women. I don't know if one could trace the curve of the swing in teachings by way of documented statements, but it would be intriguing to do so. It is doubtful that the change was made quickly, and more likely that the original intent of any changes was to emphasize that women are just as capable and spiritual as men are.

It is also likely that the over-correction was initiated by such simple things as self-deprecating humor from male leaders in the church. I would guess that at some point that joking was taken to be doctrinal.

[BCSpace]

I've not heard in the Church that women are smarter than men. I do disagree with the notion that women are more spiritual than men. I think men typically go longer without a desire for spiritual recharge (Church or "churchy" stuff) whether they need it or not. Men are typically not prone to much speaking or tolerance for lecturing which means that Church as currently structured is more for women than men. We can grunt out the doctrine in 10 mins and be ready to go as far as doing our duty. "Just do it dammit" is our Golden SWK.

[MorningStar]

In a singles ward I was in, a member of the bishopric blurted out during Gospel Doctrine, "Women are better than men! They are naturally more spiritual. If it weren't for the priesthood, we would be good for nothing!" The girls' jaws dropped, some guys nodded in agreement, and a few other guys looked rather dismayed.

[Bob Crockett]

Do you believe that women are innately smarter, more charitable, and more spiritual than men?

I am not willing to rule out a "yes." it seems there are more female college students than men. I suspect that standardized college board tests show no significant differences, but I also suspect that more women then men take those tests.

My eyeball experience in small branches and large wards is that more women attend church than men, in the LDS Church. My anecdotal experience as a one-time local church leader is that divorced women are much more likely to attend services than divorced men, and that in homes where one spouse is a member and the other is not, it is much more likely that the female will attend church services when she is the LDS member, as opposed to the male attending when he's the member.

When I cast my eyeballs into Catholic churches in California, Mexico and Brazil, I see lots more women in mass and heading to confessionals than men. When I eyeball evangelical services in the U.S., I see way more women in the services than men.

As far as charitable is concerned, I have no eyeball experience.

[LDS_RM]

I believe this false teaching about genders, spirituality, and priesthood came about because a natural person was usurping the place of God in order to conjure an answer to a question only God can answer. I ha e heard this false teaching many times throughout my life. I do not believe there is a doctrinal basis for it, nor do I believe there is an authoritative source for it. Concerning the BY quote posted by log, it does not seem to pass the Doctrine test outlined by the Church

[Calm]

Other cultures have men attending religious ceremonies more than women so I don't see attendance as an indicator of much more than liking to attend church services at this point. One has to remove cultural influences, which I don't see possible at this point.

As far as college, not so long ago it was the reverse, so that would seem to be highly cultural influenced. One would have to remove that variable at least before being able to draw conclusions there.

Charity, I see women more involved with community organized events, but men are just as prone imo to do independent charity so I don't see any significant difference demonstrated there either.

[Calm]

Many people tend to judge other people less harshly than they do themselves and love tends to inflate the value of the other in the lover's eyes, thus their spouse appears to them more spiritual, etc.

Since men have generally been the speakers more often at higher levels than women, we have heard mentions of spiritually impressive wives more often than we have heard stories of spiritually impressive husbands. Over time, I think this judgment has been assumed for all women in general.

I don't buy it having heard it from the other side, plus having observed both men and women in action.

Women have tested as more prone to engage in visible religious activities such as attending church in Western cultures, but one should not assume that visible, external spiritual activities correspond directly to invisible, internal spiritual attitudes.

Edited April 30, 2012 by calmoriah

[Nofear]

I have long disagreed with female worship where we try to put women on a pedestal there to be awed by men. I also see the pedestal used as a way justifying gender mores that are cultural and not intrinsic (e.g. you're more spiritual and (unspoken) here, do the laundry) as well as to falsely justify gender roles that are institutional (e.g. women are naturally more spiritual so men need the priesthood).

But, gender bias favoring men exists too. Who has not heard somebody say that Priesthood Session in General Conference is always the best session? Or what generated the need to have significant time spent in the Worldwide Leadership training sessions discussing the need for sisters voices to be heard and respected in the councils of the Church?

[SamIam]

</p>

Make of this what you will.

I always appreciate Logs comments and observations. I think they are often not given enough credence.

Brigham Young said:

A few remarks on woman. She is the glory of the man, but she is not at the head in all the creations of God. Pertaining to his children on this earth, she is not accountable for the sins that are in the world. God requires obedience for man, he is Lord of creation, and at his hand the sins of the world will be required. Could the female portions of the human family fully understand this, they would see that they are objects of tender mercy, and greatly blessed. This no doubt on a casual view appears to my sisters a glorious doctrine for them; and some might be tempted in their ignorance to take unwarrantable liberties, corrupt themselves with sin, and then take shelter under the doctrine that man alone is culpable for the sins they commit.

There are, however, restrictions placed upon woman. I will quote a passage of scripture to illustrate this. "And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbor's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death." When the crime was thus atoned for, then was she free, and prepared to receive in full the blessings she otherwise would have received had she not committed sin. Women must atone for sins committed by the volition of her own choice, but she will never become an angel to the Devil, and sin so far as to place herself beyond the reach of mercy. She will suffer all that she has strength to suffer according to the venality of her sins.

It always fascinates me how you can share a verse or a scripture from a source that the LDS community claims to sustain as a more probably correct venue of truth than the average members claims to be and it is so casually tossed aside in favor of their personal view. Of course the main caveat is that that is "his interpretation" or the thought of the most abused statement in my opinion of all in LDS circles "only a prophet when speaking as a prophet..."

While Brigham is here expanding on a prophets perception so many will reduce it too "speaking as a man" or again he in not a prophet unless speaking as such. For myself I have taken the approach that they or the scriptures are always a superior source of truth than I am until I understand precisely the spirit that provided the inspiration to the prophet speaking in either source. When I feel I have comprehended that spirit then I feel comfortable speaking from a point of confidence that the ones who want to qualify scriptural or prophetic utterance find very uncomfortable.

I understand what Brigham is speaking to in this instance. It is not a full treatment of the subject but it is enough that if one really wanted to understand they could do so by furthering their efforts in research and seeking out all of the quotes and scriptures on the subject and letting the spirit guide your understanding.

The temple is the best source but as many things there it is very nuanced. However the essence of that material and the other material of quotes from general authorities and scripture.

I think Lehi's tree of life vision encapsulates the essence of my feelings. As you read the journey keep in mind this is a temple imagery and we should see ourselves as Lehi in that he represents Lehi in the temple seeing himself as Adam.

The journey then is described as Adam's journey to partake from the tree of life which was barred him originally after being expelled from the Garden but by virtue of growing spiritually and having the ordinances provided he is prepared to once again partake of the fruit of the tree of life.

Using Lehi as our guide notice that the whole journey is what he sees. A dark and dreary wilderness and waste, a journey of many hours, mists of darkness, a rod of iron, others on the same journey, a spacious building and its various influences etc. etc.

Once Lehi finally gets through it all and partakes the fruit he turns around a with energy and desire calls to his family to join him. In one verse he says that those that were willing "did come unto me and partake of the fruit also" The chapter does not expand on their journeys through mists of darkness, or rods of iron, or spacious buildings or muddy waters etc. Why? Because they have been on the journey with him. In the imagery of an eternal family where the father leads and presides and guides as he is guided by the Lord this whole family has been waiting on the father to get it understood. If your character and countenance easily recognizes the things of eternity then you join with the presiding priesthood leader who has struggled so and your journey is inclusive in his. If though, you rebel from the pattern after having been shown the way then you simply have begun a separate journey with your family and wives and children and are as Laman and Lemuel. Beginning again at the mists of darkness and the whole deal. Laman and Lemuel are men who represent the collective whole of the journeys their families will be required to take. Sadly in my life and perhaps many of us may say the same, I have started on the journey without having had the understanding of exactly what path to travel. My wife and children have been required to travel the path with me, but the pattern is it requires the father to partake and then lead his family. This isn't an exact pattern but if you wait I will get to the point and it will fit together better as a general rule of how it works.

Sarah's journey to the tree is not described in the vision. When her husband finally gets there she is simply asked to join him and she does so. Perfectly in accordance with the first oaths a husband and wife make in the temple. Up until that moment her journey has been his. In many cases she has provided the struggle that Lehi had to learn to overcome as in the murmuring when the children don't get back with the plates in time for dinner. For must of us as in their case we don't realize that the burden is different for a man and a women.

A women's nature is such that by virtue of their gender they are more naturally capable of fulfilling their role. They possess the selflessness to give everything to rearing children. They are naturally more prone to persuasion, long-suffering, gentleness, meekness love unfeigned, and to kindness. All of the traits that a priesthood holder is required to achieve before he can lay claim to the powers of heaven a women possesses as a function of their very nature in their roles of wives and mothers.

However, a man's role, which it requires those same talents, is a role of presiding. He is born to this privilege as much linked to his gender as a mothers is to hers. However, as the verses point out the risk of being at the top of the food chain per se is that it will go to their head, and sadly "as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they begin to exercise unrighteous dominion".

We as men seem to have a nature that is not so well attuned to the demands of heaven and instead we must plod the journey of a dark and dreary wilderness and waste, a journey of many hours, mists of darkness, a rod of iron, others on the same journey, a spacious building and its various influences etc. etc. All the while subduing our natural tendency to abuse our role while all the while our wives are waiting. And yes sometimes by the very design of God we may see them as the very obstacle that we have to kick against to reach our objectives of persuasion, long-suffering, gentleness, meekness love unfeigned, and to kindness.

What better way to subdue our nature than to be challenged from time to time to be quite and listen, to be nurturing and patient when our wives are excited and anxious, to moderate the peace in our home by being a stable flow that calms and directs as opposed to intimidates and demands. We can as we all know intimidate - we tend to be bigger more powerful and stronger and louder and more resistant to emotional attacks and more insensitive. We can cultivate that instead but these types are more inclined to grab a chain saw and chop down that tree of life rather than partake of its fruit.

I have recently begun to recognize that a woman's status after the fall was not what we all focus on - she partakes of the fruit and so she gets the number two position - this is a mistaken perception. It is a temporary condition that will not always be so in the way we perceive it at this time that is strictly designed to somewhat slow her down just a touch to not lead out and get things done faster than her husband can figure out what needs to be done. In the long run for me, it is not that women are more righteous than men but simply that the righteous men that are worthy of righteous women are fewer in number. As well I feel that they are righteous in different ways that complement the thought of two halves being as one whole.

He has to learn to preside, and in order to fulfill God's commandment to multiply and replenish the eternities he has to get it figured and in the right order - while she waits and waits and waits. And if she waits too long then as the men are warned she will still have been true to her nature and she will be given to another who is worthy and has learned to properly preside in the eternities. Then someone else will benefit from the natural blessing it is to be a women whose very nature aspires to heaven, whose very heart beats to the rhythm of a Goddess and whose spirit waits to soar with a God to preside at her side. However, many more men will fail to learn the duties of their role while women so naturally fulfill theirs. And while these men are called, they will not be chosen and their wives need only wait so long before they will wait no more but shall have the restraints of this mortal existence burst to appear in the glory of the chosen they have become. It will feel better in the long run if we as men don't make them wait too long...

Edited April 30, 2012 by SamIam

[TruthSeeker24]

Bluntly put, yes, I do believe women are generally more righteous than men. I also believe there are a lot more righteous women than there are men. I do not believe women are held accountable to the degree than men are, as stated by Brigham Young in an earlier post to this thread. Yes, I believe women tend to be more loving and charitable as well. However, that is not to say that there are men who are just as righteous. My only argument would be in the general sense of it. Basically, there are MORE righteous women, and women do tend to be better than men in regards to morality and love. But there are men who are just as loving and righteous as the best of women, if not more. I do find it annoying that LDS men tend to place a huge emphasize on how great women are compared to men, as I do not believe that women SHOULD be better, and it usually feels like the guy saying it is only saying it to make himself appear humble. I hope I don't offend anyone for saying this, but I believe a man should be more righteous than his wife. I think men in general are poorly depicted in the media. In cartoons, they are usually blubbering idiots, and in magazines and pop culture, their sex craved individuals who can't take 2 seconds to get their mind off their rock hard 6 pack abs. Masculinity today is almost dead as far as I'm concerned. I do appreciate the question that this thread poses, as it seeks to keep everyone in a lowly state and humble, but at the same time, I can't help but feel that women are generally more righteous than men.

[Nofear]

In a similar vein, I suppose we ought to be careful not to confuse a greater ability to be empathetic and sympathetic (which does appear to be a gender distinction) with being more charitable and loving.

[wenglund]

I believe this false teaching about genders, spirituality, and priesthood came about because a natural person was usurping the place of God in order to conjure an answer to a question only God can answer.

Ironically, your post is a case in point.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-