The Theology Of Patriarchy Cannot Be Changed.

[mfbukowski]

That's not the issue.  They can be 100% exactly equal in power and in authority, but that doesn't mean both preside.  All 15 Apostles have been ordained to the exact same power and authority, but one has been set apart to preside over the Church as head.

 

If both Father and Mother preside together that leads to only two logical options:

 

1. They NEVER disagree.  They are in such perfect harmony of spirit that they are in fact one unit, making the entire discussion moot.

2. They DO disagree but because they have exactly equal authority and power, neither one can get their way nor override the other.  So no conclusion can be reached.  This makes a mockery of Godhood.

 

Talk about "making reason stare".  And based on the fact that we are commanded to pray to the Father, not the mother and other similar things, it's pretty obvious who presides.

Yep.

 

I cannot for the life of me see what is wrong with this, and neither, I am thankful to say, does the church as far as I know.

 

I really don't even know why this would raise a fuss on a Mormon board.

[mfbukowski]

That's not the issue.  They can be 100% exactly equal in power and in authority, but that doesn't mean both preside.  All 15 Apostles have been ordained to the exact same power and authority, but one has been set apart to preside over the Church as head.

 

If both Father and Mother preside together that leads to only two logical options:

 

1. They NEVER disagree.  They are in such perfect harmony of spirit that they are in fact one unit, making the entire discussion moot.

2. They DO disagree but because they have exactly equal authority and power, neither one can get their way nor override the other.  So no conclusion can be reached.  This makes a mockery of Godhood.

 

Talk about "making reason stare".  And based on the fact that we are commanded to pray to the Father, not the mother and other similar things, it's pretty obvious who presides.

Yep.

 

I cannot for the life of me see what is wrong with this, and neither, I am thankful to say, does the church as far as I know.

 

I really don't even know why this would raise a fuss on a Mormon board.

[jkwilliams]

Of course I never said any of this about authority.  Authority in the gospel is servitude but you would not understand that.

 

I understand exactly how authority in the gospel works, thank you very much.

 

I keep coming back to a conversation I had with my daughter when she was about 17. She asked me why Heavenly Father likes boys more than He likes girls. I said that wasn't so, that Heavenly Father loves all of us equally. She asked why boys can do more than girls can. I said that girls can do whatever they wish to do. She replied that girls cannot pass the sacrament or serve as a bishop or perform any priesthood ordinance. Her mother told her that women had the responsibility of bearing and raising children, whereas men have the priesthood. She wasn't buying that. I gave her an answer much the same as you give above: the priesthood is less about "authority" than it is about a responsibility to serve. She wasn't buying that, either, as she correctly pointed out that if God loves us equally He expects us to serve each other equally. In the end, I said, "Just because the church teaches something, it doesn't mean it's right or that it reflects what Heavenly Father thinks." She is active in the church, and I have no idea what she thinks about Kate Kelly, but she has reminded me of that conversation several times to tell me that it helped her maintain her faith in the church. I know, what kind of apostate helps his child stay in the church?

[jkwilliams]

Such as ensuring that both spouses hold priesthood office.

Please don't put words into my mouth.

 

 

 

Sounds very General Conference-esque to me!

How disturbing. 

 

 

No, each 1 realizes he/she is only 1/2 and 1/2 + 1/2 = 1.

I think it's more 1x1=1.

 

 

It's still 1/2 + 1/2 = 1 and very joyous. Unless your quotation marks around happy is to convey something other than "happy."

What I meant is that making yourself responsible for the other's mental or emotional state ("happiness") is a recipe for failure.

Edited June 26, 2014 by jkwilliams

[mfbukowski]

If I said what he did, I would hope that my wife didn't have a weapon handy. Of course, I would never say something as disrespectful as that to my wife or my daughters.

My wife and I have talked about this over the years (we've been married almost 27 years), and we both agree that not only is it not either one's job to make the other one happy, but it is impossible. My happiness does not depend on what my wife does, and hers does not depend on me. Making someone else responsible for your own happiness is a recipe for disaster.

We serve each other, we work together as a partnership, we grow in love for each other every day. That's how it's supposed to work, and it does beautifully for us.

Semantics as usual.  Of course no one can make you happy but yourself.  You twist everything.

 

You make the nehor look like an amateur.  (I hope he sees this)

[Zakuska]

The towel thing: Instead of just doing it "her" way she wants you to see that as the "best" way to store the towels, because to her "that" way is the "best" way to store the towels. If you could think of a "better" way to store the towels she would probably be open to "that" way of doing it, though. And knowing the way your towels should be put away doesn't mean you're always going to do it that way, automatically, as if it's never going to take any effort on your part to put them away. But you could at least agree on the "best" way to put towels away, regardless of who came up with the idea to begin with.

Why people are using the priesthood to put towels away is anyones guess?!

 

And if a Man pulled rank and said his way was the best way and because he presides in the family because of his Priesthood so his way is the way the towels are going to be put away and that's final.  he'd be in danger of Unrighteous Dominion. This would also go for any other domestic dispute out there.

 

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1989/07/unrighteous-dominion?lang=eng

 

Since my wife does the Laundry (She's getting our kids to do their own now) I let her rule the roost in that regard and put the Laundry where ever she likes. One habit she had though that did really frustrate me when we first go married and I probably didn't handle it very well was that she would hang clothes in the closet but sometimes hang the hanger on the back side of the bar with the hook facing the wrong direction making it nearly impossible to take clothes out of the closet.

She doesn't do that any more.

[jkwilliams]

Semantics as usual.  Of course no one can make you happy but yourself.  You twist everything.

 

You make the nehor look like an amateur.  (I hope he sees this)

When someone says things I find appalling, I will speak up. I'm sorry that you can't be bothered to respond with anything of substance.

[mfbukowski]

I had an LDS commenter on my blog say that "the little lady" (referring to Kate Kelly) obviously had problems being around "strong male figures." That's certainly less subtle than what you describe, but I have definitely seen the subtle disregard for women. In my mission there was a definite attitude of superiority toward sister missionaries, which I never understood, as they worked at least as hard as we did and were often more effective. I have had to adjust my own attitudes because without even noticing it, I saw some of the same stuff in my own life. It's probably still there.

But invisible to the Model of Male Modernity

 

Gosh I wonder why.  That is the whole point- you just conceded it right there.  Poof.

[jkwilliams]

But invisible to the Model of Male Modernity

 

Gosh I wonder why.  That is the whole point- you just conceded it right there.  Poof.

It's not invisible, just takes a little effort to recognize what I'm doing and try to correct it.

What exactly is the Model of Male Modernity, anyway, and how does it relate to patriarchal theology?

[mfbukowski]

I understand exactly how authority in the gospel works, thank you very much.

 

I keep coming back to a conversation I had with my daughter when she was about 17. She asked me why Heavenly Father likes boys more than He likes girls. I said that wasn't so, that Heavenly Father loves all of us equally. She asked why boys can do more than girls can. I said that girls can do whatever they wish to do. She replied that girls cannot pass the sacrament or serve as a bishop or perform any priesthood ordinance. Her mother told her that women had the responsibility of bearing and raising children, whereas men have the priesthood. She wasn't buying that. I gave her an answer much the same as you give above: the priesthood is less about "authority" than it is about a responsibility to serve. She wasn't buying that, either, as she correctly pointed out that if God loves us equally He expects us to serve each other equally. In the end, I said, "Just because the church teaches something, it doesn't mean it's right or that it reflects what Heavenly Father thinks." She is active in the church, and I have no idea what she thinks about Kate Kelly, but she has reminded me of that conversation several times to tell me that it helped her maintain her faith in the church. I know, what kind of apostate helps his child stay in the church?

Is this the model of a substantive point?  What does it have to do with anything?  It shows you are a good dad.  Good for you.  We are all impressed.

[Senator]

Is this the model of a substantive point?  What does it have to do with anything?  It shows you are a good dad.  Good for you.  We are all impressed.

 

If you would like for some not to respond to your posts, make a list and maybe your request will be granted.

[jkwilliams]

Is this the model of a substantive point?  What does it have to do with anything?  It shows you are a good dad.  Good for you.  We are all impressed.

It's not the model of anything, and I'm not exactly the Model of a Modern Dad, to steal a phrase. You suggested that I don't understand how authority works in the church. I do, actually, and I gave an example of how inadequately the position you staked out responds to women's feeling subordinated in LDS culture and practice.

[mfbukowski]

It's not invisible, just takes a little effort to recognize what I'm doing and try to correct it.

What exactly is the Model of Male Modernity, anyway, and how does it relate to patriarchal theology?

Look in the mirror.  You are it.  You are learning as we all are, and it doesn't come naturally does it?  THAT is the point John.  Like it or not you ARE a patriarch because you are trying to change and become a better man in relation to women even if it does not come naturally

 

It will never come naturally because we have eons of evolution behind that word "naturally"

 

THAT is the only point. 

[mfbukowski]

If you would like for some not to respond to your posts, make a list and maybe your request will be granted.

Been there done that with John.  Doesn't work.

[mfbukowski]

It's not the model of anything, and I'm not exactly the Model of a Modern Dad, to steal a phrase. You suggested that I don't understand how authority works in the church. I do, actually, and I gave an example of how inadequately the position you staked out responds to women's feeling subordinated in LDS culture and practice.

See what I mean?

Edited June 26, 2014 by mfbukowski

[jkwilliams]

Look in the mirror.  You are it.  You are learning as we all are, and it doesn't come naturally does it?  THAT is the point John.  Like it or not you ARE a patriarch because you are trying to change and become a better man in relation to women even if it does not come naturally

 

It will never come naturally because we have eons of evolution behind that word "naturally"

 

THAT is the only point.

I reject completely the notion that Western patriarchy is at all "natural" and that it cannot be changed. That has been my point all along.

[watermelongirl]

Because you can't.  There is nothing to explain.  You don't like men holding the door open for you, or that God is an exalted Human Male.?  That is demeaning?

 

Do you always throw out irrelevant fire starters?

 

Patriarchy in the church is not benevolent sexism. You insist on equating benevolent sexism with the foundations of Mormonism, and I very fundamentally disagree. You seem to have thought it through and made up your mind. Good luck on that. Breaking it down further for you really isn't worth the time it would take.

[watermelongirl]

No, she's just quiet like the rest of her female children.

 

Why is it that I feel the need to speak less about the more intelligent things around men at family gatherings because if I do, I might sound manly or macho?  Why do I feel the need to be soft spoken and quiet and sweet around them?  Speaking of my very TBM bro in laws and father in law of course.  I know it's all in my head but this has been part of my being for so long.  Do any women here feel the same, or am I an anomaly?  What is that all about?  Who or what made me feel this way?    

 

You're not an anomaly. Every family is different, and I've found that in some environments I feel more comfortable speaking my mind than in others. There are lots of different conversation patterns and topics amongst men and women that have thousands of years worth of history. It won't change over night. It is also very difficult sometimes to convey to a man what it feels like. I've had several simply dismiss it as a nonissue. It is an issue and you're not alone.

[Ahab]

You sound like someone who isn't married. This just sounds like overthinking things.

I am married, to a woman, and I believe it is impossible to overthink anything, even though not everyone will put as much thought into some things as I do.

Marriage is about partnership, and being an equal partner means you both let little things slide and you compromise on bigger issues.

I'm more into developing unity between myself and my wife with the goal of eventually being in agreement with each other about everything. Including the best way to put towels away.

Unless you have some weird compulsion to fold towels a certain way, you're best to be flexible and not worry about which way is "best."

Why would you ever put towels away in some way that is not the best way to put towels away? Are you imagining some kind of emergency which would prevent you from putting towels away the best way, maybe because you wouldn't have enough time at that moment? You could still come back later to put the towels away in the best way possible, couldn't you? What's the big deal about putting towels away in the best way possible?

Every day of a marriage you and your spouse are going to approach things differently, from the way you fold towels to the way you cook to the way you handle your finances and parenting. Having a good marriage isn't about resolving every single difference (how boring would that be?) but in appreciating each other's differences and perspectives and working together.

For me and my wife, working together and resolving differences creates unity in thought and action so that we both do and think the same things, rather than having or continuing to have disagreements or conflicting ways of doing things.

She shares her thoughts with me, and I with her, and then together we work out the best solution or agree on the same idea. And I like our way better than what you are talking about.

In a good marriage, 1+1=1. Spending all your time trying to keep the other person "happy" sounds to me like 2-1=1. I don't think that's how it's supposed to work.

Ours is more like 1 x 1 = 1, I think. We want to do only what makes both of us happy, together.

[mfbukowski]

I reject completely the notion that Western patriarchy is at all "natural" and that it cannot be changed. That has been my point all along.

Ah yes.  Western patriarchy.

 

All over the world women are free and equal and not oppressed in any way, and here we are with nasty Western patriarchy putting them down and keeping them under domination.

 

All over the world, free women are not raped or sold.  All over the world the natural course for mankind historically has been women in authority and living in freedom, except in this system of evil Western Patriarchy.

 

Bye John.

[mfbukowski]

Do you always throw out irrelevant fire starters?

Look at my siggy.  Yes, but if they are irrelevant they don't start fires.

 

If you can't stand the heat of discussion, ....

[rameumptom]

The Church does not teach patriarchy.  It does teach the Patriarchal Order.  There are some major differences in the two.

[Zakuska]

The Church does not teach patriarchy.  It does teach the Patriarchal Order.  There are some major differences in the two.

 

AMEN.

 

One of which is the intricate and eternal connection between it and the priesthood order of the matriarchy. You cant have a Patriarchy without the Matriarchy.

 

"The man is neither without the woman nor the woman without the man in the Lord"

 

LOL. Vance.  

Edited June 26, 2014 by Zakuska

[Vance]

Well sorry to reduce it to this, but we all know the saying "If Mama ain't happy, ain't nobody happy".

 

The reality is that in 80% of those secret meetings known as "High Priest's Group" that is what is talked about- keeping Mama happy, so we can be happy.  THAT is the reality of all this "sexism".  Every time a young elder gets married, everyone jokes that he is about to learn the secret of a happy marriage and that phrase IS the secret of a happy marriage.

There are ONLY TWO ways to handle a woman.

And nobody knows either one of them.

So says my evil ugly twin. He is the one standing next to me.

Edited June 26, 2014 by Vance

[Senator]

The Church does not teach patriarchy.  It does teach the Patriarchal Order.  There are some major differences in the two.

 

I'm all ears....