stemelbow Posted April 3, 2017 Posted April 3, 2017 (edited) Why? just why? Hasn't the Church tried to show that it's wanting to improve on getting a woman's voice involved? Now this? Come on. Did the Church just reveal its cards by not really caring what women have to say and whether they contribute? Edited April 3, 2017 by stemelbow 3
Gray Posted April 3, 2017 Posted April 3, 2017 1 minute ago, Judd said: What was your favorite part of Sister Jones' talk? It rubbed me the wrong way. Interestingly Pres. Uchtdorf's talk afterwards almost sounded like a rebuke of Sister Jones' message. 4
JLHPROF Posted April 3, 2017 Posted April 3, 2017 10 minutes ago, stemelbow said: Why? just why? Hasn't the Church tried to show that it's wanting to improve on getting a woman's voice involved? Now this? Come on. Did the Church just reveal its cards by not really caring what women have to say and whether they contribute? I only care what God has to say. It doesn't matter to me who he chooses to say it through. 3
stemelbow Posted April 3, 2017 Author Posted April 3, 2017 (edited) Quote What was your favorite part of Sister Jones' talk? I can't say I cared much for it--I headed to the bedroom after it to see my wife and as our eyes met we both rolled them...oops. How in the world will anyone ever see a sin resistant generation being raised? I mean we try to teach good things, but we all sin. Cute idea, but not much on content. But that's hardly the point here. Edited April 3, 2017 by stemelbow 2
stemelbow Posted April 3, 2017 Author Posted April 3, 2017 6 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: I only care what God has to say. It doesn't matter to me who he chooses to say it through. Feel free to notify me when God actually speaks through someone. I want to hear that. But I do care that only men speak at conference. I thought this was settled and we'd hear regularly from women. Now I'm not so sure. 3
Popular Post SteveO Posted April 3, 2017 Popular Post Posted April 3, 2017 16 minutes ago, stemelbow said: Feel free to notify me when God actually speaks through someone. I want to hear that. I think this is the real root of the issue here... 6
Avatar4321 Posted April 3, 2017 Posted April 3, 2017 20 minutes ago, stemelbow said: Feel free to notify me when God actually speaks through someone. I want to hear that. But I do care that only men speak at conference. I thought this was settled and we'd hear regularly from women. Now I'm not so sure. I thought you were listening at conference. Because I've heard it again and again. 1
stemelbow Posted April 3, 2017 Author Posted April 3, 2017 1 minute ago, SteveO said: I think this is the real root of the issue here... Let's not get distracted here. I actually think God speaks through tons of people in tons of ways--women and men, at perhaps a pretty equal rate too. Of course to me His speaking through is probably far less literal than it is for JLHProf, but that might just be us getting too nickpicky about it. Let me add this, anyone who puts in enough effort could get up in front of people and touch them in a spiritual sense, thus in a real sense having God speak through him/her.
Teancum Posted April 3, 2017 Posted April 3, 2017 38 minutes ago, stemelbow said: Why? just why? Hasn't the Church tried to show that it's wanting to improve on getting a woman's voice involved? Now this? Come on. Did the Church just reveal its cards by not really caring what women have to say and whether they contribute? What do you expect? The LDS leaders have done some token throw the dog a bone type things for women. But it is a patriarchal religion. Such is entrenched in it dogma. It ain't gonna change any time soon. But maybe as the Church continues to bleed members, have very low conversion rates like what this past year, maybe 3 per missionary? That's pretty pitiful. And then how many do they retain? How many we joining the church in first world nations....not many. So yea, when the ability for the corporate church to thrive is threatened by its ever diminishing influence...then maybe you will see changes. 2
Ahab Posted April 3, 2017 Posted April 3, 2017 2 minutes ago, stemelbow said: Let's not get distracted here. I actually think God speaks through tons of people in tons of ways--women and men, at perhaps a pretty equal rate too. Of course to me His speaking through is probably far less literal than it is for JLHProf, but that might just be us getting too nickpicky about it. Let me add this, anyone who puts in enough effort could get up in front of people and touch them in a spiritual sense, thus in a real sense having God speak through him/her. I agree. Which is why I am not nitpicky about whether God speaks through a man or a woman. 1
hope_for_things Posted April 3, 2017 Posted April 3, 2017 (edited) 48 minutes ago, stemelbow said: Why? just why? Hasn't the Church tried to show that it's wanting to improve on getting a woman's voice involved? Now this? Come on. Did the Church just reveal its cards by not really caring what women have to say and whether they contribute? The inequality of women in the church is standing out as more of an issue as changes in the wider western culture with respect to women are moving forward at a quicker pace than changes in the church (there have been some small positive steps in recent years in the church). These differences in equality between the position of women in the larger culture when contrasted with the position of women in the church will continue to stand out as old, antiquated and unfair. Edited April 3, 2017 by hope_for_things 2
SteveO Posted April 3, 2017 Posted April 3, 2017 4 minutes ago, stemelbow said: Let's not get distracted here. Right, there's far and away more important issues to focus on....like gender quotas at conference 5 minutes ago, stemelbow said: Let me add this, anyone who puts in enough effort could get up in front of people and touch them in a spiritual sense, thus in a real sense having God speak through him/her. Again, the root issue. You think anyone can get up (or rather should be able to get up) and have the same authority to speak on behalf of the church as President Monson or the quorum of the twelve. That's not how the church works. And that's what bothers you. You think quotas trump what the general membership of the church needed to hear this past weekend 3
clarkgoble Posted April 3, 2017 Posted April 3, 2017 It appears like they tried to focus on getting non-Americans speaking. Since most of the women GAs are American this meant fewer women. Ideally that wouldn't be an issue if we had more non-American women in the Relief Society and Primary presidencies. 2
stemelbow Posted April 3, 2017 Author Posted April 3, 2017 11 minutes ago, SteveO said: Right, there's far and away more important issues to focus on....like gender quotas at conference Again, the root issue. You think anyone can get up (or rather should be able to get up) and have the same authority to speak on behalf of the church as President Monson or the quorum of the twelve. That's not how the church works. And that's what bothers you. You think quotas trump what the general membership of the church needed to hear this past weekend Perhaps what the church needed to hear was not what was found at conference at all. I know how the church works and I'm up for questioning that.
Popular Post HappyJackWagon Posted April 3, 2017 Popular Post Posted April 3, 2017 57 minutes ago, stemelbow said: Why? just why? Hasn't the Church tried to show that it's wanting to improve on getting a woman's voice involved? Now this? Come on. Did the Church just reveal its cards by not really caring what women have to say and whether they contribute? Apparently women don't have anything to say...OR...God doesn't trust them to say it. Missed opportunity. I did take heart that 2 women from other countries were called into the RS and Primary Presidency. I believe that is a preparatory move before calling a non-white Q12 member from another country. When there were three open positions to be filled everyone hoped for some diversity. There were public calls for it so naturally, to avoid appearing to give in to public sentiment, the church didn't respond. Now, at some future date they'll be able to call non-white foreign Q12 members because "the time is right". Although they'll also note that it's really not all that important, after all we do have these foreign women serving in top leadership already. See, it's always been diverse 5
SteveO Posted April 3, 2017 Posted April 3, 2017 (edited) 6 minutes ago, stemelbow said: Perhaps what the church needed to hear was not what was found at conference at all. Alright, tell us what we needed to hear that wasn't said this past weekend. Because I'm going to go out on a limb here and speculate that not many members fasted and prayed going into conference weekend with the hopes of seeing a 1:1 ratio of men and women speakers edit to add: you see how this quickly turns into what YOU want? Edited April 3, 2017 by SteveO
rongo Posted April 3, 2017 Posted April 3, 2017 8 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: I did take heart that 2 women from other countries were called into the RS and Primary Presidency. How foreign are we talking? Like "modest living expense stipend" foreign? Or, are they originally of foreign origin, but living in the Salt Lake area?
Sleeper Cell Posted April 3, 2017 Posted April 3, 2017 1 hour ago, Gray said: t rubbed me the wrong way. Interestingly Pres. Uchtdorf's talk afterwards almost sounded like a rebuke of Sister Jones' message. So the talk given by the only woman speaking in general conference rubbed you the wrong way? On the other hand, a talk given afterwards by a male speaker that “almost sounded like a rebuke” of her talk did not rub you the wrong way? It almost sounds like you are less concerned with a speaker’s gender than with what the speaker has to say. 1
SteveO Posted April 3, 2017 Posted April 3, 2017 1 minute ago, Sleeper Cell said: So the talk given by the only woman speaking in general conference rubbed you the wrong way? On the other hand, a talk given afterwards by a male speaker that “almost sounded like a rebuke” of her talk did not rub you the wrong way? It almost sounds like you are less concerned with a speaker’s gender than with what the speaker has to say. Let's not get distracted here, we're discussing how the church is sexist in the number of women speakers at conference. Once it's a steady 1:1 ratio, we'll move on to how many women of color are permitted to speak.
HappyJackWagon Posted April 3, 2017 Posted April 3, 2017 4 minutes ago, rongo said: How foreign are we talking? Like "modest living expense stipend" foreign? Or, are they originally of foreign origin, but living in the Salt Lake area? Both were from South America, Brazil and...I forget. But I assume they both live in Utah now, though I don't really know. I think they prefer Utah people for these callings for logistical purposes, though in todays communication environment I don't know that Utah proximity is nearly as important as it would have been in the past. Still, it probably takes time to move into a global communication, Skype kind of mindset for having leaders serve in their diverse localities.
Ahab Posted April 3, 2017 Posted April 3, 2017 2 minutes ago, SteveO said: Let's not get distracted here, we're discussing how the church is sexist in the number of women speakers at conference. Once it's a steady 1:1 ratio, we'll move on to how many women of color are permitted to speak. ...and then maybe to how many gay people are speaking to us ???? Quotas! Quotas!! Quotas!!! 2
SteveO Posted April 3, 2017 Posted April 3, 2017 1 minute ago, Ahab said: ...and then maybe to how many gay people are speaking to us ???? Quotas! Quotas!! Quotas!!! Dude...I was just about to start a thread on the need for an openly gay relief society president... 3
Gray Posted April 3, 2017 Posted April 3, 2017 9 minutes ago, Sleeper Cell said: So the talk given by the only woman speaking in general conference rubbed you the wrong way? On the other hand, a talk given afterwards by a male speaker that “almost sounded like a rebuke” of her talk did not rub you the wrong way? It almost sounds like you are less concerned with a speaker’s gender than with what the speaker has to say. My primary concern is content, yes. But I'd also like to see more women speakers too.
Recommended Posts