One woman speaker

[juliann]

1 minute ago, Storm Rider said:

When was the last time you are any feminist presented women's problems and responsibilities without ever mentioning males?

I rest my case. 

[juliann]

4 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

 

Now, how do you want the Church structured and tell us how your desires fit in with God's desires?

Don't you mean how your desires ARE God's desires? 

Really, how do you guys say this with a straight face?

[sunstoned]

6 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

While I think there should be more womens voices at BYU I'm skeptical of the view this would avoid problems as we've seen in the honor code office. I say that because it appears from the articles I've read that there were some significant women involved in the leadership decisions on these issues. (Sorry tried to find the name but my google-fu failed me) Also one doesn't need to look far to find a lot of women who supported the older policy and opposed change. (According on one poll 27% of Utahns opposed change and 21% were unsure)

Again I think having women's voices is important. But there's a lot of diversity and the results won't always be what people predict. Much like many people who think having a woman as a leader of powerful western nations is important make a difference yet often disparage Margaret Thatcher's politics. There's often an unstated bias that the reason policies aren't the way we think they should be is because of exclusion. Typically things are more complicated.

I think for it to have much of an effect, the diversity needs to be at the top, not in the middle management ranks.  BYU is patterned after the church organization structure, which is an authoritative, top down structure.  All the top slots are male.  In fact I think it is prevented by policy (have to be a G.A.)  for a female ever to be president of BYU.  That is not a glass ceiling, that is a concrete ceiling.

[BlueDreams]

20 hours ago, Ahab said:

I think we're supposed to be showing our reverence for our Father right now, though, with our Mother already having given her consent that our Father should "run the show" now, so to speak.

But yeah I'm also looking forward to hearing more from our Mother, as well as our Father, to explain more about how women are supposed to act in regard to representatives of our Father, and our Lord.

That sounds like our own assumption to fill in our current gap in knowledge...not an actual truth, but a bandaid to help ease the sense of something missing. And  then keeps us from really looking because it maintains the status quo

I personally can't say the same. I've searched for Her in scripture and in my prayers to HF. And because of that I've come to know her more. I look forward for more revelation about Her. But in my personal life I've already heard and felt Her. Like everything that has been restored, I think we're sometimes limited by the questions we forget to ask and Pursue 

 

with luv,

BD

[HappyJackWagon]

19 hours ago, rongo said:

Julie Beck. 

But --- surprise, surprise --- those banging the drum of misogyny and sexism didn't like her or what she said, oftentimes.

It is not misogynist to dislike something a particular woman says any more than it is racist not to like a particular thing a black person says. The idea and presentation can be judged on its merits. But it would be misogynistic not to allow a woman to speak because any idea has already been dismissed, prior to even hearing it, simply be cause it is coming from a woman. Big difference.

It's the difference between saying "I don't like Hillary Clinton" and saying "Hillary Clinton shouldn't even speak."

I don't like Trump but that doesn't mean I'm anti-white male.

[Storm Rider]

12 hours ago, juliann said:

Don't you mean how your desires ARE God's desires? 

Really, how do you guys say this with a straight face?

Well, first of all, "guys" don't say it....even with a straight face.  Tell us what the scriptures record?  Are the scriptures true?  Yes or no.  

[Storm Rider]

13 hours ago, juliann said:

I rest my case. 

No, this is not worth it after all.  The conversation is meaningless and only allows for grandstanding with you. 

Edited April 12, 2017 by Storm Rider

[Storm Rider]

12 hours ago, bluebell said:

That you call me "the feminist segment" shows that you haven't understood a thing that I've said. 

Given that, I don't know that there is any point in having this conversation with you. You're too defensive for it to be productive. 

Blue, I am sorry if you got the impression that I was referring to you; I wasn't.  I find your comments to be balanced and open minded.  You search more for a truthful answers.  IT was for this reason I quoted you when I mentioned difference between equality and equability.  

As far as being "the feminist segment", julieann represents that in spades.  Her comments are so slanted, twisted, and filled with such a distorted perception that it is easy to detect the caliber of feminist writing she has immersed herself.  She attacks and then evades without ever responding.  

[Ahab]

1 hour ago, BlueDreams said:

That sounds like our own assumption to fill in our current gap in knowledge...not an actual truth, but a bandaid to help ease the sense of something missing. And  then keeps us from really looking because it maintains the status quo

I personally can't say the same. I've searched for Her in scripture and in my prayers to HF. And because of that I've come to know her more. I look forward for more revelation about Her. But in my personal life I've already heard and felt Her. Like everything that has been restored, I think we're sometimes limited by the questions we forget to ask and Pursue 

 

with luv,

BD

What I said is true, though, and yes I have often felt her influence, too, in my life. And I am looking forward to hearing and experiencing more of her in my life.

Knowing she is one with our Father, and our Lord, helps me a lot in my life, both personally and in regard to my wife.

[BlueDreams]

33 minutes ago, Ahab said:

What I said is true, though, and yes I have often felt her influence, too, in my life. And I am looking forward to hearing and experiencing more of her in my life.

Knowing she is one with our Father, and our Lord, helps me a lot in my life, both personally and in regard to my wife.

I'm glad you've felt her influence, but what evidence do you have of this:

"I think we're supposed to be showing our reverence for our Father right now, though, with our Mother already having given her consent that our Father should "run the show" now, so to speak."

I can't think of a single scripture to back this up...or anything of the sort. Which is what I meant by an assumption to make our current present make sense.

 

with luv,

BD

Edited April 12, 2017 by BlueDreams

[Ahab]

8 minutes ago, BlueDreams said:

I'm glad you've felt her influence, but what evidence do you have of this:

"I think we're supposed to be showing our reverence for our Father right now, though, with our Mother already having given her consent that our Father should "run the show" now, so to speak."

I can't think of a single scripture to back this up...or anything of the sort. Which is what I meant by an assumption to make our current present make sense.

 

with luv,

BD

I receive revelation from our Father (and our Mother who agrees with him) that I don't write down as scripture and that I don't expect you to accept.

You might want to be a little more careful about what you call an assumption.

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Storm Rider said:

Blue, I am sorry if you got the impression that I was referring to you; I wasn't.  I find your comments to be balanced and open minded.  You search more for a truthful answers.  IT was for this reason I quoted you when I mentioned difference between equality and equability.  

As far as being "the feminist segment", julieann represents that in spades.  Her comments are so slanted, twisted, and filled with such a distorted perception that it is easy to detect the caliber of feminist writing she has immersed herself.  She attacks and then evades without ever responding.  

Thank you for clarifying.

Juliann is coming at the issue from a different direction than i usually do, but I agree with her a lot of the time.  And i think a lot of the time she is talking about sexism in general and not focusing only on the church so that's important to remember.   

Her comments are not distorted, they are usually supported by research, but maybe they look like they are to people who have never experienced it.   And plus, she's older than I am and so has put up with a lot of sexism for many years.  There comes a point where you get tired and you stop trying to be polite about things.  I can't blame her.

I have found that understanding sexism, for someone who has never experienced it, can be difficult.  One male writer described the progression that he went through and that many other men also seem to go through as they begin to understand the problem, like this-

1. Sexism is a fake idea invented by feminists
2. Sexism happens, but the effect of “reverse sexism” on men is as bad or worse
3. Sexism happens, but the important part is that I personally am not sexist
4. Sexism happens, and I benefit from that whether or not I personally am sexist
5. Sexism happens, I benefit from it, I am unavoidably sexist sometimes because I was socialized that way, and if I want to be anti-sexist I have to be actively working against that socialization

A lot of men on here seem to be at the 'it happens but i'm not sexist and i don't know anyone who is so i must make sure that i point that out any and every time the subject comes up' point.  That's great, but it doesn't help anything.  The conversation has to move beyond that discussion to effect change.  

A lot of us women start to resent always getting bogged down on that one point and never being able to move beyond it.  We have all negatively been affected by sexism and we want to work towards solutions.

Edited April 12, 2017 by bluebell

[Calm]

16 hours ago, Storm Rider said:

Sure seems like there is a lot of excuses as to why women are "weak" and man is so strong and powerful when it comes to women.  It is just a little too cut and dried for me to accept as being the only answer.  Everything is presented as so one dimensional without any nod to a rather complex, multi-faceted, wide range of issues that make up our social structures.  

What women will not get is the "prize" (Whatever it is you want" by whining and complaining that the big, bad male did it to me.  He shut me up, he did not listen, and "those" people are not playing by my rules.  I don't know of a single man that thinks like that or operates in such a manner.  I have worked with a lot of women and have had several women as my superior during my career.  At no times did those women not act like a leader or allowed anyone, male or female, to disrespect their role or function.  

The flip side of this is I have not ever heard one iota of explanation as to how you, the feminist segment, want our church community to act and be structured.  I have not heard the what role motherhood plays in any of your comments.  There continues to be, purposely, a confusion between equality and equitable.  A man is not equal to a woman and a woman is not equal to a man.  They never have been and never will.  Trying to force that square peg into that round hole will only result in the same thing that doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting a different result.  

Now, how do you want the Church structured and tell us how your desires fit in with God's desires?

Have you considered the reason you have never heard of such things from another man is because you are a man?

I find it bizarre that you think this is being presented as one dimensional by most posters here, especially the women.  Juliann's references alone add real substance to the discussion of how complex interaction is.  

Given how so much of the discussion centers around how a women desires to expand her role as a mother (why else do you think women desire to be part of baby blessings...they are not asking to be there for blessings of other people's children...or to be able to give blessings of healing with power and authority to children in their care), again bizarre you have this idea that no one is talking in terms of motherhood.

That you also have heard no explanation of how various women would like to see the Church expand is also bizarre, especially with the continuing refrain of 'get women more involved in the policy/decision making by having more women present in those meetings'.  If you are interested, an easy place to start is McBaine's "Women at Church" which is a great discussion of how significant changes can be made at local levels within current structures.

[juliann]

2 hours ago, Ahab said:

I receive revelation from our Father (and our Mother who agrees with him)  

Um....

[Calm]

16 hours ago, Storm Rider said:

When was the last time you are any feminist presented women's problems and responsibilities without ever mentioning males?

Weren't you the one who was complaining that feminists weren't treating problems with male/female interaction as properly complex?  How could they discuss the issues leaving out half of the equation?

How many talks from church leaders have you heard presenting women's problems and responsibilities without ever mentioning males?  

Why in the world would you expect men to be left out when women interact with them every day, are completely intertwined in almost every facet of a woman's life...as it should be.

[Calm]

3 hours ago, Storm Rider said:

Well, first of all, "guys" don't say it....even with a straight face.  Tell us what the scriptures record?  Are the scriptures true?  Yes or no.  

"Yes or no"

Do you or don't you want complex discussion?

[Storm Rider]

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

Thank you for clarifying.

Juliann is coming at the issue from a different direction than i usually do, but I agree with her a lot of the time.  And i think a lot of the time she is talking about sexism in general and not focusing only on the church so that's important to remember.   

Her comments are not distorted, they are usually supported by research, but maybe they look like they are to people who have never experienced it.   And plus, she's older than I am and so has put up with a lot of sexism for many years.  There comes a point where you get tired and you stop trying to be polite about things.  I can't blame her.

I have found that understanding sexism, for someone who has never experienced it, can be difficult.  One male writer described the progression that he went through and that many other men also seem to go through as they begin to understand the problem, like this-

1. Sexism is a fake idea invented by feminists
2. Sexism happens, but the effect of “reverse sexism” on men is as bad or worse
3. Sexism happens, but the important part is that I personally am not sexist
4. Sexism happens, and I benefit from that whether or not I personally am sexist
5. Sexism happens, I benefit from it, I am unavoidably sexist sometimes because I was socialized that way, and if I want to be anti-sexist I have to be actively working against that socialization

A lot of men on here seem to be at the 'it happens but i'm not sexist and i don't know anyone who is so i must make sure that i point that out any and every time the subject comes up' point.  That's great, but it doesn't help anything.  The conversation has to move beyond that discussion to effect change.  

A lot of us women start to resent always getting bogged down on that one point and never being able to move beyond it.  We have all negatively been affected by sexism and we want to work towards solutions.

For me the rub comes with a focus on a single thing - whatever the activist has chosen as they pet social atrocity:  sexism, racism, anti-gay, or Islamophobia.  That approach an problem that happens individually, personally, but quantify it from a macro level.  What this causes is for a group to gain the perception that the only reason they don't achieve their desired objectives is because of "insert your cause" and nothing else.  I think this is unhelpful and only causes the reverse.  It is one of the reasons that I most often view these as causes as power struggles rather than anything else.  I don't have it, I want it, and you have it, ergo you have to give it up.  

Only looking at life through a "cause" perspective distorts the view.  It excludes a whole range of other influences that exist, regardless of the situation. Just as importantly, it necessarily negates and minimizes all other struggles for all other individuals that don't fit this activist mode - the opposite gender, other nationalities, etc.  

Recently I have read about several studies on the supposed pay gap between males and females which certainly gives me pause on thinking if there is any pay gap issue at all. Let's assume the multiple analyses are accurate and correct.  Yet, in society at large we still have women, political organizations, NOW, and every other organization that can benefit from this supposed reality still banging the drum.  Why?  At what point will they stop? I don't think they will ever forfeit this cause because it undermines their chosen perspective and cause.  

I think that is the detriment of every macro approach. When we bring it down to the individual then we can see what is happening and fix it. It does not matter what the politicians and activists are saying, it matters to the individual and what is happening in their life.  Please note that I said individual.  I purposely use that term because I have never met an individual whose life did not meet with some form of unfairness.

In closing, I remember an old saying my mom used to tell me as a young boy, "when you point your finger in judgment at another just remember how many fingers are pointing back at you."  I reject favored groups, protected groups, or whatever the term of the day is; I believe in justice and fairness. In a society, just as on a little league baseball team, there are losers and winners.  Within that group of winners you will find every gender, every race, every sexual orientation, and ever religion.  The same can be said for every group of losers.  I cannot do anything about the macro level and I think most of those people active at that level are dishonest and self-centered.  Christ taught us that the way to peace is the conversion of the individual first; society will follow. 

[Ahab]

18 minutes ago, juliann said:

Um....

Don't be shy. Feel free to speak up.

[Storm Rider]

11 minutes ago, Calm said:

Weren't you the one who was complaining that feminists weren't treating problems with male/female interaction as properly complex?  How could they discuss the issues leaving out half of the equation?

How many talks from church leaders have you heard presenting women's problems and responsibilities without ever mentioning males?  

Why in the world would you expect men to be left out when women interact with them every day, are completely intertwined in almost every facet of a woman's life...as it should be.

Calm, my comment was directed at Julieann who stated, "As more and more people become educated as to the costs of elevating men's status by reducing women's, it will become even more untenable. Meanwhile, every discussion about women will turn into a discussion about men. Without fail."  I interpreted this to mean that every thread about women will be taken over and turn into a conversation about men.  She also left a link to a article about the comic she had included.  The article was about, "It’s a sharp, damning satire of a familiar kind of bad-faith argument, the one where a male interlocutor redirects a discussion about sexism, misogyny, rape culture, or women’s rights to instead be about how none of that is his fault."  This is the intellectual equivalent of asking a person, "Does your mother know you are a sexual predator?"  There is no way to answer except to reject the question or assertion.

[Storm Rider]

18 minutes ago, Calm said:

"Yes or no"

Do you or don't you want complex discussion?

That was a pretty simple question; are the scriptures true or not?  If you want to make it a complex one, then by all means go ahead and go for it.  I am interested.

[Tacenda]

12 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

That was a pretty simple question; are the scriptures true or not?  If you want to make it a complex one, then by all means go ahead and go for it.  I am interested.

I read a quote the other day by someone on here, wish I could remember it fully. Something to the affect that scripture is basically coming from men mostly.

[bluebell]

43 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

For me the rub comes with a focus on a single thing - whatever the activist has chosen as they pet social atrocity:  sexism, racism, anti-gay, or Islamophobia.  That approach an problem that happens individually, personally, but quantify it from a macro level.  What this causes is for a group to gain the perception that the only reason they don't achieve their desired objectives is because of "insert your cause" and nothing else.  I think this is unhelpful and only causes the reverse.  It is one of the reasons that I most often view these as causes as power struggles rather than anything else.  I don't have it, I want it, and you have it, ergo you have to give it up.  

Sexism happens to all women in the US and most likely all women in the entire world (the majority of women, for sure).  It's a problem on the macro level.  

Quote

Only looking at life through a "cause" perspective distorts the view.  It excludes a whole range of other influences that exist, regardless of the situation. Just as importantly, it necessarily negates and minimizes all other struggles for all other individuals that don't fit this activist mode - the opposite gender, other nationalities, etc.  

Sexism is a problem that negatively affects women.  Acknowledging that doesn't minimize other struggles.  I don't know of any posters here who have said that it is a simple problem or that there are no other issues that women and men deal with and navigate.  

But when sexism is the topic of a discussion it is reasonable and valid to discuss it and not other issues or problems.   

Quote

Recently I have read about several studies on the supposed pay gap between males and females which certainly gives me pause on thinking if there is any pay gap issue at all. Let's assume the multiple analyses are accurate and correct.  Yet, in society at large we still have women, political organizations, NOW, and every other organization that can benefit from this supposed reality still banging the drum.  Why?  At what point will they stop? I don't think they will ever forfeit this cause because it undermines their chosen perspective and cause.  

I'm not sure what you are trying to say.  There is a pay gap, so why should they stop?

Quote

I think that is the detriment of every macro approach. When we bring it down to the individual then we can see what is happening and fix it. It does not matter what the politicians and activists are saying, it matters to the individual and what is happening in their life.  Please note that I said individual.  I purposely use that term because I have never met an individual whose life did not meet with some form of unfairness.

I think the individual approach is great, if people actually go and and individually try to help.  But most don't, until they see a problem and when it comes to sexism, it's hard for people to want to get involved when they wrongly see the problem as a micro one instead of a macro one.  It makes it easy for them to downplay the problems (or convince themselves that there actually isn't a problem at all) rather than get involved.

Quote

Christ taught us that the way to peace is the conversion of the individual first; society will follow. 

I agree with Christ.  Until individuals such as yourself see how harmful sexism is--until they are converted to that fact--they won't do anything personally to change it, and where people aren't personally willing to go, society can't follow.

No one can help be a part of the solution if they don't believe there is a problem.  

[Jeanne]

2 hours ago, juliann said:

Um....

Gee....who even knows??  I have never seen any real reason or purpose that one should not know their Mother In Heaven...and their lies a beginning of all the unknowing of the presence, the power, and very worth of a woman.

[HappyJackWagon]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

Sexism happens to all women in the US and most likely all women in the entire world (the majority of women, for sure).  It's a problem on the macro level.  

Sexism is a problem that negatively affects women.  Acknowledging that doesn't minimize other struggles.  I don't know of any posters here who have said that it is a simple problem or that there are no other issues that women and men deal with and navigate.  

But when sexism is the topic of a discussion it is reasonable and valid to discuss it and not other issues or problems.   

I'm not sure what you are trying to say.  There is a pay gap, so why should they stop?

I think the individual approach is great, if people actually go and and individually try to help.  But most don't, until they see a problem and when it comes to sexism, it's hard for people to want to get involved when they wrongly see the problem as a micro one instead of a macro one.  It makes it easy for them to downplay the problems (or convince themselves that there actually isn't a problem at all) rather than get involved.

I agree with Christ.  Until individuals such as yourself see how harmful sexism is--until they are converted to that fact--they won't do anything personally to change it, and where people aren't personally willing to go, society can't follow.

No one can help be a part of the solution if they don't believe there is a problem.  

Mic Drop!!

[BlueDreams]

5 hours ago, Ahab said:

I receive revelation from our Father (and our Mother who agrees with him) that I don't write down as scripture and that I don't expect you to accept.

You might want to be a little more careful about what you call an assumption.

No, I'm good. Until you have something beyond personal revelation that stated what you've said I don't have to be "more careful" in asking for evidence for your claims. Particularly when my own personal revelation and scripture study points me in a different direction. 

 

With luv,

BD

Edited April 12, 2017 by BlueDreams