Sexism in churches is harmful to women's health, new study says

[Meadowchik]

2 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

None of this has anything to do with leadership over the members though. And I believe that conditioning matters a lot. Women aren't conditioned to do the jobs you mention. They physically can be plumbers, and the many construction jobs you mention, but may need to bulk up and be able to function in those jobs. My husband is a retired union ironworker and there were a few women doing the same job that he mentioned. But physicality is what must happen for them to be able to do their part in those jobs. That's the only thing that stops women, is that really. So this basically has nothing to do with women in leadership positions in the church. Other faiths have women in these positions. So I may have missed something but it has nothing to do with the topic, or maybe in your conversations there is something I missed. Also, I know a woman that is a manager over construction sites. And I'm with your wife, I don't want to do what the men do at church. But I know women that would, and have gifts of spirituality and could prophesy over a congregation. 

Agreed.

And to be fair, I do see some movement by the LDS church to increase female leadership positions in some ways. I speculate that church leaders are aware that its structural sexism could be impacting the church negatively, but that mitigating the harmful effects and/or changing the structure is a difficult task.

[Calm]

51 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

That is yesterday's news. In my house I do more than my share of the laundry, dishes and toilet cleaning. Historically my wife has always made more money than me.

Yes, it has long been known that women do more housework than men.  Old news also that men apparently dislike it more too. (Possibly because they may see it as additional work ratherthan just what one sees as usual).
 

https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/22/do-women-like-child-care-more-than-men/

Edited April 22, 2021 by Calm

[MrShorty]

15 minutes ago, bluebell said:

It has authority over the congregation.  And isn't that what the study deals with, congregations?

According the SLTrib summary, they used four questions from the NCS (National Congregations Study) to measure sexism. Two of the questions seem pertinent (1) Can women serve on the governing council and (2) Can women be the main leader. One would probably have to go back to the NCS to see how the NCS treated the congregation level versus higher level considerations in answering this question (Protestantism, with its much looser organization probably easily divides down to the congregation level, but I don't see anything that explains how the NCS handled more organized churches like LDS or Catholic where the local congregation is one of many congregations under a larger head). To me, it also isn't immediately obvious that the NCS would consider the ward council as the governing council and not a smaller group (like bishopric). Obviously for question (2), even if they considered the ward council as the governing body, it is hard to make a case for a women being in the bishop's chair in the restored Church. From what I understand, a "no" in question 2 was sufficient for these researchers to label a church/congregation sexist -- overriding a yes in the other 3 questions.

[MrShorty]

duplicate

Edited April 22, 2021 by MrShorty
duplicate

[MrShorty]

duplicate

Edited April 22, 2021 by MrShorty
duplicate

[MrShorty]

Tangent warning!

4 hours ago, AtlanticMike said:

What about women like my wife and mother in law who like going to church and not having to worry about the stresses a leadership position brings?

I have long envied them. How nice would it be to not have to worry about the stresses of (potential) leadership? Since Pres. Nelson's talk about women and priesthood, I have even wondered what would happen if I abdicated my priesthood ordination so that I was no longer eligible for leadership? What if we stopped automatically ordaining every man and opened priesthood ordination up to anyone who wanted it? Pres. Nelson's talk opened up a lot of questions for me on the nature of priesthood.

[MrShorty]

duplicate

Edited April 22, 2021 by MrShorty
duplicate

[Meadowchik]

17 minutes ago, webbles said:

 

Is there any way to read this study without needing a username and password?

I'm sorry, I have access through my school, but it's not available for shared access. I tried! My guess is that you could bookmark the citation in the hopes that it gets released for free distribution later. Or, you might email the authors and request a copy. (I have personally had some success contacting authors, so it could work.)

[webbles]

4 minutes ago, MrShorty said:

According the SLTrib summary, they used four questions from the NCS (National Congregations Study) to measure sexism. Two of the questions seem pertinent (1) Can women serve on the governing council and (2) Can women be the main leader. One would probably have to go back to the NCS to see how the NCS treated the congregation level versus higher level considerations in answering this question (Protestantism, with its much looser organization probably easily divides down to the congregation level, but I don't see anything that explains how the NCS handled more organized churches like LDS or Catholic where the local congregation is one of many congregations under a larger head). To me, it also isn't immediately obvious that the NCS would consider the ward council as the governing council and not a smaller group (like bishopric). Obviously for question (2), even if they considered the ward council as the governing body, it is hard to make a case for a women being in the bishop's chair in the restored Church. From what I understand, a "no" in question 2 was sufficient for these researchers to label a church/congregation sexist -- overriding a yes in the other 3 questions.

Here's the NCS survey of 2020 - https://sites.duke.edu/ncsweb/files/2020/05/NCS-IV-Quex-for-website.pdf

It is definitely local level, not global level.  Section 3 is the staff section.  It is asking about the staff of the specific congregation (aka ward).  It even has an example of Roman Catholic and is talking about the priest and not the pope.

The governing question is on page 52:

Quote

120. If they are otherwise qualified, are women in your congregation permitted to:

120a. Serve as full-fledged members of your congregation’s main governing body or coordinating committee?

120b. Are women permitted to preach at a main worship service?

120c. Be the head clergyperson or primary religious leader of your congregation?

 

[Meadowchik]

14 minutes ago, MrShorty said:

According the SLTrib summary, they used four questions from the NCS (National Congregations Study) to measure sexism. Two of the questions seem pertinent (1) Can women serve on the governing council and (2) Can women be the main leader. One would probably have to go back to the NCS to see how the NCS treated the congregation level versus higher level considerations in answering this question (Protestantism, with its much looser organization probably easily divides down to the congregation level, but I don't see anything that explains how the NCS handled more organized churches like LDS or Catholic where the local congregation is one of many congregations under a larger head). To me, it also isn't immediately obvious that the NCS would consider the ward council as the governing council and not a smaller group (like bishopric). Obviously for question (2), even if they considered the ward council as the governing body, it is hard to make a case for a women being in the bishop's chair in the restored Church. From what I understand, a "no" in question 2 was sufficient for these researchers to label a church/congregation sexist -- overriding a yes in the other 3 questions.

Yes, and I think that in churches that are council-run, those councils have the power over the whole budget (not just over a portion allotted from above) and over selecting, hiring and firing pastors, and even things like church bylaws. 

PS It looks like you've had tech issues today...you have about three extra posts above, a triple post and a double post. 

Edited April 22, 2021 by Meadowchik

[katherine the great]

4 hours ago, AtlanticMike said:

When are women going to rough it down here with us men that carry 80lbs on their shoulder up a ladder extended on the side of a three story house? No man is holding a woman back from doing that. What about carrying a 3/4" piece of plywood up a flight of stairs and gluing it down to the floor, any man I know would let you do that task, just come out to the job site. What about laying brick from a 4 story scaffold, again, come on out, the job is yours, any woman please feel free, I'll bring lunch. What about unclogging a sewer drain under a house while laying on your back and the clog frees up spewing crap water all over the place, I've never had a woman by my side when accomplising that task. 

Lol! Have you ever heard of pregnancy, childbirth, and breast-feeding? If that isn’t “roughing it” I really don’t know what is. 

[Calm]

46 minutes ago, MrShorty said:

How nice would it be to not have to worry about the stresses of (potential) leadership?

No need for envy.
 

While we don’t need to worry about bishopric or higher callings for ourselves, if you don’t think it is stressful for women with kids thinking about potential callings for their husbands (a Bishop’s wife’s generally takes on more home responsibility as well as being sought out by ward members, often doing service for members in need rather than passing it on to the RS President), you might want to reconsider. 
 

And there are plenty of callings that women can potentially get that they stress about (one reason I always volunteered for Primary in a new ward and then ward librarian was to prevent myself being called to RS or YW’s positions. I was especially terrified of the second due to my dislike of teenagers (I like a teenager...one at a time, it is teenagers I have issues with....more than one)

Edited April 22, 2021 by Calm

[webbles]

 

17 minutes ago, webbles said:

120. If they are otherwise qualified, are women in your congregation permitted to:

120a. Serve as full-fledged members of your congregation’s main governing body or coordinating committee?

120b. Are women permitted to preach at a main worship service?

120c. Be the head clergyperson or primary religious leader of your congregation?

I tracked down the actual data (https://www.thearda.com/Archive/Files/Downloads/NCSIV_DL.asp) and took a look at all of the responses that had the denomination (the DENCODE column) of Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (value 30).  There were 88 responses over all of the years (1998, 2006, 2012, 2018)

Over the years, it looks like there were 5 questions related to women and leadership.  Here's all of the different questions that were asked and the responses:

Quote

(WMNVLTR) If they are otherwise qualified, are women in your congregation permitted to: Hold all of the volunteer leadership positions that men can hold?

55 responses (only asked in 2006 and 2012).  2 were Yes. 53 were No.

Quote

(WMNBRD) If they are otherwise qualified, are women in your congregation permitted to: Serve as full-fledged members of your congregation's main governing body or coordinating committee?

78 responses (not asked in 1998).  60 were Yes.  17 were No.  1 was Don't Know.

Quote

(WMNTCH) If they are otherwise qualified, are women in your congregation permitted to: Teach by themselves a class with adult men in it?

55 responses (only asked in 2006 and 2012). 53 were Yes. 2 were No.

Quote

(WMNPRCH) If they are otherwise qualified, are women in your congregation permitted to: Preach at a main worship service?

78 responses (not asked in 1998). 75 were Yes. 3 were No.

Quote

(WMNLEAD) If they are otherwise qualified, are women in your congregation permitted to: Be the head clergyperson or primary religious leader of your congregation?

78 responses (not asked in 1998). 78 were No.

[Meadowchik]

4 minutes ago, Calm said:

While we don’t need to worry about bishopric or higher callings for ourselves, if you don’t think it is stressful for women with kids thinking about potential callings for their husbands (a Bishop’s wife’s generally takes on more home responsibility as well as being sought out by ward members, often doing service for members in need rather than passing it on to the RS President), you might want to reconsider. 
 

And there are plenty of callings that women can potentially get that they stress about (one reason I always volunteered for Primary in a new ward and then ward librarian was to prevent myself being called to RS or YW’s positions. I was especially terrified of the second due to my dislike of teenagers (I like a teenager...one at a time, it is teenagers I have issues with....more than one)

For sure, women do their share of service in the church. And, aside from actually having positions of authority in the ward, I think that the difficulties can be compounded because no women hold the highest positions of authority. When gender roles are so divided, I think issues can be created when only one gender is represented in the bishopric. A woman cannot go to a bishop who knows firsthand the realities of her roles as a woman serving in the church. Not ever. 

[Meadowchik]

4 minutes ago, webbles said:

 

I tracked down the actual data (https://www.thearda.com/Archive/Files/Downloads/NCSIV_DL.asp) and took a look at all of the responses that had the denomination (the DENCODE column) of Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (value 30).  There were 88 responses over all of the years (1998, 2006, 2012, 2018)

Over the years, it looks like there were 5 questions related to women and leadership.  Here's all of the different questions that were asked and the responses:

55 responses (only asked in 2006 and 2012).  2 were Yes. 53 were No.

78 responses (not asked in 1998).  60 were Yes.  17 were No.  1 was Don't Know.

55 responses (only asked in 2006 and 2012). 53 were Yes. 2 were No.

78 responses (not asked in 1998). 75 were Yes. 3 were No.

78 responses (not asked in 1998). 78 were No.

Thanks for looking that up and sharing!

[bluebell]

39 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

What authority does the ward council have?

The members of the ward council have authority through their individual callings as leaders in the ward in their different organizations.  Here is what the handbook says about the council and the members responsibilities:

Members of the ward council strive to help individuals build testimonies, receive saving ordinances, keep covenants, and become consecrated followers of Jesus Christ (see Moroni 6:4–5). All members of the ward council have a general responsibility for the well-being of ward members. These ward officers also have a specific responsibility to watch over and strengthen each member in their organization.

Typically, the full ward council considers only matters that (1) would benefit from coordination among organizations, (2) would benefit from the discussion and unified efforts of the council, or (3) are of general concern for the ward as a whole. Most matters that are specific to a priesthood quorum or organization should be addressed by its leaders, not by the entire ward council. Additionally, individual ward council members may raise sensitive or confidential matters privately with the bishop.

Members of the ward council do most of their work outside of ward council meetings. They work with their counselors and with ministering brothers, ministering sisters, and others to care for those in their organizations and others who need assistance.

Ward council members strive to stay informed about the needs, well-being, and spiritual progress of members in their organizations. They also stay informed about members who face special challenges or changing circumstances. This information allows them to strengthen those who most need their help. At the same time, they respect individual and family privacy. Only the bishop deals with matters of personal worthiness.

Members of the ward council work together to build spiritual strength and unity in the ward. The ward council also oversees the planning of activities for the ward. Activities should be planned to fulfill gospel-centered purposes.  

Ward officers attend ward council meetings in two capacities: (1) as ward council members who help the bishop address needs and concerns in the ward and find solutions and (2) as representatives of their organizations. These leaders seek the guidance of the Holy Ghost as they unite in love and concern for those they serve.

Ward council meetings should focus on matters that will strengthen individuals and families. The council spends minimal time on calendaring, activity planning, and other administrative business.

During the meeting, the bishop explains each matter being considered, but he does not normally decide how to resolve the matter until he has heard the discussion. He encourages discussion without dominating it. He asks questions and may ask particular council members for their suggestions. He listens carefully before making a decision. These discussions should foster a spirit of inspiration.

Council members are encouraged to speak honestly, both from their personal experience and from their positions as organization leaders. Both men and women should feel that their comments are valued as full participants. The bishop seeks input from Relief Society, Young Women, and Primary leaders in all matters considered by the ward council. The viewpoint of women is sometimes different from that of men, and it adds essential perspective to understanding and responding to members’ needs.

After open discussion, the bishop may make a decision, or he may wait to discuss the matter further with his counselors. After he makes a decision, council members should support it in a spirit of unity and harmony.

If council members have strongly unsettled feelings about an important decision, the bishop may wait for another council meeting to consider the matter further and seek spiritual confirmation and unity.

Council members must keep confidential any private or sensitive information about members, families, and subjects that are discussed.

Quote

 

Good questions.

I think that if the disparity is something that, perceived or not, does impact her life in concrete ways, then it's possible it could contribute to psychological distress via those manifestations. 

 

That could be.  But it seems like a lot to assume.  Especially for a study that isn't talking about possibilities but actualities.

It seems like, before they could say with any certainty how a sexist religion impacted women, the researchers would either 1) have to study whether or not how the woman felt about her religion had any impact on her health, or 2) prove that the negative health results existed even if she herself did not believe her religion was sexist.

Do they do either in the study?   

[bluebell]

5 hours ago, AtlanticMike said:

What about women like my wife and mother in law who like going to church and not having to worry about the stresses a leadership position brings? She wants nothing to do with a bishopric or stake calling. Many women like the way the church is structured now.

     After reading this thread last night I asked my wife what she thought. What she explained to me made a lot of sense. Between my wife and i, I'm the more opened minded one, she's way more traditional, but here's something we agree on. She and I agree that right now, women seem way more selfish than men. For example, why does it seem like women are primarily seeking "equality" in positions of power. I've been in the construction industry for over 30 years and probably only seen 4 or 5 women in a skilled labor job. When are women going to rough it down here with us men that carry 80lbs on their shoulder up a ladder extended on the side of a three story house? No man is holding a woman back from doing that. What about carrying a 3/4" piece of plywood up a flight of stairs and gluing it down to the floor, any man I know would let you do that task, just come out to the job site. What about laying brick from a 4 story scaffold, again, come on out, the job is yours, any woman please feel free, I'll bring lunch. What about unclogging a sewer drain under a house while laying on your back and the clog frees up spewing crap water all over the place, I've never had a woman by my side when accomplising that task. 

   My point being, if women want equality, come get it, but realize if your not willing to get your hands dirty and only want the "prestigious" positions, respect is going to be hard to come by. 

Have you considered the women sometimes choose not to work in male dominated fields (like construction) because they don't want to deal with the sexism?  There are certain fields that men have made it harder for women to get into and feel safe, and then the women get told it's their fault and they are just being selfish for not wanting to work in those environments.

https://www.onrec.com/news/news-archive/we-need-to-brick-sexism-say-women-in-construction

https://deohs.washington.edu/edge/blog/gender-discrimination-poses-challenges-construction-workers

https://www.bigrentz.com/blog/women-construction

I can't personally speak for women in construction, but I worked in the oil field when I was in college for a few summers.  Everyone was very nice to me, because they were nice guys and also because my dad worked for the same company, but even with that build in protection it was still not an environment that was especially welcoming or comfortable for a woman.  It wasn't anything the men did on purpose.  But they had their culture and they were not going to let a woman being present change it.

[bluebell]

4 hours ago, Calm said:

Maybe because men generally already have more higher paying options available to them than women do. 
 

When are men going to be housekeepers doing massive loads of laundry daily, lugging vacuums and carts around hotels, cleaning toilets and bathtubs, nannies changing tons of dirty diapers and spit up on clothes multiple times daily?

No woman is holding a man back from that.  
 

Compare construction work pay to hospital housekeeping pay. 
 

The idea that women aren’t willing to get their hands dirty when it is still the women doing the majority of unpaid grunt, dirty work at home is laughable. 
 

Going in sewers is hard, dirty work, but so is cleaning up dirty bums and beds and vomit.  Nurses who do the grunt work in hospitals and care facilities are still overwhelmingly female. 

Edited April 22, 2021 by bluebell

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, MrShorty said:

Tangent warning!

I have long envied them. How nice would it be to not have to worry about the stresses of (potential) leadership? Since Pres. Nelson's talk about women and priesthood, I have even wondered what would happen if I abdicated my priesthood ordination so that I was no longer eligible for leadership? What if we stopped automatically ordaining every man and opened priesthood ordination up to anyone who wanted it? Pres. Nelson's talk opened up a lot of questions for me on the nature of priesthood.

I've been both the Relief Society President in a ward and the Young Women's president in a ward (twice).  It's a myth that women in the church don't have to worry about the stress of leadership.

We don't have as many chances to be leaders as men, but women still shoulder some of the biggest leadership responsibilities in the ward.

Edited April 22, 2021 by bluebell

[Calm]

Just now, bluebell said:

I've been both the Relief Society President in a ward and the Young Women's president in a ward (twice).  It's a myth that women in the church don't have to worry about the stress of leadership.

There may be many that do not worry about potential leadership, similar to there are likely many men who don’t worry. It may be more personality that determines worry rather than gender. 

[Tacenda]

32 minutes ago, Calm said:

No need for envy.
 

While we don’t need to worry about bishopric or higher callings for ourselves, if you don’t think it is stressful for women with kids thinking about potential callings for their husbands (a Bishop’s wife’s generally takes on more home responsibility as well as being sought out by ward members, often doing service for members in need rather than passing it on to the RS President), you might want to reconsider. 
 

And there are plenty of callings that women can potentially get that they stress about (one reason I always volunteered for Primary in a new ward and then ward librarian was to prevent myself being called to RS or YW’s positions. I was especially terrified of the second due to my dislike of teenagers (I like a teenager...one at a time, it is teenagers I have issues with....more than one)

Yes to this! I don't know how bishop's wives do it. Bishops are not at home most of the time, and she is holding down the fort. 

I'm working half day later today in a sixth grade, wish me luck!!  

[Meadowchik]

21 minutes ago, bluebell said:

The members of the ward council have authority through their individual callings as leaders in the ward in their different organizations.  Here is what the handbook says about the council and the members responsibilities:

Members of the ward council strive to help individuals build testimonies, receive saving ordinances, keep covenants, and become consecrated followers of Jesus Christ (see Moroni 6:4–5). All members of the ward council have a general responsibility for the well-being of ward members. These ward officers also have a specific responsibility to watch over and strengthen each member in their organization.

Typically, the full ward council considers only matters that (1) would benefit from coordination among organizations, (2) would benefit from the discussion and unified efforts of the council, or (3) are of general concern for the ward as a whole. Most matters that are specific to a priesthood quorum or organization should be addressed by its leaders, not by the entire ward council. Additionally, individual ward council members may raise sensitive or confidential matters privately with the bishop.

Members of the ward council do most of their work outside of ward council meetings. They work with their counselors and with ministering brothers, ministering sisters, and others to care for those in their organizations and others who need assistance.

Ward council members strive to stay informed about the needs, well-being, and spiritual progress of members in their organizations. They also stay informed about members who face special challenges or changing circumstances. This information allows them to strengthen those who most need their help. At the same time, they respect individual and family privacy. Only the bishop deals with matters of personal worthiness.

Members of the ward council work together to build spiritual strength and unity in the ward. The ward council also oversees the planning of activities for the ward. Activities should be planned to fulfill gospel-centered purposes.  

Ward officers attend ward council meetings in two capacities: (1) as ward council members who help the bishop address needs and concerns in the ward and find solutions and (2) as representatives of their organizations. These leaders seek the guidance of the Holy Ghost as they unite in love and concern for those they serve.

Ward council meetings should focus on matters that will strengthen individuals and families. The council spends minimal time on calendaring, activity planning, and other administrative business.

During the meeting, the bishop explains each matter being considered, but he does not normally decide how to resolve the matter until he has heard the discussion. He encourages discussion without dominating it. He asks questions and may ask particular council members for their suggestions. He listens carefully before making a decision. These discussions should foster a spirit of inspiration.

Council members are encouraged to speak honestly, both from their personal experience and from their positions as organization leaders. Both men and women should feel that their comments are valued as full participants. The bishop seeks input from Relief Society, Young Women, and Primary leaders in all matters considered by the ward council. The viewpoint of women is sometimes different from that of men, and it adds essential perspective to understanding and responding to members’ needs.

After open discussion, the bishop may make a decision, or he may wait to discuss the matter further with his counselors. After he makes a decision, council members should support it in a spirit of unity and harmony.

If council members have strongly unsettled feelings about an important decision, the bishop may wait for another council meeting to consider the matter further and seek spiritual confirmation and unity.

Council members must keep confidential any private or sensitive information about members, families, and subjects that are discussed.

The members advise, but they do not all have authority. The bishop does.

 

21 minutes ago, bluebell said:

That could be.  But it seems like a lot to assume.  Especially for a study that isn't talking about possibilities but actualities.

I was not answering based on the study, just thinking about your questions.

 

21 minutes ago, bluebell said:

It seems like, before they could say with any certainty how a sexist religion impacted women, the researchers would either 1) have to study whether or not how the woman felt about her religion had any impact on her health, or 2) prove that the negative health results existed even if she herself did not believe her religion was sexist.

Do they do either in the study?   

The study examines the statistical relationship between the measured parameters of sexism and self-reported health.  It seeks to establish whether there is any pattern to be found between those two things. The underlying idea is that, a pattern could warrant further study by scientists, and perhaps it could invite further consideration from people involved in those institutions.

What you are describing sounds like a different study. I do think that the belief that one is being treated unfairly can impact them, but that disparate treatment can impact people whether they acknowledge it or not.

Anyway, the authors do address this in the discussion portion of the study, as quoted above:

Quote

 

Religious structural sexism likely affects health via a number of pathways—for example, undermining psychosocial resources, increasing psychological distress, and increasing sexism in other structural domains—but additional scholarship is needed to understand how religious institutional sexism influences mental and physical health. Ancillary analyses finding that the impact of religious structural sexism does not vary by frequency of church attendance (i.e., no dose-response pattern) hints that psychological distress may not be the most important mechanism directly linking congregational sexism and health.

Instead, participation in a sexist church may be an indicator of exposure to a whole system of structural sexism because it is part of a constellation of positions within various other institutions and relationships. The family may function as a particularly important domain by providing institutional support for gender-stratified roles within the home. To the extent that structural sexism in religious congregations encourages a traditional gender division of household labor, such sexism may be particularly harmful in the context of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Social distancing has limited the social support and engagement normally provided by religious congregations, and the lack of childcare has exacerbated existing gender inequalities in domestic labor and overburdened women, undermining their careers and mental health (Collins et al. 2020; Hamel and Salganicoff 2020). Thus, exploring the connections between structural sexism across varied structural domains and levels of analysis represents an important next step in understanding the mechanisms linking religious structural sexism and health.

 

The two principle questions of the study were:

Quote

 

Is attending a sexist religious institution that excludes women from power and leadership associated with health among women and men?

If so, how does the health of attendees at inclusive religious institutions and sexist religious institutions compare to that of individuals who do not regularly participate in organized religion?

 

As they note in the discussion, the results of these questions would signal a need to study it further and indeed, seek out more direct answers to the questions you posed, among others.

Edited April 22, 2021 by Meadowchik

[Meadowchik]

6 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I've been both the Relief Society President in a ward and the Young Women's president in a ward (twice).  It's a myth that women in the church don't have to worry about the stress of leadership.

We don't have as many chances to be leaders as men, but women still shoulder some of the biggest leadership responsibilities in the ward.

Do you think responsibilities they shoulder are made more or less difficult due to not having as much authority as the bishop or bishopric members?

[Calm]

1 minute ago, Tacenda said:

Yes to this! I don't know how bishop's wives do it. Bishops are not at home most of the time, and she is holding down the fort. 

I'm working half day later today in a sixth grade, wish me luck!!  

Good luck. I eventually refused to tutor above 5th grade unless they were in my kids’ class or family.  Kids always tried to listen to me even if they had a hard time when younger. Having an adult’s attention seemed to matter to them. When older, not so much.

[bluebell]

2 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

The members advise, but they do not all have authority. The bishop does.

 

They have authority in their callings, under the direction of the bishop.  It seems like the people who did the study understood that both kinds of authority existed.  Authority in a person's sphere and authority over the entire congregation.  

Quote

I was not answering based on the study, just thinking about your questions.

Makes sense.  I'm specifically wondering about the study.