More female representation in general conference

[Fether]

I have heard a bit of a stir about this over the last week from a couple different sources. They are complain about the lack of women speaking in General conference.
 

I was curious to hear from a couple women from the forum. Do you wish this as well? Or is this just an anti-patriarchy /feminist type wish?

For a woman, Is hearing a woman talk about Christ different than hearing a man talk about Christ? Is just the tone of which they use to teach the gospel?

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, Fether said:

I have heard a bit of a stir about this over the last week from a couple different sources. They are complain about the lack of women speaking in General conference.
 

I was curious to hear from a couple women from the forum. Do you wish this as well? Or is this just an anti-patriarchy /feminist type wish?

For a woman, Is hearing a woman talk about Christ different than hearing a man talk about Christ? Is just the tone of which they use to teach the gospel?

Since each speaker is unique, I have been particularly impressed occasionally by women speakers at Conference.  But I feel the same about the male speakers.  It may very well be that a female speaker can bring experiences unique to a woman to her sermon.  That is likely to be all to the good.

[Rain]

2 hours ago, Fether said:

I have heard a bit of a stir about this over the last week from a couple different sources. They are complain about the lack of women speaking in General conference.
 

I was curious to hear from a couple women from the forum. Do you wish this as well? Or is this just an anti-patriarchy /feminist type wish?

For a woman, Is hearing a woman talk about Christ different than hearing a man talk about Christ? Is just the tone of which they use to teach the gospel?

As far as the basic message is concerned it is the same.  

The difference in hearing from a woman verses a man shows that God and his leaders are aware of and are listening to the needs of women and respect all of the roles of women in God's kingdom.

It's not a matter of pride  ("women only want to speak because they are prideful"), but rather, "Heavenly Father loves women too!"

[Calm]

5 hours ago, Fether said:

I have heard a bit of a stir about this over the last week from a couple different sources. They are complain about the lack of women speaking in General conference.
 

I was curious to hear from a couple women from the forum. Do you wish this as well? Or is this just an anti-patriarchy /feminist type wish?

For a woman, Is hearing a woman talk about Christ different than hearing a man talk about Christ? Is just the tone of which they use to teach the gospel?

I would like there to be more women. I feel more a participant than an observer/outsider when women are involved in academic conferences, panels, and such, and this extends to church activity.
 

I often put myself in the place of people I see...thinking of how they might be embarrassed by an error because I would be, for example. I think that when this connection happens with women, I am more likely to see myself as a potential contributor and therefore feel more involved. There are attributes that men can have that have similar result (shared interests or similar experiences), so it is not exclusive to women.  Given certain tendencies to withdraw that I have, having many of these visual and other connections to increase feelings of belonging is important. 
 

I also agree with Rain. When I see women participating, it is a visual confirmation that strengthens my feelings that women are valued, important to church leaders as individuals and are respected as active partners.  It is not just words I am hearing about how the male leaders care and value women, I am seeing an example in front of me of just that.  

Edited April 25, 2021 by Calm

[The Nehor]

To have more women speaking in Conference there would need to be more women as General Authorities/General Officers or a radical change in how talks are distributed.

The general model is:

Prophet speaks twice (and does intro and conclusion)
Counselors in FP speak twice each.
Apostles all speak once.
One talk or prayer given to a member of each auxiliary Presidency and the Presiding Bishopric.
Rest of talks and prayers filled in by 70s.

That is why I wasn’t kidding that women giving prayers would mean fewer talks by women. As it stands we get one talk or prayer each from the Relief Society Presidency, the Young Women’s Presidency, and the Primary Presidency.

You could give those women more by having multiple talks from each Presidency led by women but that would probably be more burdensome than anything else.

 

Proviso: Yes, there have been exceptions to the above general program of talk assignment. Apostles sometimes miss out when health declines. It is not written in stone tablets. No, pointing out an exception you saw once doesn’t mean I am entirely wrong.

[Rain]

29 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

To have more women speaking in Conference there would need to be more women as General Authorities/General Officers or a radical change in how talks are distributed.

The general model is:

Prophet speaks twice (and does intro and conclusion)
Counselors in FP speak twice each.
Apostles all speak once.
One talk or prayer given to a member of each auxiliary Presidency and the Presiding Bishopric.
Rest of talks and prayers filled in by 70s.

That is why I wasn’t kidding that women giving prayers would mean fewer talks by women. As it stands we get one talk or prayer each from the Relief Society Presidency, the Young Women’s Presidency, and the Primary Presidency.

You could give those women more by having multiple talks from each Presidency led by women but that would probably be more burdensome than anything else.

 

If the FP gives 2 talks each and the 12 give 1 talk each why would it be burdensome for each of the women to give 1 talk each? 

29 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Proviso: Yes, there have been exceptions to the above general program of talk assignment. Apostles sometimes miss out when health declines. It is not written in stone tablets. No, pointing out an exception you saw once doesn’t mean I am entirely wrong.

 

[gopher]

The solution is simple - add a third session on Sunday to allow more sisters to speak.  Having 12 hours of conference seems a much consistent biblical number than the current 10.

[Duncan]

Let's face it with all the changes and new temples being announced does anyone listen to anyone else but President Nelson?

[Rain]

37 minutes ago, gopher said:

The solution is simple - add a third session on Sunday to allow more sisters to speak.  Having 12 hours of conference seems a much consistent biblical number than the current 10.

You don't have to increase the time.  There are a number of options.  Have the FP only give 1 talk.  Cut the time on the talks given.  Have women speak instead of the 70.  Have 3 of the apostles not speak each time.

Not all changes work, but I have to ask why it is more important for some men to have a 15-20 minute talk or two than to have a woman have a 5-10 minute talk?

Edited April 25, 2021 by Rain

[Traela]

The thing I saw was comparing this past conference to one in 1972, I think, to show that “nothing has changed.”  I rolled my eyes, because in the ‘70s I’m pretty sure we didn’t see as many persons of Color and speakers from outside the USA, if any.  I suspect we will see more women speakers in October, including at least one from the new Area-level calling.

 

[Rain]

15 minutes ago, Traela said:

The thing I saw was comparing this past conference to one in 1972, I think, to show that “nothing has changed.”  I rolled my eyes, because in the ‘70s I’m pretty sure we didn’t see as many persons of Color and speakers from outside the USA, if any.  I suspect we will see more women speakers in October, including at least one from the new Area-level calling.

 

I just looked.  I don't know about which country each came from, but all speakers in 1972 were white men - except the sisters session is missing in the library app under general conference in those years.

[juliann]

They could start by letting the Women’s session be women or change the name. Or they could add equivalent women speakers to the priesthood session to reinforce the idea that women really do have priesthood. 
 

Male presence was increased this last Women’s session which was discouraging.  We hear from the First Presidency for two days surely they can step back once a year so more women have the opportunity to be heard. 

[Rain]

15 hours ago, Fether said:

I have heard a bit of a stir about this over the last week from a couple different sources. They are complain about the lack of women speaking in General conference.
 

I was curious to hear from a couple women from the forum. Do you wish this as well? Or is this just an anti-patriarchy /feminist type wish?

For a woman, Is hearing a woman talk about Christ different than hearing a man talk about Christ? Is just the tone of which they use to teach the gospel?

Thinking more on this. 

The women at the tomb.  Would it have been different for you if say Peter or Matthew were there instead?  Why or why not?

[Calm]

2 hours ago, The Nehor said:

You could give those women more by having multiple talks from each Presidency led by women but that would probably be more burdensome than anything else.

Adding one woman speaker to each session probably would be manageable especially if they added the board members to the pool. 

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, juliann said:

They could start by letting the Women’s session be women or change the name. Or they could add equivalent women speakers to the priesthood session to reinforce the idea that women really do have priesthood. 
 

Male presence was increased this last Women’s session which was discouraging.  We hear from the First Presidency for two days surely they can step back once a year so more women have the opportunity to be heard. 

I am one that would be really upset if we did not get to hear from the First Presidency during the women's session.  Which goes to show the OP that there really isn't a solution that every woman is going to agree with.  

[Rain]

Just now, bluebell said:

I am one that would be really upset if we did not get to hear from the First Presidency during the women's session.  Which goes to show the OP that there really isn't a solution that every woman is going to agree with.  

The whole first presidency or would you be ok with just 1?

What if 2 gave one talk each in the regular sessions and 1 gave one in the women's?

I started thinking about it this morning with women who definitely want them in the women's session. In the past I have thought "we are worth enough to have the first presidency speak to us too", but this morning I started to wonder why I felt that way. Is it all a matter of position/authority or is most of it how we value or don't value women's leaders?  If women's leaders were valued like men's were how much would we notice?  I don't know.

[juliann]

16 minutes ago, Rain said:

The whole first presidency or would you be ok with just 1?

What if 2 gave one talk each in the regular sessions and 1 gave one in the women's?

I started thinking about it this morning with women who definitely want them in the women's session. In the past I have thought "we are worth enough to have the first presidency speak to us too", but this morning I started to wonder why I felt that way. Is it all a matter of position/authority or is most of it how we value or don't value women's leaders?  If women's leaders were valued like men's were how much would we notice?  I don't know.

For me, it is that they have all spoken...some more than once.  Unless there was something specifically directed to women, I think it is more important to elevate our women leaders than hear more sermons. I wouldn't mind the prophet speaking very briefly, but to have all three speak for even longer times than the three women did didn't feel like a women's conference. 

[JLHPROF]

49 minutes ago, juliann said:

I think it is more important to elevate our women leaders than hear more sermons. 

I agree.  We need our Eliza R. Snows, Emmeline Wells, Zina Huntingtons etc every bit as much as our Orson Pratts and George Q. Cannons.

[The Nehor]

4 hours ago, Rain said:

 

If the FP gives 2 talks each and the 12 give 1 talk each why would it be burdensome for each of the women to give 1 talk each? 

 

Because it is more than the Presiding Bishopric, YM, and SS presidencies have to do. I said it would “probably” be burdensome.

3 hours ago, Rain said:

You don't have to increase the time.  There are a number of options.  Have the FP only give 1 talk.  Cut the time on the talks given.  Have women speak instead of the 70.  Have 3 of the apostles not speak each time.

Not all changes work, but I have to ask why it is more important for some men to have a 15-20 minute talk or two than to have a woman have a 5-10 minute talk?

That would fall under “radical change”. There are lots of ways to change it but they require redoing how talks are distributed or changing the makeup of the leadership. I am not making any kind of judgment on whether such a change is advisable.

The ideal way to do this would be to extend women the Priesthood and the makeup of the leadership would slowly but surely change. That would require God giving the okay.

 

On a personal note I oppose any plan to have less apostles speaking. They are the prophets, seers, and revelators. Everyone else sometimes gives something of value but it is their mandate to tell us what we need to hear. I admit I kind of think we would be better off cutting out everyone else speaking and cutting it down to six hours. This kind of opinion is why they have not called me into General leadership. That and the bit about me being irrascible and unworthy.

 

Edited to add: I do think women’s sessions should be mostly women speaking with a member of the First Presidency also speaking and maybe one apostle. Put Wendy Nelson in too. I want to hear more from her.

Edited April 25, 2021 by The Nehor

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Rain said:

The whole first presidency or would you be ok with just 1?

What if 2 gave one talk each in the regular sessions and 1 gave one in the women's?

I started thinking about it this morning with women who definitely want them in the women's session. In the past I have thought "we are worth enough to have the first presidency speak to us too", but this morning I started to wonder why I felt that way. Is it all a matter of position/authority or is most of it how we value or don't value women's leaders?  If women's leaders were valued like men's were how much would we notice?  I don't know.

For me, it's their positions of authority and not that I value women speakers less.  If prophets speak at the priesthood session I want prophets to speak at the women's session as well. Replacing a prophet speaking to the women of the church, with a general officer (regardless of the sex) speaking to the women of the church, isn't an equal trade in my eyes.  

I know my perspective won't work for every other sister though.

[rpn]

Let's face it, with only nine women leaders at that level (as opposed to 15 and then 7 presidents of the seventy plus more than 70 general authority seventies,  women are disproportionately represented even if only one of them speak in one session.

Do I think that the face of the church at General Conference suffers when there aren't women part of every session?  Yes.  

Do I think that both men and women members of the church benefit from hearing from women during conference (including the priesthood session, since men need to visualize making their spouses equal partners in the decision making in their homes and that means internalizing that men's views, conversation, ideas are NOT superior to women's)?   Yes

Do I think that now that they've appoint women to be in Area Councils who could also be asked to speak in conference?   Of course that would be a way to include more.

Do I think that trying really hard to make room for women and other diversity is more important than selecting specific speakers under the Lord's direction?   Absolutely not.

So yes I'm hoping that those who are planning and deciding are actively looking for ways to make the public face of conference inclusive, and most of all I want those who give talks to be the ones best able to deliver the messages the Lord wants communicated.

 

Edited April 25, 2021 by rpn

[bluebell]

4 minutes ago, rpn said:

Let's face it, with only nine women leaders at that level (as opposed to 15 and then 7 presidents of the seventy plus more than 70 general authority seventies,  women are disproportionately represented even if only one of them speak in one session.

Do I think that the face of the church at General Conference suffers when there aren't women part of every session?  Yes.  

Do I think that both men and women members of the church benefit from hearing from women during conference (including the priesthood session, since men need to visual making their spouses equal partners in the decision making in their homes and that means internalizing that men's views, conversation, ideas are NOT superior to women's)?   Yes

Do I think that now that they've appoint women to be in Area Councils who could also be asked to speak in conference?   Of course that would be a way to include more.

Do I think that trying really hard to make room for women and other diversity is more important than selecting specific speakers under the Lord's direction?   Absolutely not.

So yes I'm hoping that those who are planning and deciding are actively looking for ways to make the public face of conference inclusive, and most of all I want those who give talks to be the ones best able to deliver the messages the Lord wants communicated.

 

I think it would go a long way to include women in the priesthood session.  I do think it would help both men and women views women leaders differently.  Maybe even help push the local EQ's to study talks by a woman on Sundays every now and then.  

[Rain]

59 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Because it is more than the Presiding Bishopric, YM, and SS presidencies have to do. I said it would “probably” be burdensome.

Do you feel it is burdensome for the apostles and first presidency?

59 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

That would fall under “radical change”. There are lots of ways to change it but they require redoing how talks are distributed or changing the makeup of the leadership. I am not making any kind of judgment on whether such a change is advisable.

The ideal way to do this would be to extend women the Priesthood and the makeup of the leadership would slowly but surely change. That would require God giving the okay.

 

On a personal note I oppose any plan to have less apostles speaking. They are the prophets, seers, and revelators. Everyone else sometimes gives something of value but it is their mandate to tell us what we need to hear. I admit I kind of think we would be better off cutting out everyone else speaking and cutting it down to six hours. This kind of opinion is why they have not called me into General leadership. That and the bit about me being irrascible and unworthy.

 

Edited to add: I do think women’s sessions should be mostly women speaking with a member of the First Presidency also speaking and maybe one apostle. Put Wendy Nelson in too. I want to hear more from her.

I am ok with her speaking if we have Sister Bingham's husband speaking in the priesthood session.

[Rain]

49 minutes ago, bluebell said:

For me, it's their positions of authority and not that I value women speakers less.  If prophets speak at the priesthood session I want prophets to speak at the women's session as well. Replacing a prophet speaking to the women of the church, with a general officer (regardless of the sex) speaking to the women of the church, isn't an equal trade in my eyes.  

I know my perspective won't work for every other sister though.

If the Lord switched them from being general officers to being called as "prophetesses", but they only served for 4-5 years would you then want the women speaking?

[Duncan]

Actually it was in the 1970's that the first Asian General Authorities spoke, Elders Adney Komatsu and Yoshihiko Kikuchi. Prior to that it was in  1951 when an Asian man spoke in Conference, Henry W. Aki who was a counselor in the then Chinese Mission

Edited April 25, 2021 by Duncan