Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Making Women more Visible


Recommended Posts

Posted
4 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I've been listening to Follow Him's podcast this week with Camille Fronk Olson and it's be really great.  One part that stood out to me was when Olson connected Rebekah's reaction to being asked to leave her family and go with Abraham's servant to marry Isaac with Nephi choosing to go back and get the plates.

Olson says this when talking about after the servant finds Rebekah and talks to her family and then is ready to head back to Isaac:

It's fascinating how much there is in the scriptures that could be catered to girls and women but that has never been.  It's probably in part because most of what is correlated in our lessons is correlated by men and female representation in lessons was likely not a goal.  Plus, most scripture stories are about men and two or three women so that's some really low hanging fruit.  Of course it would be picked first and most often.

But I think it's time to put some serious effort into branching out.  These stories show that it is very possible.

Olson ends this little section by saying this:

Yes.  We need more women examples.  They are out there, we just haven't been taught to see them that well, but that can easily change.  And I think the church is sincerely trying to change it.

Yes, we do need more women leaders and examples. Why don’t we have many? Let’s explore why we don’t?

Posted
4 minutes ago, 2BizE said:

Yes, we do need more women leaders and examples. Why don’t we have many? Let’s explore why we don’t?

I tend to think it's partly because it wasn't a priority before.  Women don't need to be ordained to be an example or a leader.  I think that a push for ordination has in some ways muddied the waters and caused pushback that does not need to exist.

Posted
9 minutes ago, Nofear said:

I think some will take issue with "go and marry this guy you've never met" as an example of the kind of obedience we want our young women to emulate. Culturally, in context, it's not nearly as bad as it sounds (and God can certainly ask that of us) but to our modern ears it can be a bit disquieting. Much like, "I will go, I will do, I will cut off Laban's head," isn't celebrated in song and verse. Not that God didn't command Nephi to do so, just that it is a little jarring.

Do we see anyone attempting to persuade Rebekah to do it though?  This kind of complaint reminds me of those people are all about women's ability to choose and know their own mind, until they choose something that the person doesn't agree with.  

Posted
10 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Do we see anyone attempting to persuade Rebekah to do it though?  This kind of complaint reminds me of those people are all about women's ability to choose and know their own mind, until they choose something that the person doesn't agree with.  

Oh, I think Rebekah is a great example of faith and faithfulness. And I think it was great that her choice was asked. Still, the general concept of "I will go, I will marry, the guy the Lord commands" isn't a great verse. Also, according to the Midrash she was born when Isaac was bound to the altar (age 26). Thus, if tradition is right, he was a forty year old marrying a 14 year old. And, it might be pointed out that Isaac didn't exactly have a lot of consent in this.

 

PS: The nay-sayers of the Church also have a problem with Mary being told -- by an Angel -- that she was going to have a baby. Sure, she said yes, but can she really consent when presented a "choice" by a divine messenger. And not really even a choice since according to the scriptures she wasn't asked if it was ok, just told her it was happening and she "consented"? Put that into song for primary girls to sing and the spittle will fly. It's a nonsense complaint and criticism, but one that is made nonetheless.

Posted
1 minute ago, Nofear said:

Oh, I think Rebekah is a great example of faith and faithfulness. And I think it was great that her choice was asked. Still, the general concept of "I will go, I will marry, the guy the Lord commands" isn't a great verse. Also, according to the Midrash she was born when Isaac was bound to the altar (age 26). Thus, if tradition is right, he was a forty year old marrying a 14 year old. And, it might be pointed out that Isaac didn't exactly have a lot of consent in this.

 

PS: The nay-sayers of the Church also have a problem with Mary being told -- by an Angel -- that she was going to have a baby. Sure, she said yes, but can she really consent when presented a "choice" by a divine messenger. And not really even a choice since according to the scriptures she wasn't asked if it was ok, just told her it was happening and she "consented"? Put that into song for primary girls to sing and the spittle will fly. It's a nonsense complaint and criticism, but one that is made nonetheless.

I'm not really concerned with those who whine about God's right to ask us to do hard things.  :lol:

But you are probably right in that there will always be people who are mad at something (though I've never personally heard anyone complaining about Mary.  I'm sure they exist).

Posted
3 hours ago, Nofear said:

Still, the general concept of "I will go, I will marry, the guy the Lord commands" isn't a great verse.

It does line them up for when a guy uses the pickup line "I received revelation that we should get married".

Posted
27 minutes ago, JustAnAustralian said:

It does line them up for when a guy uses the pickup line "I received revelation that we should get married".

Do we see anyone telling Rebekah that God said to marry Isaac?  Sincere question as I haven't looked for that in the text and could have missed it.  It didn't occur to me until your post.

Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Do we see anyone telling Rebekah that God said to marry Isaac?

THEY were clearly aware, but it doesn't specifically say that they told HER. But the asking her part is covered in its entirety in two sentences (ch24 vs58) "And they called Rebekah, and said unto her, Wilt thou go with this man? And she said, I will go." So there's a lot left out.

Edited by JustAnAustralian
Posted
7 hours ago, 2BizE said:

Yes, we do need more women leaders and examples. Why don’t we have many? Let’s explore why we don’t?

our religions heritage stems from a time when women where property. Our scriptures do not contain many women so we presume that this is the model God follows and it has leached into our religion. Lets better explore how we can improve this. I think that searching through ancient text will always leave us short - but there are many examples in more modern times that need to be incorporated into our lesson plans. I say equal weight. if we are referencing a man from the scriptures, it should be accompanies by an example of a women who emulates those values. 

We also need more women in positions of authority in the church who have influence on such things as policy and curriculum. Our stake relief society presidents should have ready access to a female general authority in the same way our stake presidents do. they should be more than just another local auxiliary. 

Posted
12 hours ago, bluebell said:

I've been listening to Follow Him's podcast this week with Camille Fronk Olson and it's be really great.  One part that stood out to me was when Olson connected Rebekah's reaction to being asked to leave her family and go with Abraham's servant to marry Isaac with Nephi choosing to go back and get the plates.

Olson says this when talking about after the servant finds Rebekah and talks to her family and then is ready to head back to Isaac:

It's fascinating how much there is in the scriptures that could be catered to girls and women but that has never been.  It's probably in part because most of what is correlated in our lessons is correlated by men and female representation in lessons was likely not a goal.  Plus, most scripture stories are about men and two or three women so that's some really low hanging fruit.  Of course it would be picked first and most often.

But I think it's time to put some serious effort into branching out.  These stories show that it is very possible.

Despite what I said above, I agree.

12 hours ago, bluebell said:

Olson ends this little section by saying this:

Yes.  We need more women examples.  They are out there, we just haven't been taught to see them that well, but that can easily change.  And I think the church is sincerely trying to change it.

 

Posted
6 hours ago, Rain said:

It's not a nonsense complaint.  I struggled with Mary's story for awhile.  I still do if I really think about it, but I can trust the Lord for the time being.  At the time I felt very used by men because of several situations in my life. The story of Mary's pregnancy really hurt me and made it difficult for me to trust Heavenly Father.  It took years for me to come to neutral feelings about the story.

Hopefully my description of the complaint was fair (even if my judgment of it is very different than yours). And I think I can see how it can be difficult for many. For me the two thoughts that come to mind is that 1) she would have consented (perhaps even volunteered) in her pre-mortal life and that 2) the scriptural account doesn't have to be exactly accurate in every detail and that the specific details are much more in alignment with the concept of consent. For me it is likely both 1) and 2). Some may have difficulty accepting the idea that we chose and/or consented to specific mortal activities or challenges prior to coming to earth -- nonetheless, it is a pretty stable concept within our doctrines and and idea that I have comfort from within the context of my own personal afflictions.

Explanation 1) doesn't remove the difficulty of the idea 2) -- if can one really consent when an *angel* comes and tells you to do stuff. Did Alma really have a choice when he was told to either stop fighting the Church or be destroyed? (Though Laman and Lamuel seem to suggest such choice can exist.) Whatever the case, I do know that our Heavenly Parents hold our moral agency as a "prime directive" and I can fully trust that they did not violate their principles with Mary even if I don't know all the details. And I'm certain the scriptures don't have all the details.

Posted
8 hours ago, Rain said:

Despite what I said above, I agree.

 

When it comes to the scriptures, we have to work with what is there.  As much as I agree with what you said above, and it would be really helpful if almost all of the stuff surrounding women didn't also have to do with men in some way (marriage and pregnancy), it's all we've got in most cases.

Posted
20 minutes ago, bluebell said:

When it comes to the scriptures, we have to work with what is there.  As much as I agree with what you said above, and it would be really helpful if almost all of the stuff surrounding women didn't also have to do with men in some way (marriage and pregnancy), it's all we've got in most cases.

I agree that we have to work with what we have.  I just don't think that it is a nonsense complaint or whining for everyone who struggles with what those examples are.  I think we can appreciate what we have without assuming others who struggle with the examples are complainers. Some may be.  Others may not be able to communicate those feelings well 

Posted (edited)

Perhaps we are unfairly judging the men and women of the scriptures by current standards? Those were tribal cultures, far removed from how we live today. So much of their time and effort was spent doing basic survival chores about which  none of us has a clue today.

I remember witnessing the daily grind my grandparents (born 1880s) went through in their small Colorado town. They had little time for anything other than work, food concerns, some Church service, housekeeping, and sleep. I live like royalty compared with them. 

Edited by Bernard Gui
Posted
1 hour ago, Bernard Gui said:

I remember witnessing the daily grind my grandparents (born 1880s) went through in their small Colorado town. They had little time for anything other than work, food concerns, some Church service, housekeeping, and sleep. I live like royalty compared with them. 

A bit off topic, but one of my favorite talks from Hans Rosling.

 

Posted
3 hours ago, Rain said:

I agree that we have to work with what we have.  I just don't think that it is a nonsense complaint or whining for everyone who struggles with what those examples are.  I think we can appreciate what we have without assuming others who struggle with the examples are complainers. Some may be.  Others may not be able to communicate those feelings well 

You were right to call me out on that.  I should have chosen my words better.

Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Nofear said:

A bit off topic, but one of my favorite talks from Hans Rosling.

 

Oh yeah! My mother used a Maytag wringer tub and my grandmother used a galvanized tub. Wash day pretty much lasted all day, especially when they had to heat the water on the coal stove. Our parakeet flew into the Maytag once but we got him out before he drowned. Our Pueblo Indian cleaning lady got her arm caught in a wringer. It busted it up really good. She couldn’t use her arm after that. That was a fairly common injury. 

Edited by Bernard Gui
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Perhaps we are unfairly judging the men and women of the scriptures by current standards? Those were tribal cultures, far removed from how we live today. So much of their time and effort was spent doing basic survival chores about which  none of us has a clue today.

I remember witnessing the daily grind my grandparents (born 1880s) went through in their small Colorado town. They had little time for anything other than work, food concerns, some Church service, housekeeping, and sleep. I live like royalty compared with them. 

I'm not sure who you might think is judging them, if anyone.  

The concerns are not about the people heavily involved doing the daily grind.  They are about the lack of examples for women or about about being able to relate to the few examples we have.  

If there is any judging it would be on the people who create our modern day curriculum and leave the women out, but like Bluebell said those examples don't play a prominent roll so they weren't noticed as much.  So it really isn't judgment on them either.

What it is now is that we know better we do better.  We should be looking for the women examples and making them more visible and that's where the focus really should be.

Edited by Rain
Posted
2 hours ago, Rain said:

I'm not sure who you might think is judging them, if anyone.  

The concerns are not about the people heavily involved doing the daily grind.  They are about the lack of examples for women or about about being able to relate to the few examples we have.  

If there is any judging it would be on the people who create our modern day curriculum and leave the women out, but like Bluebell said those examples don't play a prominent roll so they weren't noticed as much.  So it really isn't judgment on them either.

What it is now is that we know better we do better.  We should be looking for the women examples and making them more visible and that's where the focus really should be.

Addressing the bolded about women in the scriptures. 

Posted
23 hours ago, Freedom said:

our religions heritage stems from a time when women where property. Our scriptures do not contain many women so we presume that this is the model God follows and it has leached into our religion. Lets better explore how we can improve this. I think that searching through ancient text will always leave us short - but there are many examples in more modern times that need to be incorporated into our lesson plans. I say equal weight. if we are referencing a man from the scriptures, it should be accompanies by an example of a women who emulates those values. 

We also need more women in positions of authority in the church who have influence on such things as policy and curriculum. Our stake relief society presidents should have ready access to a female general authority in the same way our stake presidents do. they should be more than just another local auxiliary. 

Freedom,

I agree. Women in the church have been ostracized for many years. One example is the Relief Society.  The women of the church used to run the Relief Society. They collected dues, developed their own manuals and provided leadership opportunities.  Unfortunate, the RS was overtaken by the male leadership of the church.  I also think women are reluctant to speak out or become leaders because of past and present action taken by the church against women who have worked toward change for women to have more leadership opportunities. Usually what happens is the women are excommunicated and then to save face, the church usually develops some of their ideas into the church.

Sonia Johnson was a great example of this. A woman who fought for women rights and was excommunicated.  Here is an interview with her from 1982.

 

Posted
22 minutes ago, 2BizE said:

Sonia Johnson was a great example of this. A woman who fought for women rights and was excommunicated.  

She set a wonderful example when she chained herself to the Seattle Temple gates during the dedication. 

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...