Sometimes I point out to people that if women were really devalued in the Church then one of the most outraged should be me. With a Ph.D. in management, albeit public management, shouldn't I be a prime candidate for leadership?
So, how come I'm not miffed?
Well, it's complicated. Isn't it always? This issue is once again in the news. Michael Otterson addresses it in The Washington Post. Jana Reiss has to air her views and, of course, The Salt Lake Tribune must enter the fray.
Question: Why doesn't anyone express any outrage as to why men aren't allowed to do specific jobs completely reserved for women in the Church? Answer: Because the men are assumed to do jobs that are superior to that reserved for women. In my opinion, THAT view is what is really sexist.
In fact, God is sexist. He must be. Why else would He only make women capable of bearing children instead of both men and women?
Look at it another way. Heavenly Father reserves different roles for men and women. Our current, secular society, values the men's roles higher than the women's roles. However, that does NOT mean Heavenly Father values them differently.
In fact, the roles are (drum roll) "separate but equal." Oh great, that argument is just going to build me legions of fans. . .
If Mormons truly value all callings as equal, and simply as opportunities to serve, why do we even have this discussion? Answer: Because even Mormons don't really believe that a nursery leader's status is on par with a that of a stake president. We are captives of our secular society values that tarnish our religious beliefs.
Maybe it is the way in which it is phrased, "Would you prefer to be a co-creator with Heavenly Father in bringing new life into this world? Or, would you like to be an administrator?" If it is phrased like that, I'll take co-creator any day.
Let's start calling our Church leaders "bureaucrats" instead of "leaders" or "managers." That makes it sound much less desirable.
I'm a 7th generation Utah Mormon, born, raised and educated. If the system is so repressive, how did the system create me? I exist. Something has to explain me.
In fact, the core belief in Mormondom is that our ultimate goal is the highest echelon of the Celestial Kingdom. Interestingly enough, men cannot make it there without women and women cannot make it there without men, as equal partners.
That's right, I can make it there without being a Bishop, Branch President, Stake President, Seventy, Apostle or even President of the Church! In fact, I am not kept from anything necessary for my eventual advancement even if I NEVER hold any supposed position of responsibility in this life.
Is that supposed to comfort me? I guess it will have to, me and other women. I think I'll just sit in my cushy, comfortable seat in the Relief Society Room and reflect on it. That is the special room, exclusively for women in meetinghouses, that is always more comfortable and elaborate than the fold-up chairs men place in a corner where they have to meet.
What was that about equality again?
I think the kicker is that the men's responsibilities, like Bishop and Stake President, have personal glory involved. Okay, so I'm denied personal glory. Wait a minute, isn't that what Satan was after in the premortal life?
Okay, if I had the vaunted corner office in Mormondom, would I start acting brain damaged? Modern science suggests I would. In Mormondom we call it "unrighteous dominion" though.
A sister in one of our church congregations complained to my husband that her husband, not a member yet, told her he thought Mormon women should be docile and pointed to what he thought were examples of docility in our Mormon congregation. My husband's rejoinder: "He can't say that about MY wife."
My husband actually likes having a smart, capable woman as a spouse. What's wrong with him? Nothing, in my opinion. The second time around, General Authorities also seem to prefer smart, capable women too.
I'll close for now. There are simply too many tangents and too little time.
So, how come I'm not miffed?
Well, it's complicated. Isn't it always? This issue is once again in the news. Michael Otterson addresses it in The Washington Post. Jana Reiss has to air her views and, of course, The Salt Lake Tribune must enter the fray.
Question: Why doesn't anyone express any outrage as to why men aren't allowed to do specific jobs completely reserved for women in the Church? Answer: Because the men are assumed to do jobs that are superior to that reserved for women. In my opinion, THAT view is what is really sexist.
In fact, God is sexist. He must be. Why else would He only make women capable of bearing children instead of both men and women?
Look at it another way. Heavenly Father reserves different roles for men and women. Our current, secular society, values the men's roles higher than the women's roles. However, that does NOT mean Heavenly Father values them differently.
In fact, the roles are (drum roll) "separate but equal." Oh great, that argument is just going to build me legions of fans. . .
If Mormons truly value all callings as equal, and simply as opportunities to serve, why do we even have this discussion? Answer: Because even Mormons don't really believe that a nursery leader's status is on par with a that of a stake president. We are captives of our secular society values that tarnish our religious beliefs.
Maybe it is the way in which it is phrased, "Would you prefer to be a co-creator with Heavenly Father in bringing new life into this world? Or, would you like to be an administrator?" If it is phrased like that, I'll take co-creator any day.
Let's start calling our Church leaders "bureaucrats" instead of "leaders" or "managers." That makes it sound much less desirable.
I'm a 7th generation Utah Mormon, born, raised and educated. If the system is so repressive, how did the system create me? I exist. Something has to explain me.
In fact, the core belief in Mormondom is that our ultimate goal is the highest echelon of the Celestial Kingdom. Interestingly enough, men cannot make it there without women and women cannot make it there without men, as equal partners.
That's right, I can make it there without being a Bishop, Branch President, Stake President, Seventy, Apostle or even President of the Church! In fact, I am not kept from anything necessary for my eventual advancement even if I NEVER hold any supposed position of responsibility in this life.
Is that supposed to comfort me? I guess it will have to, me and other women. I think I'll just sit in my cushy, comfortable seat in the Relief Society Room and reflect on it. That is the special room, exclusively for women in meetinghouses, that is always more comfortable and elaborate than the fold-up chairs men place in a corner where they have to meet.
What was that about equality again?
I think the kicker is that the men's responsibilities, like Bishop and Stake President, have personal glory involved. Okay, so I'm denied personal glory. Wait a minute, isn't that what Satan was after in the premortal life?
Okay, if I had the vaunted corner office in Mormondom, would I start acting brain damaged? Modern science suggests I would. In Mormondom we call it "unrighteous dominion" though.
A sister in one of our church congregations complained to my husband that her husband, not a member yet, told her he thought Mormon women should be docile and pointed to what he thought were examples of docility in our Mormon congregation. My husband's rejoinder: "He can't say that about MY wife."
My husband actually likes having a smart, capable woman as a spouse. What's wrong with him? Nothing, in my opinion. The second time around, General Authorities also seem to prefer smart, capable women too.
I'll close for now. There are simply too many tangents and too little time.
Continue reading at the original source →