I keep trying to write a post about what the heck I've actually been up to lately but I can never finish it for some reason. So here's what I've been doing:
Writing
I've been writing a lot over the summer and fall. I co-authored a patent with my dad for a pocket knife he invented, started doing some freelance writing, and started writing for a women's website. My feminist blog is still going as well, although I haven't had as much time for that with all the other writing projects I've had.
Health
The summer was sorta meh but I'm starting to feel better now that I've found a drug combination that actually suits me. Funny how that works. It's like I've been in a dark room and someone suddenly flipped a light switch on.
MoFem stuff
I felt some feminist fatigue over the summer. I was very tired of all the same old arguments against the things I cared about. I was tired of being ambushed in conversations online and in person. Everything Church-related felt very triggering to me. My Church attendance hit an all-time low. I had to pull back a little from the Church and from some feminist activities, but it was a good thing for me at the time. It saved my sanity.
Now that I'm feeling better, I think I'm in a better position to deal with stuff. Church, rather than torture, seems pretty okay to me. That's good news. I know that I will be criticized for my opinions and beliefs in the future; they're unorthodox ideas. But I know that I'll find appropriate ways to respond to people, and that there's always something I can learn from them.
Projects
I got back into driving over the summer. I haven't done anything hardcore. It's a process. But knowing that I can do it, and that I'm on that path, is really exciting.
I'm crocheting a lot. I'm a lot better than I was a year ago. Lately I've made a headband/earwarmers, an infinity scarf, a crochet hook case, driving gloves, and legwarmers. I'm hoping to make a sweater this winter, because I've never done anything that challenging before.
Future?
I dunno. Jordan's graduating in a few months, and then everything will change again, probably. I don't want to be a freelancer forever. I daydream about having a normal job outside of my house, one that I drive my car to. No, neither I nor Jordan knows what he wants to do after graduation. Sorry about that. We'll probably keep living in Utah, at least for a while, but we hoooooope that we can leave this state at some point.
Showing posts with label thoughts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label thoughts. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 22, 2013
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
I'm bad at books?
I keep trying to read books that have high ratings on Goodreads, but I keep finding myself disappointed and sometimes bored like crazy.
Last week, for example: I tried reading Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close and Water for Elephants. And I hated both of them. Why is that? People love both of these books, right? Am I just super bad at liking good books? Well, here's my defense [*spoilers, maybe*]:
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close was... original... but it was just about the most obnoxious book I've ever read. The story takes place in 2003 (I think) and mostly revolves around a weird, depressed kid trying to recover from the death of his father, who was at the World Trade Center during the attacks on 9/11. I'm not really a fan of books that use the deaths of parents as backstory. It just seems... lazy. Like the writer needed a "real reason" for their protagonist to be depressed or something. I dunno.
The author used a lot of gimmicks to move the story along and Give It Character, including using tabs instead of spaces to show a character was using a typewriter to narrate; putting in pictures from the kid's Things That Happened To Me scrapbook; jumbling up all of one narrator's words as he runs out of space in his notebook, forcing him to write over his previous words and turning the pages black; putting blank pages in the middle of the book; ergghhnnnngggggg. There were three things that bothered me about this: 1) It happened so often that I lost track of what was going on; 2) It felt like the author relied on the weird gimmicks to tell the story, instead of, I dunno, his writing; and 3) This is a novel for adults. If I want pictures with my story, I will get a comic book, a graphic novel, or an old-fashioned picture book. More prose, please.
Water for Elephants was so boring I only got through a few chapters. Here's what I didn't like: It was tedious, there was parental death as a plot device, the main character had little to no personality, it felt like the author was trying to "shock" the readers with circus life/a peek into the mind of men/etc. and it seemed sort of over the top.
Did any of you guys like these books? Am I just cray-cray?
Last week, for example: I tried reading Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close and Water for Elephants. And I hated both of them. Why is that? People love both of these books, right? Am I just super bad at liking good books? Well, here's my defense [*spoilers, maybe*]:
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close was... original... but it was just about the most obnoxious book I've ever read. The story takes place in 2003 (I think) and mostly revolves around a weird, depressed kid trying to recover from the death of his father, who was at the World Trade Center during the attacks on 9/11. I'm not really a fan of books that use the deaths of parents as backstory. It just seems... lazy. Like the writer needed a "real reason" for their protagonist to be depressed or something. I dunno.
The author used a lot of gimmicks to move the story along and Give It Character, including using tabs instead of spaces to show a character was using a typewriter to narrate; putting in pictures from the kid's Things That Happened To Me scrapbook; jumbling up all of one narrator's words as he runs out of space in his notebook, forcing him to write over his previous words and turning the pages black; putting blank pages in the middle of the book; ergghhnnnngggggg. There were three things that bothered me about this: 1) It happened so often that I lost track of what was going on; 2) It felt like the author relied on the weird gimmicks to tell the story, instead of, I dunno, his writing; and 3) This is a novel for adults. If I want pictures with my story, I will get a comic book, a graphic novel, or an old-fashioned picture book. More prose, please.
Water for Elephants was so boring I only got through a few chapters. Here's what I didn't like: It was tedious, there was parental death as a plot device, the main character had little to no personality, it felt like the author was trying to "shock" the readers with circus life/a peek into the mind of men/etc. and it seemed sort of over the top.
Did any of you guys like these books? Am I just cray-cray?
Wednesday, July 3, 2013
When my baby sister surprises me a little
We were talking about Neil Patrick Harris and I asked her if she had ever seen pictures of his adorable kids. She hadn't, so I showed her a bunch. After stalking him on Google for a while, she asked me if he had a significant other, so I showed her a picture of David Burtka and said that they were engaged. And she was like, "Cool." She then noticed a picture of Beyoncé and started talking about her.
I worried that she would react badly to such shocking information, so I'm delighted that she was just so... normal about it. I'm not sure if that's because she's awesome, my family's awesome, or her generation's awesome, but I'm proud of her anyway.
I worried that she would react badly to such shocking information, so I'm delighted that she was just so... normal about it. I'm not sure if that's because she's awesome, my family's awesome, or her generation's awesome, but I'm proud of her anyway.
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
Guest writers: myself at age 10, 14, and 15
I've been keeping a journal faithfully since I was eight. (I know: totes adorbs.) I'm currently on notebook #17 or something. I'm too lazy to count.
My journal serves many purposes for me. I use it for cathartic purposes when I'm struggling. I release negative emotions and look at them on the page, which can be helpful in identifying why I'm feeling a certain way. I also like to reflect on experiences and try to capture the spiritual and intellectual growth I notice in myself. And sometimes I write just because I want to put words together in a way that sound nice to me.
I try to avoid the "captain's log" type of journal, where I list the day's events and nothing else. I know that in the future when I reread my journals, I won't really care what happened on a given day. I'll care about the internal struggles I had been grappling with and how I dealt with them. I'll want to revisit the prose I crafted that communicated how my life "felt" at different times. Mostly though, I think I'll value the honesty in my words and in the emotions expressed on the pages.
For funsies I pulled out a couple of journals to see what I wrote on February 12th during various years of my life. I wanted to start with the earliest age I could find, but it's not actually today's date; it's about a month off. But it's so hilarious I had to include it.
1. Oh my gosh. I wrote pretty much the same thing a couple of years ago on my other blog. My older younger self sorta plagiarized my younger younger self. Can we make up a word for that? 2. What kind of fifteen-year-old sits down and thinks, 'Today, we will be writing about the various types of screams in the ole journal. Let us begin.' (Only the royal "we" will do.) 3. I haven't changed at all, ever. 4. I kind of love who I am.
I used to be nervous about what people in the future would think when they read my journals, but it doesn't seem like a big deal anymore. I'm just writing about real life, and after all, I'm just some girl, you know? Of course there will be embarrassing, weird, silly posts. For me, the charm of the "awkwardness" is that what I've written is still so me it makes me laugh.
My journal serves many purposes for me. I use it for cathartic purposes when I'm struggling. I release negative emotions and look at them on the page, which can be helpful in identifying why I'm feeling a certain way. I also like to reflect on experiences and try to capture the spiritual and intellectual growth I notice in myself. And sometimes I write just because I want to put words together in a way that sound nice to me.
I try to avoid the "captain's log" type of journal, where I list the day's events and nothing else. I know that in the future when I reread my journals, I won't really care what happened on a given day. I'll care about the internal struggles I had been grappling with and how I dealt with them. I'll want to revisit the prose I crafted that communicated how my life "felt" at different times. Mostly though, I think I'll value the honesty in my words and in the emotions expressed on the pages.
For funsies I pulled out a couple of journals to see what I wrote on February 12th during various years of my life. I wanted to start with the earliest age I could find, but it's not actually today's date; it's about a month off. But it's so hilarious I had to include it.
Age ten: [Flowers are taped to page] These very flowers were from my Nana's backyard. They are to remind me of sweet, fresh, spring, and of my home that I soon find.First of all: BAHAHAH. This made me die laughing. It's just so... I don't even know what to call it. You can tell that I read a lot is what it is. To provide a bit of context, we had been visiting my grandma in Utah while house-hunting. We were about to move because my dad was hired as a doctor in good ole Cache Valley. I don't remember feeling nervous about finding a house, but I do remember feeling sad about leaving my friends behind.
Age fourteen: Church choir started up again today. There were 4 altos, 2 sopranos, 2 tenors ([I name two cute boys]), and then one bass. But we'll get more people.
[Cute boy] and the other boys did their song today in sacrament today. I felt the Spirit as they sang. I couldn't really tell which voice belonged to him though--my brother said he was the one singing in the highest voice, but I'm not sure. I'm hope [my brother] will join the Church choir. I doubt it, though.
Anyway, we did the song practice for the small group of girls (I'm the pianist--have I not mentioned that before?). At one point (we were in the Primary room) [same cute boy] walked in and looked at me. I think I smiled at him, but I can't remembered [sic] if he smiled back or not.
Our class presidency got set apart today--finally. It was very good, and I feel a special sort of love for everyone.Various choir adventures and various boys? Yeah, that basically describes my high school experience. I love that I had to throw in the detail that he looked at me omg omg omg. But I don't remember trying to convince my brother to get into music back then. I guess it paid off, because now he's a magical beast bursting with musical talent. Six months until he's home. Ladies.
Age fifteen: There are a lot of types of screams people can have:
- high-pitched shriek that quickly turns to laughter. That happens a lot at lunch, when someone startles you, or something similar happens.
- loud, piercing scream of rage, when you're angry.
- the hyperventilating sort of "Oh-oh-oh-oh!" that occurs with 'fangirls.' Another thing similar is the 'girl scream'--where girls are happy or something, and they just let out a high screech of excitement. Trust me--I've done it.
- There's a short, "Aiii!" sort when a spider is suddenly found on your leg and you hurridly brush it off. This is a good 'shriek.'
- There a [sic] "WWOOOOAAAUUH!" that occurs especially on roller coasters. That's what my roller coaster scream sounds like, anyway.
- Also, there's the heart-stopping, blood-curdling, scream-as-loud-and-high-as-you-can, top-of-your-lungs type of scream, that happens when an evil murderer is advancing on you with a long knife, or you're riding Tower of Terror and you were suddenly thrust into your first drop.
That's all I can think of for screams.
- There's also an "AAAAGH!" That's mostly used by men, when they're suddenly frightened.
1. Oh my gosh. I wrote pretty much the same thing a couple of years ago on my other blog. My older younger self sorta plagiarized my younger younger self. Can we make up a word for that? 2. What kind of fifteen-year-old sits down and thinks, 'Today, we will be writing about the various types of screams in the ole journal. Let us begin.' (Only the royal "we" will do.) 3. I haven't changed at all, ever. 4. I kind of love who I am.
I used to be nervous about what people in the future would think when they read my journals, but it doesn't seem like a big deal anymore. I'm just writing about real life, and after all, I'm just some girl, you know? Of course there will be embarrassing, weird, silly posts. For me, the charm of the "awkwardness" is that what I've written is still so me it makes me laugh.
Sunday, February 10, 2013
surface
We went on a date yesterday, partly to make someone else cook for us, and partly to distract me from the difficulty of transitioning antidepressants. Again. There's a dangerous vulnerability in allowing too much time for thinking in between meds. There's a fine line between my thoughts and the depressed thoughts. My thoughts are the ones that know it'll be okay, that I'm fine, I'm fine, it just takes a little while to adjust to these things. But the depressed thoughts tell me it's not the medicine; it's you, you're the problem. I have to defend myself, so I seek out the most upbeat, silly things I can. I'm glad that there are shows like Futurama that are ridiculous, witty, and hilarious the entire way through. I'm protected. I'm safe.
On the way to pick up some food, we listened to Greg Laswell, an artist we hadn't heard for a while, since we hadn't updated our iPod for so long. While listening, I had this strange moment where the whole world lit up with energy and color. I simultaneously felt like I had never heard music before, yet remembered exactly how his music used to make me feel. I remembered the weak brown of his guitar mixed with a blur of color in Take Everything; the lush dark blues and purples sweeping softly through Take A Bow with the twinkling pinpricks of white. But the fullness of the music caught me off guard, as if I had been half-mindedly listening to it play, muffled, from an adjacent room, and a door had suddenly been opened.
Sometimes I have these moments that pull me above the surface and I remember. Like the unexpected parting of dark clouds in a storm, letting the warm light stream through. A sun shower. It's still raining; the ground is still wet. But I stare up at the sky in wonder as the raindrops hit my cheeks, and I feel like I've never seen anything so amazing or beautiful. Rain and sun at the same time.
Moments when I surface, moments when I remember and see and feel with sharpness and clarity, they are what gently pull me toward the future. A future of filling my house with the sound of my voice in song. A future of walking outside in the sunshine and seeing the colors and smiling, because I feel my body and spirit in harmony, neither my thoughts nor my body imprisoning me. A future of feeling like myself with all the energy of my soul, from my head to my toes.
A future of breaking free of the surface and staying.
On the way to pick up some food, we listened to Greg Laswell, an artist we hadn't heard for a while, since we hadn't updated our iPod for so long. While listening, I had this strange moment where the whole world lit up with energy and color. I simultaneously felt like I had never heard music before, yet remembered exactly how his music used to make me feel. I remembered the weak brown of his guitar mixed with a blur of color in Take Everything; the lush dark blues and purples sweeping softly through Take A Bow with the twinkling pinpricks of white. But the fullness of the music caught me off guard, as if I had been half-mindedly listening to it play, muffled, from an adjacent room, and a door had suddenly been opened.
Sometimes I have these moments that pull me above the surface and I remember. Like the unexpected parting of dark clouds in a storm, letting the warm light stream through. A sun shower. It's still raining; the ground is still wet. But I stare up at the sky in wonder as the raindrops hit my cheeks, and I feel like I've never seen anything so amazing or beautiful. Rain and sun at the same time.
Moments when I surface, moments when I remember and see and feel with sharpness and clarity, they are what gently pull me toward the future. A future of filling my house with the sound of my voice in song. A future of walking outside in the sunshine and seeing the colors and smiling, because I feel my body and spirit in harmony, neither my thoughts nor my body imprisoning me. A future of feeling like myself with all the energy of my soul, from my head to my toes.
A future of breaking free of the surface and staying.
Friday, February 8, 2013
A 100 Hour Board nostalgia sandwich
So this little critter showed up the other day. I was expecting it to, but I still had a case of the "Ah, the good ole days," anyway, thinking about the spectacular people I met and the strange adventures I had. Maybe this is lame, but who cares: pretty sure the Board is one of the best things I got involved in at BYU. If it weren't for that, I would've gone crazy with the BYU-ness of BYU. You know what I mean.
The post tempted me, for a moment, to go back and reread some stuff I wrote, but I thought better of it. It would be like a combination of reading the most cringe-y essays from the 8th grade, journal entries, and crazy hyper texts from high school. I'm just glad I'm a little less cray-cray.
The post tempted me, for a moment, to go back and reread some stuff I wrote, but I thought better of it. It would be like a combination of reading the most cringe-y essays from the 8th grade, journal entries, and crazy hyper texts from high school. I'm just glad I'm a little less cray-cray.
Monday, January 14, 2013
Complaining: I like it.
I LOVE complaining. Just for the sake of it. I'm a recreational complainer!
I think most people don't know this about me, because I don't reveal it to them unless I feel really really comfortable with them. I usually worry they'd think I'm one of those angry negative people or something. Which... well. I guess some people might think I'm one of them, because I totally have depression, and I totally love feminism. Rants sometimes happen when you are a depressed feminist. But I save those for my husband, and rants, for me, serve a very different purpose than complaining. I rant to relieve frustration, and I complain to entertain myself. When I complain about something, it's usually because I either find it interesting, or because I find it mildly annoying. Here's some of the stuff I complained about last week:
I think most people don't know this about me, because I don't reveal it to them unless I feel really really comfortable with them. I usually worry they'd think I'm one of those angry negative people or something. Which... well. I guess some people might think I'm one of them, because I totally have depression, and I totally love feminism. Rants sometimes happen when you are a depressed feminist. But I save those for my husband, and rants, for me, serve a very different purpose than complaining. I rant to relieve frustration, and I complain to entertain myself. When I complain about something, it's usually because I either find it interesting, or because I find it mildly annoying. Here's some of the stuff I complained about last week:
- A well-intended but totally weird lady in Relief Society told us that the only media we should partake in was "wholesome" stuff like BYU Radio, instead of Trashy Reality Television, Because It Doesn't Teach Us Anything Worthwhile... What? WHAAAAAAAT? Do people do that? Listen to radio? BYU-kind? And you know what, lady? I learn PLENTY from my trashy tv, okay? Like plastic surgery is a bad idea sometimes, some people are cray-cray, and good parenting skills is very important. So THERE. Also, she said "mediums" instead of "media," which is awful.
- While we're on the subject, prescriptive grammarians kinda suck. But I'm not one, even though my mom totally thinks I am! Ruuuuuuuuuuuuude. (jk I love you) I don't correct people. I just know a couple (read: actually a lot of) grammar rules and notice when peeps violate them, so there. (Honestly, I'm most annoyed by people who hypercorrect, rather than people who just don't know what they're doing, or who know what they're doing but really don't care.) Also: GRAMMAR IS THE MOST BORING PART OF LINGUISTICS.
- Disney is totally racist. I'm not talking about the obvious stuff. I'm talkin' linguistics! Let's consider The Lion King.
- Simba's voice actor is white, and he speaks Standard American English.
- All the other main good guy lions speak Standard American English, but they are voiced by black actors (except, strangely, for adult Nala).
- Scar speaks a high-class British dialect (RP, probably?), and has darker fur than everyone else. (Weird...) It is TOTALLY impractical for him to develop his own dialect/accent, when everyone else in the pride is apparently American. Yeah, the film makers probably did it because we like smart, British bad guys, but come on. One lion has his very own dialect? For realsies?
- The dumb bad guys have ethnic dialects: Hispanic and lower-class Black English. I couldn't assign a dialect to Ed if I tried, because he doesn't really talk. Is he supposed to be mentally disabled? I'm not sure.
- The superstitious African shaman monkey, Rafiki... I had to look him up, but apparently it's a Swahili accent. (And his name means "friend" in Swahili, cute!)
- The dumb good guys: Timon is a Jew with a Brooklyn accent and... I have no idea on Pumbaa.
- Zazu, of course, has a high-class British dialect, because he's stuffy, works with the king, etc. Btw, do you know who did the voice acting for him? THIS GUY.
- Did I forget anyone?
- (You know I totally love Disney with all my heart, right? My major just ruined my ability to watch movies like a normal person.)
- Our house doesn't have any heating, but we have a heater that keeps us from dying. But I like to sleep with about twelve blankets at night anyway because it's so cozy falling asleep surrounded by fluffy softness. But in the middle of the night, I feel like I'm going to DIE of HEAT AND SUFFOCATION AND LEG-TANGLINESS so I have to throw all the blankets except for one onto the floor, and it's not as fun or exciting anymore.
Are you a recreational complainer, or am I just a weird person?
Friday, August 31, 2012
Further thoughts on women and the Church
You guys are super awesome and have shared a lot of interesting, thoughtful ideas about women and the Church, and I'm really glad. Also, I'm in a much better place mentally than I was at 2:00 a.m., so it's easier to look at a broader perspective and whatnot.
I want to mention some of the ideas that I found interesting, for the benefit of anyone who cares or has questions like I do. Maybe something will click for you!
First, I really enjoyed this article a Facebook friend referred me to. I felt validated to hear that many others feel the way I do, and I liked seeing some of the author's suggestions on how to make the Church more inclusive. It's a long article, so... yeah. TL;DR: many women feel hurt and confused about seeming inequality in the Church, and there are ways we can make it much better.
A few of you pointed out that in your experiences, women in your wards have been referred to as "President Person" instead of "Sister Person," and that your ward councils are very supportive of the female leadership and the ideas and concerns they bring up. That makes me really happy! I guess my experiences have just been a little more negative than yours, unfortunately.
An idea that my mother-in-law and husband have previously mentioned is the "women=physical responsibilities, men=spiritual responsibilities" idea. What they mean by that is this: women are in charge of bringing children into the world and nurturing them (especially physically), and men are in charge of bringing children back into the presence of God (so, Priesthood duties). I find this idea very interesting. My husband suggests that perhaps either a) women were given some sort of Priesthood authority before coming to earth, so they could "officiate" in their womanly duties, or b) women gain some sort of Priesthood authority from covenants and ordinances to officiate in womanly duties. Or maybe the "power" is something different altogether. But still: this resonates with me and feels pretty okay. (Also, this makes me wonder: is childbirth an "ordinance" that women "officiate" in? 'Cuz you can't get any of the other ordinances if you're never born, so... )
A thought that goes along with this is the "women have certain innate qualities that help them return to God, but since men don't have them, they need to learn them" theory. So, men need to serve in Priesthood offices in order to gain traits that women typically have naturally: nurturing, self-sacrifice, etc. (and, men have to receive the Priesthood for exaltation, whereas women do not). I've heard this before in Church and several of you brought it up to me. I think the idea has merit, and could at least partly explain the division. One thing I do recognize is that Priesthood holders are not directly benefited by holding the Priesthood; it is all about serving others. This does bring me great comfort.
Also: well, I've obviously never been a mother. Duh. So I haven't had any of the cool experiences related to that calling and gift and until I have fat little babies, I won't understand. Maybe I'll finally feel more valid and appreciated when that time comes. My frustration with motherhood and the Church is that people in the Church only seem to praise women when it comes to this calling, and try to make it sound like it's totally perfect and awesome all the time. Maybe it is, but it looks like a lot of poop and crying to me. Maybe that's more awesome than I've been lead to believe. Poop, after all, is one of the best words ever invented, and it's fun to use. But my point is, until I'm a mother, it's hard to understand who else and what else I can be, in the eyes of Church members. I want to do and be a lot of things, but with my current situation, I can't do a lot of that, and I often feel like I slip between the cracks and am viewed as broken or something. I want to be recognized as a full human being even though I'm not a mother right now. I want to be valued and appreciated for who I am right now.
What I really want to know is this: what is the REAL REASON that women do not (appear to) use the Priesthood on the earth (outside of the temple)? Is the reason doctrinal? Policy-based? Knowing this would help me feel so much better. It just feels confusing to me that it seems that men=Priesthood=Church leadership, when something in my heart tells me that isn't quite the truth. It's hard to perform the mental gymnastics to explain how, exactly, women are equal to men in the Church, and why, exactly, we apparently don't need to hold the Priesthood. I would love a straight answer.
I know that God loves everyone the same, and that in His eyes, we really are equal. But I feel that a lot of societal attitudes and cultural values obscure that equality for me. The Church is good and wonderful, but it is also subject to racism, sexism, and all the other -isms. I'm tired of the rhetoric that implies men are terrible people and that women are perfect angels. It hurts everyone, because I know many amazing men AND women, and many not so amazing men AND women. I'm tired of being labeled in certain ways that constrict me from fully experiencing being a human. Just because I'm a woman doesn't mean I shouldn't be assertive, shouldn't ask questions, shouldn't get angry or depressed. Because I do all of those things, and I know for a fact you guys do, too. How can I learn to be happy if I'm never sad? How can I find truth if I don't look for it? How can I get anywhere in life if I don't stand up for what I believe in? And I hate that men are made fun of for being gentle or kind or tender-hearted, when apparently they're supposed to be tough and grow some balls and always take charge and not act like women or else they're sissies (or much more insulting terms). Jesus Christ is the most gentle, kind, tender-hearted, nurturing person I can think of. Isn't the point of the gospel to become more like Him?
I'll quit here before I get too rambly, because I could say lots of other stuff but it might get boring and plus I've said the most important stuff. So: share your opinions, please! Tell me what you think about the position of women in the Church. If we ask the tough questions, we can find the answers that will bring us light and peace. So... ready set go!
I want to mention some of the ideas that I found interesting, for the benefit of anyone who cares or has questions like I do. Maybe something will click for you!
First, I really enjoyed this article a Facebook friend referred me to. I felt validated to hear that many others feel the way I do, and I liked seeing some of the author's suggestions on how to make the Church more inclusive. It's a long article, so... yeah. TL;DR: many women feel hurt and confused about seeming inequality in the Church, and there are ways we can make it much better.
A few of you pointed out that in your experiences, women in your wards have been referred to as "President Person" instead of "Sister Person," and that your ward councils are very supportive of the female leadership and the ideas and concerns they bring up. That makes me really happy! I guess my experiences have just been a little more negative than yours, unfortunately.
An idea that my mother-in-law and husband have previously mentioned is the "women=physical responsibilities, men=spiritual responsibilities" idea. What they mean by that is this: women are in charge of bringing children into the world and nurturing them (especially physically), and men are in charge of bringing children back into the presence of God (so, Priesthood duties). I find this idea very interesting. My husband suggests that perhaps either a) women were given some sort of Priesthood authority before coming to earth, so they could "officiate" in their womanly duties, or b) women gain some sort of Priesthood authority from covenants and ordinances to officiate in womanly duties. Or maybe the "power" is something different altogether. But still: this resonates with me and feels pretty okay. (Also, this makes me wonder: is childbirth an "ordinance" that women "officiate" in? 'Cuz you can't get any of the other ordinances if you're never born, so... )
A thought that goes along with this is the "women have certain innate qualities that help them return to God, but since men don't have them, they need to learn them" theory. So, men need to serve in Priesthood offices in order to gain traits that women typically have naturally: nurturing, self-sacrifice, etc. (and, men have to receive the Priesthood for exaltation, whereas women do not). I've heard this before in Church and several of you brought it up to me. I think the idea has merit, and could at least partly explain the division. One thing I do recognize is that Priesthood holders are not directly benefited by holding the Priesthood; it is all about serving others. This does bring me great comfort.
Also: well, I've obviously never been a mother. Duh. So I haven't had any of the cool experiences related to that calling and gift and until I have fat little babies, I won't understand. Maybe I'll finally feel more valid and appreciated when that time comes. My frustration with motherhood and the Church is that people in the Church only seem to praise women when it comes to this calling, and try to make it sound like it's totally perfect and awesome all the time. Maybe it is, but it looks like a lot of poop and crying to me. Maybe that's more awesome than I've been lead to believe. Poop, after all, is one of the best words ever invented, and it's fun to use. But my point is, until I'm a mother, it's hard to understand who else and what else I can be, in the eyes of Church members. I want to do and be a lot of things, but with my current situation, I can't do a lot of that, and I often feel like I slip between the cracks and am viewed as broken or something. I want to be recognized as a full human being even though I'm not a mother right now. I want to be valued and appreciated for who I am right now.
What I really want to know is this: what is the REAL REASON that women do not (appear to) use the Priesthood on the earth (outside of the temple)? Is the reason doctrinal? Policy-based? Knowing this would help me feel so much better. It just feels confusing to me that it seems that men=Priesthood=Church leadership, when something in my heart tells me that isn't quite the truth. It's hard to perform the mental gymnastics to explain how, exactly, women are equal to men in the Church, and why, exactly, we apparently don't need to hold the Priesthood. I would love a straight answer.
I know that God loves everyone the same, and that in His eyes, we really are equal. But I feel that a lot of societal attitudes and cultural values obscure that equality for me. The Church is good and wonderful, but it is also subject to racism, sexism, and all the other -isms. I'm tired of the rhetoric that implies men are terrible people and that women are perfect angels. It hurts everyone, because I know many amazing men AND women, and many not so amazing men AND women. I'm tired of being labeled in certain ways that constrict me from fully experiencing being a human. Just because I'm a woman doesn't mean I shouldn't be assertive, shouldn't ask questions, shouldn't get angry or depressed. Because I do all of those things, and I know for a fact you guys do, too. How can I learn to be happy if I'm never sad? How can I find truth if I don't look for it? How can I get anywhere in life if I don't stand up for what I believe in? And I hate that men are made fun of for being gentle or kind or tender-hearted, when apparently they're supposed to be tough and grow some balls and always take charge and not act like women or else they're sissies (or much more insulting terms). Jesus Christ is the most gentle, kind, tender-hearted, nurturing person I can think of. Isn't the point of the gospel to become more like Him?
I'll quit here before I get too rambly, because I could say lots of other stuff but it might get boring and plus I've said the most important stuff. So: share your opinions, please! Tell me what you think about the position of women in the Church. If we ask the tough questions, we can find the answers that will bring us light and peace. So... ready set go!
Women in the Church
The stuff I'm going to talk about today might make sensitive readers think I'm crazy. Also, it's like 2:00 in the morning, and it's not going to be concise, probably. You're invited to stop reading now.
It has taken me a little while, but I have finally realized--and embraced--the fact that I am a feminist. The idea of promoting equality, love, and respect for all of God's children feels so right to me. But a lot of my strong beliefs seem to clash with the structure of the Church.
Let me get a few more disclaimers out of the way, since you should've stopped reading when I told you to, and you definitely think I'm crazy:
1. I believe in God the Father and the Mother, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost. I believe that when 'God' is used in the scriptures and talks, it really refers to both our Parents. I believe that the gospel is true.
2. I believe in the Book of Mormon. I believe that the Church is directed by the Savior, and that He reveals truth to our leaders, and to us.
3. I believe that God is no respecter of persons.
4. I believe that most all Church members and those who identify themselves as Mormons are very good people, and have good intentions.
5. I believe that the Church is an earthly institution to spread the gospel, and because it is primarily run by imperfect humans, it is imperfect.
That being said, the Church makes me feel so sad sometimes, and the reason is that I'm a woman.
As a woman, I don't feel very valued or special. I feel ignored, misunderstood, and misrepresented. I long to be honestly seen alongside my sisters as equal to the men in this Church.
Church leaders and members *try* to value women, in a weird and mostly annoying way. We're told how Incredible We Are. We're told that motherhood is the Best Thing Ever and how we're so amazing and angelic and glorious for doing that. We're told how virtuous and pure and perfect we are compared to the women of the world, and how they're a bunch of selfish floozies.
The problem to me is that if everyone thinks women are so great, then why are we left out of so, so much?
Understand me: I love being a wife, and I look forward to motherhood. But I am more than just those two roles. Womanhood is certainly about more than those two roles, which many women, by the way, never experience.
It hurts that the leadership is predominantly male, who decide things for and about females without consultation, as far as I'm aware. It hurts that, when there are female leaders, they are called "Sister Whatever" instead of "President Whatever." It hurts that some callings are only given to men, even though absolutely no Priesthood keys are required. It hurts that we women are excluded from being witnesses or participating in baby blessings in any way (although I can see loopholes in the official policy and you can bet I will take advantage of those loopholes). It hurts that we don't talk about God the Mother; I really, really want to learn about Her and from Her. I want to learn how to be a woman from another woman.
And yes: it does hurt that men are given offices in the Priesthood, when it appears that there is no doctrinal backing for why women aren't allowed. Most of all, it hurts that no one will tell us why.
Well... that's not 100% true. Some people try. But because they don't know, the explanations fall short, don't make sense, sting. Women can't hold the Priesthood because they have uteruses, and dudes are totally jealous? Women don't hold the Priesthood because they're subject to men? Women don't hold the Priesthood because they're so much better than those gross, icky men, therefore they don't need it? Women don't hold the Priesthood because they have to be protected by others? Women don't hold the Priesthood because they're not supposed to, and that's how it will always be, amen?
The most insulting accusation regarding women and the Priesthood is that it's unrighteous for us to want to have it, because we're mothers and it's just wrong and yeah. But if we in the Church believe that men and women are striving to become kings and queens, priests and priestesses, gods and goddesses... then who are you to say that it's unrighteous to want to exercise Priesthood power? I want to serve people in a fuller capacity than I am currently able!
Speaking of a fuller capacity, being a temple worker is so fulfilling to me because I get to officiate in several important ordinances. As far as I know, one can't perform ordinances without the power and approval of God. I believe that we as women are more fully able to use the Priesthood--or maybe our Priestesshood?--within the walls of the temple. It feels so right to me to be able to serve my sisters in the temple in this way.
Here is what I think: our Church is subject to long-standing cultural values, just like everyone else in the whole dang world. I think that Jesus is merciful, and lets us make mistakes, but corrects us when we are ready for it. (... Blacks and the Priesthood, anyone?)
I also think that, perhaps, we just really don't understand the Priesthood all that well, and that until we do, we will continue to come up with confusing answers and shame the questioners for daring to ask.
All these thoughts and feelings, coupled with lingering depression and the occasional migraine makes Church attendance very painful. But because I believe that the life after is going to be so much better helps me hold on. I love the temple so much because I can see a glimpse of that.
This post, while a helpful emotional rant, is also a call to action. If you feel that women and men are equals... show it. Encourage it. Some of the things I'm going to do include calling female leaders by their titles; speaking up for women in ward councils (if I'm ever in a position to); teaching my children to respect and love everyone; giving the same attention to my future daughters as my future sons will inherently receive at Church; doing Visiting Teaching; teaching modesty in a way that isn't male-centered and female-shaming; and finding my own ways to be more involved in things. These are all tiny things. And I know I'll find more. Because by small and simple things are great things brought to pass*, yes?
I believe that things will change. If not in this life, then certainly the next.
*Alma 37:6, in case you were wondering.
It has taken me a little while, but I have finally realized--and embraced--the fact that I am a feminist. The idea of promoting equality, love, and respect for all of God's children feels so right to me. But a lot of my strong beliefs seem to clash with the structure of the Church.
Let me get a few more disclaimers out of the way, since you should've stopped reading when I told you to, and you definitely think I'm crazy:
1. I believe in God the Father and the Mother, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost. I believe that when 'God' is used in the scriptures and talks, it really refers to both our Parents. I believe that the gospel is true.
2. I believe in the Book of Mormon. I believe that the Church is directed by the Savior, and that He reveals truth to our leaders, and to us.
3. I believe that God is no respecter of persons.
4. I believe that most all Church members and those who identify themselves as Mormons are very good people, and have good intentions.
5. I believe that the Church is an earthly institution to spread the gospel, and because it is primarily run by imperfect humans, it is imperfect.
That being said, the Church makes me feel so sad sometimes, and the reason is that I'm a woman.
As a woman, I don't feel very valued or special. I feel ignored, misunderstood, and misrepresented. I long to be honestly seen alongside my sisters as equal to the men in this Church.
Church leaders and members *try* to value women, in a weird and mostly annoying way. We're told how Incredible We Are. We're told that motherhood is the Best Thing Ever and how we're so amazing and angelic and glorious for doing that. We're told how virtuous and pure and perfect we are compared to the women of the world, and how they're a bunch of selfish floozies.
The problem to me is that if everyone thinks women are so great, then why are we left out of so, so much?
Understand me: I love being a wife, and I look forward to motherhood. But I am more than just those two roles. Womanhood is certainly about more than those two roles, which many women, by the way, never experience.
It hurts that the leadership is predominantly male, who decide things for and about females without consultation, as far as I'm aware. It hurts that, when there are female leaders, they are called "Sister Whatever" instead of "President Whatever." It hurts that some callings are only given to men, even though absolutely no Priesthood keys are required. It hurts that we women are excluded from being witnesses or participating in baby blessings in any way (although I can see loopholes in the official policy and you can bet I will take advantage of those loopholes). It hurts that we don't talk about God the Mother; I really, really want to learn about Her and from Her. I want to learn how to be a woman from another woman.
And yes: it does hurt that men are given offices in the Priesthood, when it appears that there is no doctrinal backing for why women aren't allowed. Most of all, it hurts that no one will tell us why.
Well... that's not 100% true. Some people try. But because they don't know, the explanations fall short, don't make sense, sting. Women can't hold the Priesthood because they have uteruses, and dudes are totally jealous? Women don't hold the Priesthood because they're subject to men? Women don't hold the Priesthood because they're so much better than those gross, icky men, therefore they don't need it? Women don't hold the Priesthood because they have to be protected by others? Women don't hold the Priesthood because they're not supposed to, and that's how it will always be, amen?
The most insulting accusation regarding women and the Priesthood is that it's unrighteous for us to want to have it, because we're mothers and it's just wrong and yeah. But if we in the Church believe that men and women are striving to become kings and queens, priests and priestesses, gods and goddesses... then who are you to say that it's unrighteous to want to exercise Priesthood power? I want to serve people in a fuller capacity than I am currently able!
Speaking of a fuller capacity, being a temple worker is so fulfilling to me because I get to officiate in several important ordinances. As far as I know, one can't perform ordinances without the power and approval of God. I believe that we as women are more fully able to use the Priesthood--or maybe our Priestesshood?--within the walls of the temple. It feels so right to me to be able to serve my sisters in the temple in this way.
Here is what I think: our Church is subject to long-standing cultural values, just like everyone else in the whole dang world. I think that Jesus is merciful, and lets us make mistakes, but corrects us when we are ready for it. (... Blacks and the Priesthood, anyone?)
I also think that, perhaps, we just really don't understand the Priesthood all that well, and that until we do, we will continue to come up with confusing answers and shame the questioners for daring to ask.
All these thoughts and feelings, coupled with lingering depression and the occasional migraine makes Church attendance very painful. But because I believe that the life after is going to be so much better helps me hold on. I love the temple so much because I can see a glimpse of that.
This post, while a helpful emotional rant, is also a call to action. If you feel that women and men are equals... show it. Encourage it. Some of the things I'm going to do include calling female leaders by their titles; speaking up for women in ward councils (if I'm ever in a position to); teaching my children to respect and love everyone; giving the same attention to my future daughters as my future sons will inherently receive at Church; doing Visiting Teaching; teaching modesty in a way that isn't male-centered and female-shaming; and finding my own ways to be more involved in things. These are all tiny things. And I know I'll find more. Because by small and simple things are great things brought to pass*, yes?
I believe that things will change. If not in this life, then certainly the next.
*Alma 37:6, in case you were wondering.
Friday, January 27, 2012
I stole this post from my secret blog
Hi guys! So... I have a secret: I have a secret blog that I haven't told anyone about. It's a bit of a school project, and it's probably not that interesting. If you are interested in following it, let me know and I'll let you read it. I'm going to keep it private.
The following words are from that blog:
I left the class feeling very upset.
I recognize that he might have a reason for saying the things he did, including principles given in Jacob 2 and D&C 132, and the fact that a man can be sealed to more than one woman (usually as long as only one is currently alive; it sounds like sometimes divorces don't end in sealing annulments). But I highly suspect that his comments were out of context, and, honestly, out of line.
I need to stick in a disclaimer right now and admit that I don't know what it's going to be like on the other side. But I do believe that things will work out right. I think that people struggle with the idea because, first of all, it isn't really discussed, and second, when it is discussed, it's very vague. And sometimes people with weird ideas are the ones who speak up loudest.
My issues with his presentation of this "doctrine" are
1. Historically, plural marriages were instituted by God to "raise up seed" (Jacob 2:30). I highly doubt that this will be a problem in the Celestial Kingdom, considering all the people who have lived on the earth, and who have yet to live on the earth. D&C 132 addresses plural marriage; however, Joseph Smith received this revelation at a time when the Church was commanded to practice plural marriage. It seems to me that, again, the people needed to expand the Church. I believe that verses 58-66 are specifically for the members of that time, and not for the members of today or even the future.
2. The idea that there will definitely be more women than men in the Celestial Kingdom seems kinda silly to me. I take it that my teacher is drawing this idea from his own experiences seeing more women at Church or in the temple, or perhaps in hearing talks about how LDS Women are Incredible! Whether or not this is the case, there are other things to consider. For example, think of all the children who have died before the age of eight, or all the righteous people who died before having the opportunity to be sealed. I believe that God is just and fair, and that He will give those people an opportunity, too; the idea that the Celestial Kingdom will be over-populated by women is ridiculous to me.
3. I do recognize that a man can be sealed to more than one woman in this life. I have struggled with the idea of typically not having men annul their sealings upon remarriage, because the idea of polygamy disgusts me, frankly. I can't imagine being happy sharing my husband with anyone, whether in this life or the next. But I believe that the multiple sealings are more for the sake of giving those women access to the fullness of the gospel and the Priesthood; I think the Priesthood is going to play a huge part in the Resurrection, and probably other stuff, too. It would be unfair to cut them off from that blessing. HOWEVER, again, I think that everyone will be able to have their very own family unit, meaning one man and one woman, so the idea that a man will be living with a bunch of women forever simply doesn't cut it for me.
4. God understands the desires of our hearts, and takes them into account (Alma 41:3-6). I firmly believe that He would never take away our agency and force us into arrangements that we don't feel good about. The Celestial Kingdom is a place of happiness and peace and progression. The only happiness and peace and progression I can imagine will be with MY husband and our (future) children.
In a way, I'm glad that my teacher made those comments in class because it forced me to really research it for myself, and as a result, I understand it a little more and feel at peace. There aren't many things I know for sure, but I do know that Heavenly Father loves me, and He values me as much as everyone else. That, to me, speaks volumes.
*Edit: I realize now that I failed to mention something. I'm not trying to disprove the possibility of eternal plural marriage. I'm trying to explore other ideas about what might be going on with this topic. I do think that if eternal plural marriage does exist in the Celestial Kingdom, it will be an option, not a requirement. My teacher upset me because he presented it as true, certain doctrine, and I didn't appreciate that; it was a little one-sided for something that isn't (what I consider) solid doctrine. If you have your two cents to throw in, please do so!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)