Look around you at church. Only men on the pulpit seats, only men preside, only men can give the opening prayer, only men decide what position a woman will be called to take, and what action will be taken in almost every-other way--including what duties the Relief Society President (called by men) will be assigned.

Watch church conferences, and again, the men dominate the speakers podium. But wait---(as the ad-announcers say)--a token woman does make it into one of the conference's speaking slots.

Later, women have their own time-slot to speak to each other at a women's conference. However, how many men listen to the wonderful advice women have to offer? The answer: Only the few who are assigned to be present and supervise this session.

Also, take a look at the headquarters provided by the church for the church's Relief Society's presidency. It is barely big enough to contain a few desks and chairs, let alone any guests or visitors.

Even so, also note, the official decision-makers in the church feel it necessary to keep reminding the sisters how much they are valued and appreciated in the church (if, that is, they know their place and don't complain). (And why not be valued?--Women do the yeoman's duties therein.)

If a member of the priesthood steps into a ward Relief Society room while it is session, all business is expected to come to a sudden halt, so that he can state his business. On the 5th Sunday (which has no routine classes assigned), a member of the priesthood leadership chooses this opportunity to lead and instruct the women on the way they should go.

Moving on now to temple affairs. In the beginning of the services, women are told to "bow their head and say 'Yes'", when they are instructed to "honor and obey" their husband.

And, all the sessions inside the temple, of course, are lead by men. For instance, near the end of the services a man asks for volunteers from the assembled group (both male and female), to step forward to form a prayer circle.

Once this circle is formed, the male leader instructs all the women in the congregation (including in the circle) to cover their faces with their veil, and bow their heads.

Then, this same male *leader (the church LOVES to think in this *term for all men), asks the people assembled in the circle to repeat the prayer he offers, word-for-word.

Note, again, that it is still a man who gives all these instructions.

Afterwards, the women are told they may now uncover their heads, and the congregation is now ready to follow the line of people which leads to a stretch of white curtains that reach the floor. All the congregation must pass through a curtain in order to reach the Celestial room.

The C.R. is lavishly decorated--primarily with a huge glass chandelier hanging from the ceiling, and expensive comfortable seating. The problem here is, the patrons (as they are referred to) are instructed to exit quickly, so that the next group can enter this same room.

No chance to contemplate in this room (and ignore the lavish seating). Also, speaking is discouraged--and even if it is done, it is to be only whispered.

As a result, one very soon heads for the exit and makes their way back to the dressing rooms (to get ready to go home).
---

So, now you who haven't been inside a temple at least have an idea of what happens inside that restricted place (at least, in my day).

Yeah, I could have been a real powerful male had I stayed in the church, lording my priesthood power over all those less-than-equal, only-good-for-making-babies women.

Alas, I left the cult...and found out that women were not only good for more than making babies, and not only "equal" to we men in every way, but in lots of ways they're *better* than we are.

Damn. Reality shot down my misogyny. Oh, well.
I do pity all those ignorant, haughty male mormons who don't know what I do about women, though. They're missing out on so much!

Yet oddly enough, my experience is that women in the church are the fiercest defenders of the treatment that they receive. LDS men don't really have to defend the treatment of women because women do it for them.

My female TBM relatives insist that they feel completely equal to men in the church and I know there are plenty of Mormon women who share that belief. I don't know how this is even possible. As a woman, I certainly noticed the inequality when I was active in the church.

Do Mormon women think things are equal and fair just because they're told by the church over and over that it is? Someone please explain.

For some reason, there are many female true believers that accept their role in the LDS Church as subservient and secondary to the male. They seem to like it that way as they believe that is what Heavenly Father wants for them. It's a central core to their role. (I tried to accept it, really did, but it just never set well with me.)

While women do wear the same Holy Melchizedek Priesthood garment (same markings, same promises), placed on them by covenant in the temple, their roles are very different in the doctrine.
And while a man cannot receive his celestial glory (in the Celestial Kingdom), without a woman, her role is, again, very different in the doctrine.

I've written several long posts on the Role of Women in the LDS Church over the years that keep her in her place, and only allowed her to serve under the men. They have no individual rights as females that are equal to the men.

True, men and women are different. In Mormonism, the doctrine for men is to take the leadership roles in church and the home, and women (often referred to as "more spiritual") are to bear the children, maintain the home and support the men.

The only place there is any equality between men and women(and that is not total) is in the temple, making the same covenants, or similar ones. For those that do not know, they sit in separate sections in all the temple sessions - which facilitates the ability to make slightly different covenants, one of which is to follow their husband as he follows the Lord (slightly paraphrased). Women make this very serious covenant by raising their hand to the square in the temple.

It is spelled out very clearly in their "The Family a Proclamation to the World"...https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-and-church-history-student-study-guide/the-worldwide-church/the-family-a-proclamation-to-the-world?lang=eng

This is the line-in-the-sand statement that makes a clear declaration that male and female are eternal from the preexistence and only marriage between a man and woman is acceptable to Heavenly Father.

Women have no recourse for an grievance in the LDS Church that is viable. They do not have an equal say in anything. The men are the priesthood holders and are the only ones in charge. Even in Relief Society, the women only serve under the approval of the men supervising the organization.

A copy of it was given to be while I was an investigator. If I'd had any sense, I'd have seen right through it and told the Mormons not to come back.

I was a single mother, and received no alimony. (The ex made about four times what I did, but he could also afford a clever attorney who wiggled out of child support.)

So - mothers weren't supposed to work outside the home, huh? If they are the only breadwinners in the home, they don't have much of a choice. The sneery implication that SAHMs were somehow "better" than those of us who had to support our children made me very angry.

The two genders are best thought of as equal. As regards what Smith called "Priesthood" however (which was not restored in a True Church Restoration, at all; that was a deceptive entity who appeared to them) it's actually true that there are three initiatory levels which cannot be held by a woman- the Templars name for those are Magister Templi, Mage, and what they erroneously call Ippissimus... This priesthood "chart" is based on the kabbalistic Tree Of Life diagram, called Yggdrasil by the Nordic sages. The topmost of these three is the Key needed for any true church, esoteric or occult lodge, or school, religious order...- it can only be held by a male- such as the original Pope. Ippissimus means Avatar, which a woman can be just as well as a male- however, a Divine Incarnation woman still would not be endowed with the official duty, headmaster of such a group. This is like duty, which women are exempt from. A woman can be a High Priestess, but not one of these three. A woman cannot perform a marriage sealing ordinance, relatedly. The past Age Of Pisces Aeon was extremely patriarchal- this New Aeon will see an equalization of the genders, although these priesthood issues stay the same.

There is fear if someone strays from the expected mantra

The one that annoyed me the most is the attitude that women can't go anywhere, do anything as a church or decide anything without male supervision. Like the women were potentially naughty little girls who needed a babysitter. For example, girl's camp - you always had to have your assigned priesthood holders there. There is usually one watching over women's conferences and you need to ask permission from the men for certain activities in the RS meeting formerly known as Homemaking.

It's incredibly annoying the way they have institutionalized the infantilization of women - as if they need to see women as little girls to be cared for in order to deal with them. This translates into interpersonal relationships too. I know several Mormon women who are annoyed by the way their husband treats them like a little girl instead of a grown up and an equal. It's really horrible to relentlessly treat a grown adult like they are a small child - very condescending. But the women seem to play along, as anyone who has heard that Utah Mormon Woman accent can testify.

That's true, women can't do anything on their own without male approval, and supervision. Even when there's a RS or YW's event on a weeknight, there's always a penishood holder in the building because the women aren't to be trusted to be by themselves. Often, women aren't taught things like how to check the oil or tire pressure on their car, as they're expected to have a man do those things for them, whether it's their Daddy or husband.

The only tools they're really taught to use are sewing machines, and appliances that are used for housekeeping. The whole thing is sickening to me the way women are infantilized and I'm glad I got out of that without subjecting an innocent girl to that type of treatment.

I will never forget my anger when a group of us adult women in the church decided to form a Harry Potter book club. The lady putting it together was the Stake Patriarch's wife - a delightful, intelligent, articulate lady.

The proposed book club never asked for church sanction. membership was not limited to members, though they were mostly the only ones who knew about it. Meetings were held at private homes. There was no "church meeting" format (opening prayer, opening hymn, closing prayer, yawn, yada yada). There were usually refreshments though, as a social nicety.

The meetings were solely to share our enjoyment of the HP books. And they were fun!

Until the bishop heard about it, and forbade the meetings.

Several of us told him that since it was not a church activity, he had nothing to say about it. Every one of us was called into a bishop's interview and rebuked for this attitude. I know that I, for one, refused to back down. I said, "You have no authority over this. It is NOT a church activity, funded by the church, or held on church property."

Our persistence was eventually bucked up to the Stake President, who insisted that whether it was a church activity or not, we were BOUND (BOUND, mind you!!) to submit to the demand of the p-hood holders and stop attending the club meetings. Hints were dropped that there might be disciplinary action.

The club eventually just dried up. Most of the women were too afraid of p-hood reprisals to continue attending what had been a delightful activity.

This was well over a decade ago, and I am still bitter about it.

That is so ridiculous to me. Why would any bishop presume he has some sort of authority about how anyone spends their free time? Anyone can join any book club if they feel like it, so wtf? Just because the book club was comprised of mostly church members, that doesn't make it a church activity. But of course, this douchebag decided to assert his authority and scared the submissives, so your book club died on the vine. Such bullshit.

Sometimes I wonder what my TBM neighbors think of me as a independent, single mother. I have lived on their property (the mormon compound) for years. They have seen me support my child and myself, date, and live my life the way I choose, with no help whatsoever from a male.

In their family, all the women moved from the parents house to DH's. The only single one in the family, in her 40's, has never lived on her own in her life.

I have high hopes that the teenage daughter will break free and discover the joy and satisfaction of independence. Circumstances are stacked against her.

In the mid 90's I was the teacher for the 11 year old girls. We lived in a Ward that was a short drive to Kirtland. I was shocked that not one of the 8 girls in my class had ever been there. I decided that we needed to take a road trip.

I told the Bishop my plan. He told me that the only way I could do that was to do it on my own, and it was in no way to be associated with the church. REALLY!??? I was surprised by this, but agreed. His daughter was one of the girls in my class. At first he told her she couldn't go, then relented when he realized what a huge ass that made him look like.

The day arrived. I hadn't been able to get any of the girls SAHM's to go with me. No takers. That kind of pissed me off, but then I began to see why none of these girls had never been anywhere but Utah for vacation.

No matter. I had a nevermo friend that wanted to go. She thought it would be fun and interesting. The girls were dropped off at my house one by one. We weren't allowed to meet in the church parking lot. OMG! No matter, I worked my way around all the silly rules. I packed food for the girls, and made sure everyone had their seat belts on. And we were off.

The day went very well. The girls were fun. I never once had a problem with any of them. They really enjoyed the day, and they really liked getting ice-cream at the store across from the Whitney Store.

When it was time to go home, I dropped each girl off at her house because I wasn't allowed to drop them off at the church. Heaven forbid. Not one single parent was willing to pick them up at my house, 30 miles from the church. Nevemind i'd had their kid all day, fed them,entertained them, bought them ice cream, and never asked anyone for gas money. That was the day I learned about what assholes Utah mormons are. Yes, we were in Ohio, but all and I mean all of these girls had been born in Utah. We lived in a College town with a lot of transferees.

The next Sunday was F&T. The girls asked me if they HAD to get up and tell about their trip. I told them absolutely not, unless they wanted to. Only the Bish's daughter got up. She made her father look like the ass he is.

Not one of those parents ever said thank you, or even acknowledged that their kid had spent an entire day with me doing major mormon stuff.

Why? Because it wasn't church sanctioned. There were no men along for the ride to make it a big spiritual event. It was disgusting. The female are 2nd class, and that teaching starts very very young.

My husband took the scouts on the same exact trip for a day. He was reimbursed. He had to turn down offers of people who wanted to go. All the boys brought their own money for lunch and treats. Several parents gave him gas money.

I don't know why I didn't leave the church right then and there. I guess I needed more information. More proof that I was of no value to mormonism.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/03/2017 10:11PM by janis.

So if women get no benefit from church, why do they like it so much? Apparently most here think they are stupid or weak.

Once again, I have to point out what many want to ignore to promote their agenda.

Most women like to have children. If it were not so, we wouldn't be here. The church supports that role. It tells moms to stay home with the kids and tells the dads to make the money. Why don't we consider that oppressive of men?

Years ago I was hating my job and came home a few times to see my wife in her craft room with church friends having a good time. Kids were junior high and high school. Since women supposedly like equality, I pushed her to go get a job. She was quite angry with me.

Then there is the sex thing, which is what men want the most. For some reason, men are supposedly in charge of the church, but give all sorts of anti-sex and anti-porn messages. The only explanation that makes sense is the women are pushing that behind the scenes. They need monopoly control of their man's sexuality to have bargaining power for his money.

So many women love the whole law of chastity and the modesty standards, as those reduce competition.

If men were really in charge, we'd spend Sundays at ball games or fishing or strip clubs. But being oppressed, we do the righteous priesthood holder thing, to boost her image and all. Kind of like all the boys that feel pressured to go on missions to qualify as a husband to the Mormon girls.

There are some benefits. They can rely on the church to keep their men in line. Laying down a guilt trip is easier for a TBM. Straighten up or she'll go to the Bishop.

I clicked on this thread only because I figured you'd be in here with your rather interesting perspective. First, thank you for not letting me down. You never disappoint! Second, thank you for using softer language like "most" and "so many." I am okay with you making generalizations about mormon women when you acknowledge, through your language usage, that your ideas and thoughts do not necessarily apply to ALL women, especially nonmo women.

I mean, don't get me wrong, in general, I still think you're completely full of shit, but this post wasn't too bad. ;-)

dogzilla Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ...that your ideas and thoughts do
> not necessarily apply to ALL women, especially
> nonmo women.

Or ALL men. That comment about all men want is sex was also bullshit.

> I mean, don't get me wrong, in general, I still
> think you're completely full of shit, but this
> post wasn't too bad. ;-)

Amen, sister :)

women. The other men are oftentimes treated as though there must be something wrong with them because they aren't "leaders."

I only went to church because I thought I had to. I believed. I didn't want to be a leader. I didn't want to pass the sacrament or collect fast offerings or especially GO ON A DAMN MISSION. I felt lucky to be a female in the LDS church. My dad never acted as though the priesthood was anything special, never treated it that way, found positions in the church a bother. He had a farm and taught school full time. He didn't have time for church callings.

He had more respect from people than mormon leaders ever did. He also found mormon leaders full of themselves.

It is all in perspective.

What interesting and good responses, all ranges seemed to be represented.

Especially dogzilla's, "I mean, don't get me wrong, in general, I still think you're completely full of shit, but this post wasn't too bad. ;-)"

(How can one not help but LOL to that response?)

By the by, Dogzilla, does the church's advice to keep a food storage supply also include toilet paper? According to your perspective re. me, I may need more than the average person. :-)

dogzilla's post was a response to Free Man.

The bishop has an office with admirers lined up at the door. There are men sitting up front on the stand staring out at their followers.

Only the female chorister is likely to sit up front and she's off on the side. She waits for the bish to give her orders although he likely knows nothing about music.

Any pictures on the walls will be of men.

Women are called sister and men and boys are called bishop, deacon, teacher, president, patriarch.

Girls and very few take leadership roles. They never pray over the bread and water or pass it to the congregants.

Girls don't have a recognized program like scouting.

Once when I was still attending, many many years ago, and went to church while staying at my family's house post college. I got so mad at how a man could just drop into our women's Relief Society meetings any old time and listen in.

In fact they made a habit of checking on us, making sure we were doing what they tell us to do (since, at least then, they wrote all of the material for our lessons! I don't know how it is currently, but I heard once upon a time women could write their own lessons but I guess the men got too threatened by that!)..

So one Sunday I thought, 'I'm going to drop in on THEM, in their secret Priesthood meeting!' After all there was no hard fast rule written anywhere saying I couldn't do it. So I went with my brothers and sat in the back. It was a nice defiant feeling I had. But didn't really amount to much, as I found the meeting very boring and if anyone was shocked they did a good job of hiding it. Though now I wonder if they altered the meeting seeing that I was attending. No way to know for sure.

I am still proud of having took a stand like that at least once. But when I did become fully aware of the extent of the sexism and what it meant for my life I left the church. But as I just wrote in my breaking away story posted here (today).. I still ended up with sexist men for a long time because that was what was familiar to me. It took me so long to even see that I was raised in a sexist unequal way (when it's the norm for you it's hard to see it until you are given another example) and process that intellectually. But even then it took years more to get out of those crappy abusive male dominated relationships!

I still have to vigilant to avoid falling back into old habits of submissiveness. It's just so engrained. Even it it makes us miserable it's hard to be otherwise.

Also I have found that it's hard to overcome the feelings of unworthiness having been raised that way, as not being important.

I am reading 'Blood of the Prophets' about the Meadow Mountain Massacre (so horrific!) and the author starts out by going into a lot of detail about the early church and in doing so you just start to see how women were considered and treated as property. Esp. after the polygamy started. The leaders would just hand over their daughters (or sometimes wives) to the other leaders higher in the hierarchy than they were. In one case with the 'law of consecration' a man deeded his daughter to the church along with his property! They even gave away women to some of the Native tribes to take as wives when they were trying to win their favor (mainly to use them to rob wagon trains passing through Utah and for doing killings for them, though it seemed the early members didn't mind doing most of the killings themselves, there were just cases when they wanted to blame to 'Indians' so they wouldn't get in trouble with the Feds).

Anyway reading the history of the early church sort of puts the current views (of women) and practices into perspective.

There may have been some changes since then. But on the level of belief and in practice really women in the Mormon church still don't having any rights, though the leaders may try to pretend otherwise.

I mean the church put a ton of money into fighting the ERA back in the 70s. They have always been very anti- rights for women.

It's really disgusting.

I enjoyed this thread, thanks for the posts everyone! And so glad to have found this site and to get to be a part of the discussions.

You said, "so glad to have found this site and to get to be part of the discussions." ME TOO!!!!
For years after marrying an active TDM (I'm a nevermo) I have been puzzled and sometimes saddened by how the church surprised me by being so invasive of our lives and choices, and I wished so much I had someone to ask about things and talk about how I felt. This has been wonderful. THANKS.

Just have to add to the comment about sex being what 'men want most'.. I think that is a poor generalization. There are firstly a lot of women who feel that way, but are told it's wrong to feel that way, not just by the Mormon church but by society in general. If we want sex and like it and are open about that we are seen as 'loose women' as 'whores'.. but a man is a 'stud'.. But also I know a lot of men who don't have high sex drives and it isn't what they 'want most'.. I also know plenty of women who DO NOT want babies!!!! I never did and still don't and again that is a BAD thing for a woman to ever admit to.

The problem to me looks like we've been brainwashed with these ridiculous stereotypes about men and women and their 'natural' needs and desires. For example I HATE staying at home. I always loved travel and adventure. I've traveled to 21 countries ALONE and done pretty hard core adventurous things in nature that I don't know anyone else man or woman who has done this. ANother thing I noticed while traveling is I find WAY more SOLO female travelers than male. I almost never met a solo male traveler. They seemed to only travel with other people, particularly with a partner. I think there may be many more women than men with a true need and desire for independence and adventure. I have known a lot more men than women comfortable with the idea of family and marriage and 'settling down'.. they seem to prefer that sense of stability and security even if they then feel the need for a relationship outside of marriage too, they definitely like to have a woman at home looking after the 'home and hearth'..

So I really think these stereotypes can be WAY off. And as for wanting sex as the 'main thing'.. I think that this is really mostly the case at certain ages for both men and women when their sex drives are naturally higher. For men the peak is early and for women it's later. So by nature (if we were free from societal control and brainwashing) the natural coupling would be an older woman and younger man, not the reverse. The reverse happens because of power. Of men having power and wanting to maintain it. It also happens because it's true that 'many' women want and need the male to provide and an older male tends to have a better ability to do that. But I feel that woman only 'want' that when they are oppressed to the point that they don't have a place in society where they are given or allowed the opportunity to provide for themselves. Which women actually used to do in many ancient hunter gatherer societies the women actually did most the hunting contrary to popular belief. And in the animal kingdom it is more often the female that hunts than the male.

Anyway I digress. I am just saying, we need to break free of this ridiculous programing about male and female 'wants' and 'needs' and 'natural roles'.. it's really a bunch of BS! And it's not because 'women want babies' that there are so many humans it's because men also want them, in fact more often than not the men want the babies more than the woman. After all they have an easier part in the equation to donate sperm. They can always (and often do) leave. Whereas for a woman it's a much more serious thing to participate in mating and being left with a child to not only carry in her body for 9 months and go through excruciating labor pain, but then care for after that. Men can complain all they want about feeling they have to provide and have that pressure, but they can always leave. It's much harder for the woman to do that. And woman only manipulate and even get pregnant intentionally to try and keep the man around when she feels threatened about his potential to leave. And this of course doesn't usually work but given few other options many women try this one.

And the 'natural order' is really for the women to chose the male mates, again because she has a greater investment at stake,so the competition should really be about the men competing for women not the other way around (and of course with the early days of the 'saints' and Brigham and his lot actually often killing each other over women, it was a warped brutal display of that instinct.. however it was distorted as women were treated as property and given no ability to actually choose their own mates) But in our patriarchal. this is not how things go. Men rule, in the church and out of it. Women still do not have equal rights at all and are still seen as sex objects in society. And seen as not having any kinds of similar needs or desires as male. We are seen as simple creatures who don't even really know what they want and need to be told.

I know men also have it rough in many ways in the LDS church, but for power hungry egotistical sexist males it's a good place to be. (Esp. back in the days of polygamy, although only really if you were in the top ranks and so not at risk of being castrated by the men in authority who saw you as a threat!).. At least it's certainly better for the men than the women.

Although I think the challenge for Mormon men, esp. those who leave is to get past all the ego trip programming they went through. being holy priesthood members and better than the women. Having the women and children 'serve' them. I am sure there are pressures that also go along with that kind of power position. Again I think it's a different kind of challenge for men.

But, like the point made in the original post here, we women ARE second class citizens in the LDS church and I think that is putting it mildly. It's worse than just 2nd class, we are completely subservient and it really does a number on us psychologically to get over that.

Again we both have our crap we have to get passed. And some of that is really the sexist views we grew up with, roles for men and women, what we think it is we each want and need. Making assumptions about that. It's hard stuff to really sort through and work out. And it's very insidious, working beneath the surfaces still potentially controlling our thoughts and actions.

And speaking for myself I have a very active sex drive and that was one of the most important things to me for a long time. But a lot of that had to do with my age, some of it could have been psychological. I know I also allowed myself to be treated as a sex object. I know I got my self worth wrapped up in that and had an unhealthy attitude towards sex and sex identification. It created a lot of conflict in large part because it wasn't okay for me to want sex that much. I mean it was more than okay for the men who wanted sex too and got it from me. But because of their own sexist attitudes they then did not value me as a person and so my relationships that were mainly based on that did not last even though I didn't feel I understood because I thought that it's what men wanted the most right? So why would they walk away from it even if they admitted it was the best sex they had ever had?

Because guess what, men are also not that shallow and they want more than that. It was unfair of me to think of them that way. I also found that some men placed much more importance on other aspects of relationships. I found that there were men that were sensitive and felt used when the focus was so much on sex.

I realized I had been unfair to them as well categorizing them like. And I had been unfair to myself, allowing myself to be objectified, thinking that's the only way I could be worth something and get attention from men.

I now no better and sex is not as important to me anymore. Because I am doing a better job at making more meaningful connections with us instead of trying to label them and confine them to roles, myself included.

We are worth much more than these roles that have been in many cases forced on us and that have controlled our lives. We are individuals with individual minds and needs and values. Let's all try to meet each other that way, as other souls, all of us equal.

AND we should remember this religion as well as most others in practice today that I can think of were invented by MEN, NOT by women. The men invented them and the men are in charge of them, period. It was never the idea of the women. Women went along with it, go along with it still, either because they had no other choice, no other means to support themselves (and their children, it seems it serves the men for to keep the women pregnant all of the time so it's harder for them to leave or do anything else with their lives but care for an increasing number of children!) or were raised in it, and now, like the men that stayed don't know any better, were afraid to ask questions, were trained not to ask questions…

though sometimes I wonder at myself for making excuses for the ones who stayed in this cult religion. I mean didn't we all have the same challenges to overcome? Why did some of us still ask questions (when trained not to) and others didn't?

You and I could be sisters under the skin. I go to Europe or Bermuda roughly twice a year and my observations mirror yours. Most men seem to want to travel in packs, but I'm perfectly content to go it alone. I once had a big, strapping man (6'3", 260) tell me how "brave" he thought I was. Keep in mind that I'm 5'4" and weigh 120. I'm no match for a robber or other creep, but I know how to stay safe. Happy travels.

You really a Nole from FSU?

Gatorman

She is!

This is the only forum where our relationship is acceptable and credible.....

Gatorman

This was a point that crept up in my mind from time to time. My aunts left the church, and said they would happily come back when women could hold the priesthood. As an adolescent I thought it was silly, why should they want to hold the priesthood? However, as they say, the seed had been planted. That kept piping up. Why couldn't they have the priesthood? The answer given to me was that if they had the priesthood then men would have no purpose, since we cannot bear children. Needless to say, that answer did not resolve the issue.

It used to be "common knowledge" that though playing card games was prohibited to LDS, David O. McKay's wife played bridge with her bridge club regularly as they met at various women's houses. What was forbidden to the laymembers wasn't off limits to his wife. IMO she led by example. And McKay was one of the most laid back presidents the church has ever seen (and perhaps the most beloved of them all.)

It disturbed me greatly to learn the Relief Society General Board members earns squat diddly as in no salary whatsoever, compared to their male counterparts.

The single/widowed Hawaiian woman, Chieko Okezaki, who served in her elderly years had no husband to support her as the other women depend on spousal support to stay in those callings. The GA told her to write books to subsidize her expenses as a RS board member. She couldn't afford to pay her way without writing books to supplement her calling.

While the GA gets paid fat salaries w/bonuses and perks, the women RS board are truly second class citizens who are strictly volunteers who spend an inordinate amount of time in their callings, same as the fellas.

Excellent reasons to quit. So I did.

Do mormon men have the same problems with women colleagues?
Women doctors and lawyers, do mormon men condescend to their equal but different gender co-worker?

I make more money than most of the Mormon men in our neighborhood, yet my children and I were marginalized because we "didn't have the priesthood in the home."

I worked hard, and worked long hours sometimes, as the sole support of my family. I soon owned my home outright, and it was one of the nicer ones in the neighborhood, and we have refurbished everything, inside and out. My children are happy and successful, with good marriages, and children, good education and careers--and they own their own houses in the neighborhood. (I guess I'm bragging, because none of the Mormons believed my children and I would exceed the Mormon men--and all I got was criticism for "working outside the home.") One bishop told me to stop working, and to go on welfare. He ended up declaring bankruptcy, and losing his house. His kids got divorced, and his wife ended up in a mental institution. This was not a very wise man, and could not run his own affairs, yet he claimed authority over ME, because I was nothing but a woman.

Never was I given any respect! Mormon men thought they had the right to invade my home and drag my children to Mormon meetings, behind my back. I called them on their BS--saying that if I were a MAN, they wouldn't dare abuse my children!

My life changed when my sons grew into strong football players. Many of the MOrmon men in our neighborhood were bullies to women and children, but too cowardly to pick on someone their own size. I never felt sorry for myself for being single and "alone" and not married to one of those TBM-type men.

Thanks for sharing these stories, I think it's very healing to be able to voice our opinions and tell about the things we went through in this religion.

I remember the first time in my life when I was able to start seeing the sexism I'd endured most my life up to that point.

Oddly it happened while at BYU. I had gone out to a show in Salt Lake with a couple of male friends. They had driven to it, but then one of them ended up drinking (most of my friends were of the rebellious crowd, I still didn't drink then and was still involved with the church but liberal leaning) so I was asked to drive back.

I did so and what I noticed is that for that whole hour long drive neither of them made any chiding remarks about my driving (in particular about my driving because of I was a woman). I actually was always a very good driver, but I was always hounded while in the car with men. They would act nervous, be back seat drivers, make rude comments, that kind of thing. I never felt trusted by them.

And for the first time I was was trusted by men to be able to handle driving! Not only did neither of them say anything, they were very relaxed.

I felt liberated, finally treated as an equal. I nearly cried. This is what had been bothering me, this unnamable feeling, underlying everything. I had been constantly teased by 4 brothers (I was in the middle of 4 Mormon boys, yes, and I somehow survived, just barely), and my sexist narcissist father. I had been teased by male teachers at school (most though not all, these were non LDS, but I think at the time sexual harassment at school was more common place as it was pre sexual harassment lawsuits.. so many of my teachers back then would be fired in today's world), and by male teachers and leaders in church. I had rarely, if ever, been taken seriously by men. And any time I had been I had had to fight for that respect, it was always hard won.

But for once I didn't have to fight, I didn't have to prove myself. I was just accepted as being equally capable to do a simple task.

I was always grateful for that moment. We need to have an experience of being treated as equals to know that we had not been. I think many LDS women just don't get to have that experience so they never are really able to identify what is wrong.

I know my mothers and sisters think of the teasing they endure from their spouses and male children (sometimes also female) as a sign of 'love' and I think often the ones doing the teasing think they are being 'loving' by giving the women their attention. But it's always in this demeaning way and it's only fun if both parties feel safe and can each interact.

At least in my family my mother was never the one teasing my dad or anyone else, she was always the victim. And sometimes she even cried she got so scared from some of the pranks. But then she'd recover and sort of pretend to go along and be a 'good sport' and really she just learned so much to laugh at herself and put herself down. It's so terrible when I think of how she was (and still is) treated and what it's done to her self esteem and sense of self worth.

And then she set the example for us girls and I can tell you I have really struggled to break free of that example. I am finally able to be in a healthy equal relationship after nearly 2 decades of emotionally abusive ones. And I know I owe that all to the examples I had which were a product of the LDS patriarchy.

I don't know if any of you are Simpsons fans, but there was a really good episode I saw again recently where Lisa gets angry about the new talking 'Malibu Stacey' doll. She had waited years to see what Stacey would say and when she pulls the string she says stuff like 'let's put on make up so we can look pretty for the boys' and then the best one 'don't ask me, I'm just a girl!'

And then when she goes to the Malibu Stacey factory and goes on the tour (trying to find and speak with the Malibu Stacey creator to complain) she watches the video about the history of Malibu Stacey and at the end of the video the narrator says and what does Malibu Stacey have to say to all of that (her history just presented) and then she says 'Don't ask me I'm just a girl' and the narrator says 'She SURE is!' ARRGGGH!! LOL.

But honestly just thinking of that phrase 'I'm just a girl' (also brings to mind the great song by 'No Doubt') can make my blood boil pretty damn quick!

Things must have really changed since I last went through a temple session.

- In the beginning of the services, women are told to "bow their head and say 'Yes'", when they are instructed to "honor and obey" their husband.

I could be wrong but I believe that the instruction to “honor and obey” their husband was removed some time ago. As far as bowing my head and saying “Yes”…it wasn’t just a “woman” thing, I was instructed to do so a couple of times as well.

- And, all the sessions inside the temple, of course, are lead by men. For instance, near the end of the services a man asks for volunteers from the assembled group (both male and female), to step forward to form a prayer circle.

Weak. The last time I went there was a man AND a woman in the front of the room instructing.

- Once this circle is formed, the male leader instructs all the women in the congregation (including in the circle) to cover their faces with their veil, and bow their heads.

Weak. I was told to bow my head in the circle as well.

- Then, this same male *leader (the church LOVES to think in this *term for all men), asks the people assembled in the circle to repeat the prayer he offers, word-for-word.

Weak again. It's a ceremony!! Would you prefer that those in the circle each spout out their own prayer?? Also the male *leader (the church LOVES to think in this *term for all men) was NEVER referred to as a "leader" during the temple ceremony...regardless of how much the church LOVES to "think in this term".

- Note, again, that it is still a man who gives all these instructions.

Weak. Scraping the bottom of the barrel.

- The problem here is, the patrons (as they are referred to) are instructed to exit quickly, so that the next group can enter this same room.

- No chance to contemplate in this room (and ignore the lavish seating). Also, speaking is discouraged--and even if it is done, it is to be only whispered.

Weak. I was never instructed to exit quickly, was able to contemplate the room for as long as I wanted, and totally understood and respected the reverence of the place and the need to speak in whispers.

Things must have changed.

Sounds like the bishop was a valiant priesthood holder/fascist pig who didn't understand boundaries! Any female who bows a knee to this clown is doing herself a great disservice! It's time to say adios amigos to the so-called church! mormon women don't have to put up with belittlement of this nature because of gender - end of story! Fargin Asshat! Thanks Johnny Dangerously! As Always, tnurg (GRUNT)

According to the above corrections on my original posts, all I can say is (as my brother often says), "Well, I'll be darned".

Glad to hear that some things have been changed.

And, in time for my granddaughter (who is scheduled to be married in the L.A. temple, in May).
----

Of course, I won't be at the temple to see it happen---but not because I couldn't wrangle a temple recommend out of my bishop, but because I choose not to go.

The reception will be at the ward, the accommodation of which, (she realized, after scouting-out other, and expensive-to-rent-accommodations, is free, and includes plenty of free parking spaces and clean bathrooms, etc). These advantages beat the heck out of having to pay plenty for a rented a place with very little parking, and of which one has to pay to park.

I will be going to the ward for the reception, and free (to me) food, which suites me fine.

I do have a super gift, something which can't be bought: A treasured family heirloom.)

The purpose - or possibility - of the 'Relief, So Society' is so INSURE this doesn't happen.

To collude against the priest least understood.

If all [lds] women demanded ORDAIN WOMEN (or the equivalent) principles, things would begin to change... But not until then.

If women are 2nd class citizens, men "not worthy" are 3rd class.

Why then are women staying while men are leaving LDSInc? Among rank and file members women outnumber men 2 to 1.


This is true for most Christian denominations. Male leadership, female members. Church is a social club for women.

Women feel less empowered in general and we are made to feel like this from a young age.

So I think it's harder for them to leave, ESPECIALLY when they have become financially dependent on men for support.

The LDS 'church' discourages women from both getting an education and working outside the home. This keeps them tied to the men and the church for support. This is done, I think, intentionally. All repressive patriarchal organizations and societies have used this same tactic to keep women 'in their place.'

Many women in this organization are the victims of physical, psychological and sexual abuse. And then top it off with having many children dependent on them. It is almost an insurmountable task for most women to leave. They just don't have it in them.

Not sure if I would have had the strength or courage to leave had I not gotten out when I did. Early, before marriage and kids, before I got that entrapped.

Men on the other hand are taught to be powerful leaders, in control, taught that they can achieve anything. Are given skills to provide for themselves and earn a living out in the world.

Men also are more able to detach from their offspring esp. in this 'religion' since they are kept away from the home so much trying to provide financially for a large family and because of church leadership positions. They also did not carry them as fetuses in their bodies and go through the pains of birth. And they don't spend all day long with them every day like the women do. The bond therefore can be much greater for the female and so much harder to leave them.

And then if the father of the kids is the abuser than of course the woman doesn't want to leave the kids alone with him. She has no means to support the children on her own. She is encouraged by all of the church leaders (men) to stay in abusive relationships, to 'forgive' her spouse (for unforgivable acts of violence!) in order to not break apart the family. she took vows to 'uphold the priesthood' and all she has known thus far in her life is blind submission to the priesthood holders.

When the rest of her family is thus enslaved as well she has no other family to turn to for help.

In my mind women who were married and had kids in this cult and got out are the most incredibly brave women I have ever heard of and I would think the exception for obvious reasons.

I disagree with the 'social club for women'.. that's ONLY if you like the other women and believe you me most women do NOT love to be in groups of just women. We generally cannot trust each other at all and there is a lot of back stabbing gossip that goes on. This is typical of women who are treated as the least significant members of a social group. They feel powerless so the only way they can feel any power is via gossip. They are not allies at all and not to be trusted.

My mother seems to like the social atmosphere but I can see that she is also highly insecure about it and so gossips relentlessly.

And my sisters and sisters-in-law in the church don't seem to enjoy camaraderie with the other 'sisters' at all and I think their friendly social interactions are really very superficial. I mean have you ever watched them interact? Nothing but superficiality going on there.

There are other much more compelling reasons that women stay in more than men.