Mr. Benson- if this is too personal, feel free to ignore it. But in my endless quest to understand the minds of our church leaders, do you have any thoughts on the motivation behind your grandfather's attack on women wanting to become employed (I think it was 1981)?

I heard that the church news version of the talk was changed significantly from the actual wording of the BYU devotional. GAs were sent in to get the Provo economy back from the brink from all the women who dumped their birth control and their jobs!

. . . it was a cornerstone of goodness and faith to accept the notion that it is the man's exclusive "right" to be called of God to hold the priesthood (which is, in essence, Mormon-Church-male-invented "authority" to control) and, in that capacity, to then tell women in the name of this man-god what to do.

It's the territorial impulse of such men (and, indeed, of many men, including non-Mormon ones) to want to control women. I think that many of these men are frightened by powerful, independent women who threaten their fragile egos and their perceived domains.

Simple as that.
_____


P.S.--The ETB sermon to which you may be referring was delivered as a Church-wide fireside address on 22 February 1987, entitled "To the Mothers in Zion." When it was subsequently published a short time later in pamphlet form by the Mormon Church, the content of the original speech had been edited.

(see, "A Voice From the Past: The Benson Instructions for Parents," by Lavina Fielding Anderson, at: http://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/Dialogue_V21N04_105.pdf)


As noted by Vella Neil Evans in her article, "Empowerment and Mormon Women’s Publications" (reprinted in Maxine Hanks, ed., "Women and Authority," Chapter 3):

"In 1987, LDS president Ezra Taft Benson effectively ordered women out of the workplace--a stance that has been only grudgingly modified to recognize the 'no choice' status of single women, including single mothers."



Edited 19 time(s). Last edit at 08/21/2013 03:27AM by steve benson.

Thanks. And I do remember now that it was 1987.

. . . or 1819, or 1198, or . . .