The List

This year marks my 12th consecutive year of having daughters in the YW program, and I've become accustomed to having little lists lying around the house enumerating the qualities the girls would like to see in their future spouses. This ritual is a strange one which I think must be peculiar to the Latter-day Saints. I tend to view it as rather pernicious and dangerous. Perhaps its roots lie in good intentions. Indeed girls should be looking for young men to date who are following certain standards. I believe that communication should take place before young people get seriously involved so that a girl who wants 10 children doesn't end up married to a boy who doesn't want any. However, the lists I've taken out of pockets in the laundry tend to include items like "he should have blue eyes," "must be rich and have good taste in ties," or "will already have graduated from med school." Are my daughters simply being facetious in what they are writing on these lists? Or are they really culling from my future family possible brown-eyed son-in-laws?

What is the purpose of such a particular list? Should a girl who considers education important really refrain from dating a good LDS boy because he plans on becoming a mechanic rather than aspiring to a degree in medicine? What happens when she falls in love with a boy who doesn't meet every requirement on her list? Will she always feel in her heart that she lowered her standards to marry this individual? How will this girl react when (as happened in one of our Ward Standards Nights) a bright-eyed newlywed pulls a list out of her journal and gushes that the man she married fulfilled every requirement on her list?

Well, it must be that time of year again, for this week I found two lists written by each of my two teen-aged daughters. This list was a pre-printed one from some apocryphal YW materials entitled "A Future Husband" and which included several categories of inspection. The YW leader, in a burst of creativity, had the girls cross out the word "husband" and write in "wife." Apparently they were to decide what qualities they were to develop which would make them a worthy wife to the man they would someday marry. This seemed an improvement upon the standard, but upon perusal, I still became disturbed.

Following are the results of each list:

(14-year-old daughter) A FUTURE HUSBAND WIFE: Career Objective Job to fall back on (lawyer?) Spiritual Preparation Patriarchal Blessing Temple Recommend Mission Caregiver Education At least a college degree Law Degree Well Educated Special Skills Know how to care for house and family Have good work ethics Selflessness Good teacher Kindness Talents/Hobbies/Interests Piano player Reading Play sports Physical Traits Appreciate my body Good hygiene Treat body like a temple

(16-year-old daughter) A FUTURE HUSBAND WIFE: Career Objective Something to fall back on Spiritual Preparation Worthy to go to Temple R.M. Education College graduate Special Skills Good with kids Trustworthy Honest Talents/Hobbies/Interests Physical Traits Healthy

This was all quite a surprise to me. First of all--my readers will know that BiV has never taught her children that a career is "something to fall back on." Why did both of my daughters use these same words? Is this something our YW are being taught in Church? Should women look upon a career as simply "something to fall back on?" Does my intelligent 14-year-old have a passion for law? Does her question mark indicate an awareness of its unsuitability as a backup career, or is she unsure if this choice of career will fit in with the Latter-day wife expectation?

And my amazing, multi-talented 16-year-old wrote nothing down in the space provided for talents/hobbies/interests. Did she just get bored with the activity, or doesn't she think her talents or interests would be useful in her future role as wife?

I'm especially interested to know if any of these responses would have changed if the purpose of the list had been to describe "MY FUTURE ASPIRATIONS" instead of "A FUTURE WIFE??"

Jesus Loves Me, But Not My Breasts?

This comment at FMH brought on a slew of unwelcome emotions:

"As to the question of modesty, I would just ask women for some basics: I don’t want to see your boobs, and I don’t want to be overly reminded of them. I know you have them, and I know you can’t make them disappear, but you also know how to make them more or less noticeable. Please, choose things on the “less noticeable” side of the scale. Similarly, skirt-lengths that don’t give me reason to think I might catch something if I pay close enough attention are nicer than not."

I have often deplored the treatment of modesty for women in our Church. Women and YW are oft castigated for wearing clothing that might titillate a man. Girls are faulted for inappropriate thoughts experienced by SS teachers, and are held accountable for men's reactions to their appearance.

This emphasis is unwelcome for many reasons. First, a man is accountable for his own responses. We realize that men have sexual reactions to visual stimuli. But since a man is likely to get turned on by the sight of a shapely woman in jeans and a turtleneck sweater, or even a woman's eyes flashing through a burka, he must learn how he will deal with these completely natural feelings. We have seen that it is not impossible for a man to enjoy the sight of a beautiful woman, relax and turn his mind to other things, then go on with his life. He need neither feel guilty for his reflexes, dwell on inappropriate thoughts or take them into action, nor blame the woman who happened by or her choice of clothing.

In many countries outside of the U.S., women breastfeed their children in public. Men are taught from a young age that this is natural and normal. When a breast appears in public, it doesn't seem to throw these men into a tizzy. Thus, it must be possible for males to learn how to process the sight of women's body parts.

So-called "modesty" teachings are also unwelcome in the Church because they undermine the principles of the Gospel. The Lord would have his children know that they are valued, precious, and loved. Why do you think our youth have such difficulty believing these teachings? When carried to an extreme, as they now are, teachings on "modesty" undermine and confuse this Gospel truth. Young people get the message that their body parts are shameful and disgusting. "Modesty" teachings are so often emphasized that they replace instruction on God, Christ and the atonement, the Restoration, and Christian love. This leads youth (and others!) to excessive dieting, eating disorders, cutting, and depression.

Comments such as Blain's are all to frequent in Mormon culture, among both women and men. I may be more fragile than most Mormon women, but these words have the effect on me of wanting to either flaunt my body or hide it and hurt myself. They make the possession of a woman's body an undesirable condition. "I know you can't make those breasts go away, but I wish you would," these voices say. "Make them less obvious if you can. Better yet, just disappear."

At times I am admonished to choose my dress as if I would be in the company of Jesus. In reality, we should feel perfectly comfortable stark naked in the presence of the Savior. If we don't, there is something wrong with the way we have been taught to view our bodies. In the Garden before the Fall, man and woman were unclothed in the presence of God, Jesus, and perhaps the entire Heavenly Host, and they "were not ashamed!" God fashioned our body parts and is intimately acquainted with them.

We are making the clothing issue for women a bit of an obsession. I agree with C.S. Lewis that "I do not think that a very strict or fussy standard of propriety is any proof of chastity or any help to it." In Mere Christianity he writes on the Christian view of sex and sexuality. He says that sex is an appetite, and like all appetites, it should be fed in healthy ways but not titillated, not indulged, not gorged. One sign that our sexual appetites are totally out of bounds is the growing phenomenon -- Lewis was writing in the 1940s -- of striptease shows. He wrote:

"Now suppose you came to a country where you could fill a theater by simply bringing a covered plate onto the stage and then slowly lifting the cover so as to let everyone see, just before the lights went out, that it contained a mutton chop or bit of bacon, would not you think that in that country something had gone wrong in the appetite of food? ...There is nothing to be ashamed of in enjoying your food: there would be everything to be ashamed of if half the world made food the main interest of their lives and spent their time looking at pictures of food and dribbling and smacking their lips."

I would not like my remarks to be construed as a defense of ostentatious flaunting of the body or of the degradation that takes place in pornography. Both are extremes which are as contorted as an overemphasis on covering up. In this fallen, cold and inhospitable world, clothing is a necessity. It is a gift given to mankind for their protection and comfort. Some concluding thoughts by C.S. Lewis:

"Finally, though I have had to speak at some length about sex, I want to make it as clear as I possibly can that the centre of Christian morality is not here...All the worst pleasures are purely spiritual: the pleasure of putting other people in the wrong, of bossing and patronising and spoiling sport, and back-biting; the pleasures of power, of hatred. For there are two things inside me, competing with the human self which I must try to become. They are the Animal self, and the Diabolical self. The Diabolical self is the worse of the two. That is why a cold, self-righteous prig who goes regularly to church may be far nearer to hell than a prostitute. But, of course, it is better to be neither."

Latter-Day Morality

You may not be aware of this if you grew up Mormon, but the LDS definition of morality is rather different than that which is generally accepted. Morality is very easily defined to Mormons--it means not having sex. That's all. End of discussion. Immorality means having sex. That's what we teach our teenagers, and that is the definition we carry with us from our church meetings into our daily lives.

Today I'd like to talk about some of the nuances to the word "morality." The meanings that we don't get in Mutual or Seminary or Sunday School. For purposes of this discussion, I would prefer to define "morality" as a system of ideas of right and wrong conduct.

We Mormons like to think of ourselves as a moral people. We accept the Ten Commandments from the Old Testament, Jesus' behavioral standards as described in the New Testament, additional ideals and clarification from the Book of Mormon, and random precepts such as the Word of Wisdom health code from the D&C. We even have our own rules of behavior that come from continuing revelation and church tradition. But out of all of these standards of morality, there are some in which we are truly invested, and some to which we merely give lip service.

As one indicator of standards of morality, let's look at what we teach our children and youth. The standard of conduct that we hit the hardest is of course sexual purity before marriage. We do this to the extent that even the word morality has become synonymous with sexual behavior, as noted above. We reinforce this teaching with related cautions about masturbation for YM and dress standards for YW. I have been dismayed by the amount of emphasis dress standards receives in the Young Women's program. This counsel eclipses all other religious instruction, including teaching of the Savior and the Restoration. Modesty in dress for girls is taught during YW classes, midweek activities, Standards Nights, Seminary, Sunday School, over the pulpit, at Stake dances, Girls Camp, EFY. Indeed, there is scarcely a church activity a YW can attend where she is not warned that she must appear dressed modestly. If her clothing is not appropriate, she is subject to being sent home to try again. The message is firm and unmistakable. Dress standards must not be violated. Here again the very word "modesty" has been coopted to mean only a particular pattern of dress for girls and women.

Additionally, sermonizing abounds in our youth programs on the importance of obedience to the Word of Wisdom. Due to this emphasis the youth of the Church would sooner steal a car, cheat on an exam, or spread vicious rumors about a peer than take a sip of coffee.

The emphasis on the remainder of the wide spectrum of right and wrong behavior is virtually ignored among Latter-Day Saints. To illustrate this point, fill in the blank of the following sentence:

Our Mormon youth are known for never ________________.

One might say that our youth would never drink alcohol, or smoke a cigarette. One might fill in the blank with "never sleep with a boy/girlfriend." But would you even think of filling in the blank as follows:?

Our Mormon youth would never skip classes at school.
Our Mormon youth would never haze their fellow students.
Our Mormon youth would never tell a lie.
Our Mormon youth would never steal.

As a convert who attended evangelical Christian services, I can tell you that in other churches, these standards of moral conduct are given great emphasis. If you have grown up in the LDS church, it is likely that you consider loss of sexual purity and Word of Wisdom adherance as grievous sins. It is possible that you would add murder to this list, with the exception of those you kill while in the military. Other transgressions would be appraised as less important on the moral continuum.

Is there not a morality that is based on the other commands of God found in the scriptures? Is there not a morality that is concerned with practices that minimize the harms that people suffer? Promoting people living together in peace and harmony? Morality that requires charitable action for good? Overcoming selfish vices? What about a morality based on respect for the planet on which we live and the myriad creatures who live upon it?

I hope we can begin to consider the vast implications of religious morality. Morality within the Church should be more than simply refraining from sex. This wider morality should be discussed at least as often as the length of skirts. It should help us formulate ethical theories for personal conduct.

Bearing Children--The Default Position

This question came up as I wrote my last post, and I'd like to discuss it further with my readership. What is the preferred "righteous" Latter-day Saint position on procreation?






1. Begin having children and don't stop until you receive revelation to do so.
2. Wait to have children until you are directed that it is the right time.
3. Have as many children as you desire unless the Spirit intervenes with different instructions.
4. Use your own wisdom to figure out how many children you can support financially, physically, and emotionally.
5. Strive to discover the exact number of children that Heavenly Father wishes to send to your home, and act upon this information.
6. Other?

Do you think there is a general Latter-day Saint position on this question? Does it differ from your personal position?





When I was a young mother, I perceived the Church's position was to have as many children as you possibly physically could. I began by having my first two girls less than a year apart. There were some problems with #2, and the Dr. advised that we should be satisfied with two children and not attempt to have more. He sent us home with a prescription for the Pill. I held the paper in my hand and cried. I felt strongly that I should not use this contraception. We went home and researched statements of General Authorities on birth control. I could find nothing that condoned the use of artificial birth control, and discovered many General Authority quotes preaching against it. These impressed my mind so much that to this day I have never used it. As you know, readers, I went on to have 8 children. Miraculously, there were no further physical problems.

As the years went by, my zeal for having children has waned. I once saw my childbearing as a great demonstration of faith and obedience to the Lord and dedication to Church teachings. But in recent years, teachings on procreation have changed in their emphasis. Now a young couple can be considered perfectly orthodox and faithful while waiting to finish schooling or spacing their children. I feel that my sacrifice has become essentially meaningless. I could have had 4 children and saved myself the year of serious post-partum depression, financial struggles, and marital discord. Perhaps the children would have had more advantages, more attention, a better home life. I would have been free to pursue educational and other interests. I love and value each of my children, but I don't know if my choice was the wisest one I could have made. I don't even know if it was the Father's will that I have that many children. I just had them by default because I believed the #1 example above. Since I never had a direct revelation to stop having children, I often feel guilty that I haven't had more.

Julie Beck's talk has taken us back to the era in which I was starting my childbearing. I react to it differently than many younger couples. I feel pressured to have more children. I'm noticing that many younger couples can listen to the directives without feeling this pressure. They are not applying Julie's admonition directly to themselves. They see it as advice that doesn't necessarily have to be acted upon immediately.


I'm waffling dreadfully on this issue. In a way, I'd love to be true to that zealous, faithful little Latter-day Saint girl I was in the beginning. But I've lived long enough to see that there are other ways I can contribute to society and to my family than having children and staying at home to cook for them and clean up after them.



What is the Spirit trying to tell me? I just don't know.

Fantasy Bonds in Eternal Marriages

This was another session I attended at Sunstone Symposium. It was given by Michael Farnsworth, EdD, an educational psychologist who recently retired from the marriage and family relations dept. at BYU Idaho.

The words "fantasy bonds" were, in my opinion, a little misleading in this presentation. Michael was using the terminology given by Robert Firestone to roleplays that husbands and wives develop in their marriages. Fantasy bonds are culturally defined duties that people begin to act out in their marriages. They can eventually become bonds which hold the couple back from intimacy.

Michael said that intimacy is an acquired taste--many cannot stand the passion that true intimacy brings. When we fear our own and others' energies, we can form fantasy bonds as a psychological defense to marital distress. Mormon women have a great tendency to slip into this role-playing behavior. Once a young wife enters into the pattern, all her decisions are made for her. She will have many children, she will not work outside the home, she will hold Church callings, etc. Michael warns of three dangers to this reaction, and I have observed these myself.

1. The relationship can become superficial
2. The marriage partners are embroiled in continual conflict
3. One of the partners surrenders their voice

Thus, Michael suggested that personal identity has to be established before relationship identity can be formed.

The respondent to this talk was Ronda Callister, PhD and professor of organizational behavior at Utah State. She presented the point of view that developing a resilient identity is the work of a lifetime. She said that had she waited until personal identity was established before she was married, it would have been a very long time! Then she shared some steps she had taken in developing a resilient identity and encouraging intimacy in her marriage.

I enjoyed this presentation but I found it very difficult to listen to, since I neither see myself as having a very well-developed sense of identity nor much intimacy within my marriage.

To Be A Pioneer

This may surprise some of you, but I am completely and totally enthralled by the Mormon Pioneer story. Any song, story, film, or talk dealing with the pioneers can reduce me to tears. Many of my children refuse to sit next to me in Sacrament meeting on Pioneer Day. When the story of Mary Goble Pay is retold, I begin to cry at the Platte River, and by the time her mother dies between the Little and Big Mountains at the entrance of the Salt Lake Valley, my eyes and nose are red and blotchy and my sobs and sniffles are so loud and wet they can be heard throughout the chapel.

I'm a convert, and have no Mormon Pioneer ancestors, so I don't know what it is about their story that has grasped my heart so strongly. I suppose it's the epic, archetypal, "Hero's Journey" that I relate to. I won't go back to Joseph Campbell and try to compare his elements of a hero's journey with our pioneers, but I do want to name some of the facets of the Mormons' trek that resonate with me.

First, the journey starts with the death of their Prophet and all of their hopes and dreams for a new Zion of peace and safety. The pioneers are willing to enter an unknown wilderness because of their faith and belief in something outside of themselves.

Next, they are cast out of their homes and must divest themselves of treasured possessions. This is just wrenching for me. It symbolizes the worldly things we must cast aside as we take our spiritual journey. I suppose I must find this difficult in my own life, as the tale of pianos and china left by the side of the trail holds such pathos for me.

The tales of selfless sacrifice along the way are an important element of the story. Some of these have been embellished to the point of legend, but are important to us as a people. These include Mary Fielding Smith's determination to beat the captain of her wagon train to the valley (and the anointing of her ailing ox); Robert Parker who went back to find his young son carrying his wife's red shawl; and the young men who carried some of the Martin Handcart Company over their last crossing of the Sweetwater and suffered the effects the rest of their lives. These stories highlight our better nature and remind us of the courage and cooperation we must maintain as we help each other toward our goal of eternal life.

I love these stories of bravery and faith. They strengthen me and encourage me to continue my journey. I've got a journey coming up ahead of me in the next few months that may be as difficult as that faced by the pioneers. I hope I'll be found as courageous as they were.

The Heroine's Journey

The Hero's Journey is a basic pattern found in important myths throughout the world, as described by Joseph Campbell. The fundamental structure of this journey has been described as follows:

1. A call to adventure, which the hero has to accept or decline
2. A road of trials, regarding which the hero succeeds or fails
3. Achieving the goal or "boon," which often results in important self-knowledge
4. A return to the ordinary world, again as to which the hero can succeed or fail
5. Application of the boon, in which what the hero has gained can be used to improve the world

Many historic, religious, and literary figures, such as Moses, Odysseus, Joseph Smith, and Abraham Lincoln follow this hero prototype. I think that the Temple endowment casts all of the Lord's covenant people into this hero role, and follows many of the particulars on the Hero's Journey found in Campbell's book "The Hero with a Thousand Faces."

I've been captivated by the application of the Hero's Journey to women. Since the writing of Campbell's book, women have asked if we find a different journey with different archetypes when the hero figure is a woman. Do we need to adjust the stages of the hero's journey to fit the female life or do we just need to search for heroes (male or female) that we can relate to? Are women able to place themselves easily into the role of hero?

Many men, and especially those at the tail end of their adolescence, can visualize themselves as a participant in the Hero's Journey. Young women, on the other hand, can find it difficult to accept an image of themselves as powerful and competent, and so they reject "hero/ine" as a model of their journey. In recent years, there has been more literature with heroine as protagonist, especially in the young adult field. Motion pictures, however, have lagged behind, and Mormon culture in particular is sadly lacking in providing heroines as role models.

I would love to see more Mormon women heroine role models. When I think of Mormon women who we encourage our daughters to emulate, I cannot think of a one who strongly models the Hero's Journey. Many of them are known for their association with a powerful husband (Camilla Kimball or Patricia Holland). Others who seem ideally placed as models for women have been disappointing. I am thinking particularly of our recent General Relief Society Presidents. Name recognition and visibility has been quite low. (Try this: Name all of the Presidents of the Church in your lifetime. Now name all the General RS Presidents in your lifetime. Can you even name the current one?)

Are any of my readers aware of Mormon heroines suitable for emulation by Mormon women? What are their accomplishments? Do they reflect a Hero's Journey, or is their journey a modified one due to their gender? How well are these heroines known Church-wide?

In Which We Are Trained To Be Nice

I am appalled and concerned about the recent trend on the Bloggernacle to avoid controversy and to be nice at all costs. This went so far today as Times & Seasons taking down their post about the impropriety of the Marriott hotel chain being involved in questionable activities. On this chain, there were heated comments presenting both sides of an argument of concern to all of us as members and friends of the LDS Church. I realize that Times & Seasons strives to present a faithful aspect of Mormonism. In the past, I think they have done an admirable job of being balanced and fair while faithfully discussing issues of concern to LDS of a more intellectual bent. On occasion, they have found it necessary to delete comments, moderate the discussion, or close the comment forum down when they felt things were out of control. I think these actions are sometimes necessary in maintaining the tenor they would like to present at T&S. But in my opinion, deleting the entire thread is censorship akin to the type I have found unacceptable in the Mormon Church.

LDS members are trained to be nice at all costs. One will rarely find a satisfying intellectual discussion in any of our meetings, because we do not wish to tread on toes or cause waves. We will keep things inside of ourselves to the point of explosion, because we've been trained to be nice. Perhaps this is valuable in a ward setting. After all, we must closely associate with the members of a ward over an extended period of time. We must socialize with them, teach their children, work with them and attend meetings together.

But the Bloggernacle is an excellent forum for the expression of our true feelings. We can tell it like it is. We don't have to worry about official Church disapproval or repercussions. (at least so far...) We can discuss things that may not be welcome in our ward or even in our own homes. We are also able to participate at our comfort level. If the discussion gets too heated for our taste, we can be gone at the click of a mouse. The only thing we need to remember is that our position is only one view of the world. Others will have different ideas. These differing positions are not an indication of the faithfulness or unfaithfulness of any participant.

The blogger MCQ has opined: "At their most basic level, blog posts are expressions of ideas. The ideas are those of the poster originally, then those ideas are added to or modified by the subsequent comments. They become unique expressions, a preserved moment in time, and can never be perfectly duplicated once they are gone. These ideas deserve a spot in the marketplace, to stand or fall in the court of opinion. By their very nature they do not imply the endorsement of all who are permabloggers on a particular site, and anyone is free to voice their agreement or disagreement with them explicitly in the comments. Based on the above, there is no affirmative reason, in my mind, to ever delete them. Moreover, there is a grave danger in doing so. It is a disservice to all of us when deletions take place, because it robs us all of the opportunity to learn from the ideas that were expressed there."

I have always regretted actions of the Church which tend to censor or force members not to publish on their personal conjectures. I am more of the opinion of Gamaliel, when he says in the Book of Acts: "Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought: But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God." There were many things I did not agree with on the T&S thread. However, reading the discussion of the topic helped me form my own opinion. A more restrained restatement of the problem can be found at BCC (Sustaining Our Leaders, Sustaining One Another, by Mark Brown). But I found nothing wrong with the original post. That the discussion became heated and out of control is only an indication that the respondents possessed strong feelings on the subject. Such strong feelings should have a place to be expressed while feeling free to remain affiliated with the Church.

That is the value of the Bloggernacle to me. I can always attend my local ward when I am looking for niceness.

Coming to Terms With Polygamy--A Response

In this post I respond to Caroline's questions at Exponent2 blog regarding how I have come to terms with polygamy.

I have several different thoughts. First, I believe that the Church continues to practice polygamy today. Because sealings to multiple wives continue to be practiced in the Temple, and because we believe in an afterlife, polygyny is something we must come to terms with as Latter-day Saints.

In the early days of the Church many leaders declared that polygyny was necessary in order to be exalted. However, Melvin J. Ballard refuted this idea in (I think) 1912 when he said that a man sealed to one wife could be exalted. Thus, my thinking is that polygamy is not necessary. (You just have to convince your husband not to be sealed to another wife after you die!) There are many women who are repulsed by the doctrine (how much of this is cultural conditioning we do not know), and imo they will not be forced to live it. Other families have been sealed into the principle. There is no evidence to suggest that these sealings will be dissolved. My opinion is that they will continue in the next life. Whether or not we personally contract into a polygamous union, it remains so much a part of our doctrine that I doubt any of us will not be personally affected in some way.

I'm not against polygamy myself. But I've had different experiences than many of you. My parents were involved in polygyny from the time I was age 12. It had nothing to do with Mormonism or religion, it was a lifestyle choice. I did not agree with my parents' choice to bring another wife into the family. The choice had many negative repercussions regarding the four children's relationships with our mom and dad. Nonetheless, I saw that it was a viable lifestyle. There was little, if any jealousy. The three adults usually acted as a cohesive unit (much to our dismay as children!) Living closely as a family made it impossible to hide any problems or tensions. I must admit that they were very few and usually solved with patience, tolerance, and love. Both women lived in our home and had separate bedrooms. (I have No Idea what the sexual arrangements were--and I don't want to think about it! Please! They're my parents!) Both women were employed full-time (the youngest child was already school age). Both women had feminist inclinations. Both women as well as my dad shared household responsibilities. All three were very happy with the arrangements, and seemed close and emotionally connected. Thus my personal experience has convinced me that polygyny is a lifestyle that can be lived in love and satisfaction for all parties.

In addition, I have always had very close female relationships. Always. Until I came to Vernal I always had female friends I could rely on emotionally. A woman will listen to you hash the same experience out umpteen million times. A man will (usually) listen to it once. Then he will want you to solve it or get over it. (Yes, I know I'm generalizing a bit!) But there are many reasons that I find a woman to be better "best friend" material than a man.

I can imagine retaining my feminist sensibilities in a polygynist relationship. In fact, I can picture myself in a coterie of chattering females, discussing a book we've read until 3 in the morning, while polygamist hubby waits alone and cold in the upstairs bedroom!

The last point I wish to make is the "obedience" issue. I read two posts at FMH dealing with this issue (See #1 and #2). It interests me that Mormon women who are traditional in every way state that they would rather give up their exaltation than live polygamy. I wonder at statements that if polygamy was reinstated they would "flatly refuse" to obey prophetic counsel. I am often taken to task on this blog for some of the stances I take. Conventional believers would have me adhere more closely to prophetic counsel. Yet it seems acceptable, on the blogs and in wards in which I've lived, to rebel against this one principle.

As I wrote this post, I asked my husband if he would ever want to live polygamy, and he was emphatically negative. He doesn't feel up to dealing with multiple females. I guess most of that is my fault! I think he finds me emotionally taxing. So perhaps I will never have to face this issue head on. I'm not like my parents; I don't believe polygamy is something to be entered into without the specific instructions of the living Prophet of God. But I like to think that if "The Principle" was required of us once again, I would see it as a fascinating and fulfilling adventure.

What Advice Would You Give This Missionary?

This is a leaf taken from my Missionary Journal from Thursday, 27 August 19xx in Beloeil, Quebec, Canada. It was one of my very first District Meetings.

Today we had a District Meeting to set goals for September. It was really hard because I couldn't understand why we were setting goals for baptisms, etc, if it didn't depend on us, it depended on the free agency of the person. We finally figured out that the only way it made any sense is if this was the number of baptisms the Lord would give us if we did all we were supposed to, taking into account the people that would fall through, etc.

Sister R. and I came up with the number of 4 Baptisms for our area. This is really scary because it means at the end of the month if we don't get 4 Baptisms it is because of something we did wrong, or OUR lack of faith. We are really stepping out in faith, something I haven't really tried before. If we don't make our goal, the District will say, "Why didn't it work, Sister L.?" I was so sure of it before, but fear has crept in a little bit.

I want to call down the powers of heaven by doing all the things I'm supposed to do, so that by obedience to the law, the Lord will be bound to give me the blessings. What I just don't know are all the things I must do to gain the blessing of baptizing. What is the law upon which it is predicated? I have tried to make an exhaustive list, and I am determined to follow them. If this works out, it will add a great deal to my faith. And I want so badly to be able to develop my faith!

Here are some of my questions:
Do missionaries still make monthly baptismal goals?
How do you think such goals fit with free agency?
When the goals are not met, is it the fault of the missionary?
How does D&C 130:21 apply to missionary goals?
Do you think attributing not meeting our goals to our own sin is doctrinal? Is it healthy?

Effects of Prophetic Endorsement

One of our late-night conversations at the Retreat has been on my mind ever since returning home. We were discussing the response of Latter-day Saints to the Prophet's admonition that women wear only one pair of earrings. I have seen a huge response to this all over the United States. Many women have not only removed their extra earrings, but have borne their testimonies about it! An address given by Elder Bednar has reinforced the teaching with the story of a young man who was considering marriage with a girl who had multiple piercings. When President Hinckley asked women to wear only one set of earrings, he patiently waited for her to remove them. She did not, so he stopped dating her. She had failed to respond to prophetic counsel.

In our discussion, we marveled at the general obedience in the Church to this teaching. Then one woman wondered what would happen if, at the next Conference, President Hinckley approached the stand and said, "Brothers and Sisters, I've been thinking about this, and I think we should all recycle!"

Can you imagine what a difference the Prophet's endorsement of this would make in our world? I've noticed that in Vernal and in other places in Utah, it is very difficult to recycle. There are not accessible places to bring your recyclables. In Boston, where my sister lives, everyone recycles, because on trash day, there is a day for the pickup of your glass, a day for your plastics, and a day for your paper. Table scraps and yard detritus are placed in a compost bin or pile. I'm thinking that if the Prophet told us to recycle, a similar program might suddenly find support in Utah.

Elder Bednar says that the earring issue might seem minor, trivial, or silly, but that in following the prophet we learn to become "quick to observe." My question is why can't we learn the same lesson and meanwhile accomplish something positive and make a difference in the world?

The Scarlet "S"

One of the most interesting things discussed last weekend was that of singleness in the Church. Suzette and Julie, our speakers at the Retreat, are both returned missionaries in their late 30's. Several topics were brought up that I thought were pertinent. Foremost in my mind was the comment that a single person lacks legitimacy in a married Church. We do have a coming-of-age ritual in the form of a mission. But even after serving a mission, in the Mormon society one is not fully grown and a member of the "adult" class until they have been married. This results in strange behaviors, such as speakers who will come into singles wards and talk down to them as a group, though several of his audience may actually be older than he.

In our discussion, one woman mentioned that she has noticed that married couples without children also struggle with lack of legitimacy.

Singles in married wards are often treated like teenagers, and seldom receive leadership callings. They are sometimes asked to babysit instead of joining in the activities that married couples are attending without their children. Julie spoke of some notable exceptions she has seen, such as a Boston singles ward which was given much responsibility in the Temple. They also were called upon to organize and lead a Youth Conference. In addition, Julie had two single Relief Society Presidents in her family ward in Northern Utah. These things lift the entire Church as we utilize the now-dormant strengths of many additional adult members.

I know that Sister Barbara Thompson, newly called Second Counselor of the General RS Presidency is a single woman. I wonder if she will have an influence in being a role model for women or effect any change in the status quo for singles. I don't hold my breath, since our last General RS had quite a low visibility in the Church.

Suzette said that marrieds might have an image of singles as having a wild and crazy social life, playing Ultimate Frisbee every afternoon with a group of cute guys. This makes them reluctant to invite singles to socialize or join them in their comparatively boring activities. "I'm in my late 30's, and I like to do things that other people my age do," she pointed out. Unfortunately, there is usually a "Great Divide" among the single and married members of a ward. Suzette observed that since the predominant culture in the Church is a "family," it is incumbent upon the married members to open a way to integrate the singles.

Our two presenters gave married members several suggestions to help integrate singles into the culture. One of the most poignant was their plea not to try to "fix" singles as if something were broken. Many church members feel a vast discomfort with single members and sense the ambiguity with our doctrine which necessitates marriage for progression and Godhood. They try to probe the psyche and discover what is wrong. The single member must be gay, or too picky, or too intimidating.

In what ways have you seen the Church making efforts to integrate singles? Where do you stand on the "Singles Wards versus Married Wards" controversy? If you've experienced time as an adult single member of the Church, please share any insights you have gained.

Buck Up, Ladies!

I'm pretty steamed about a comment on Amri's post "Part-Time Jobs and Part-Time Daycare." Amri wonders if a part-time job might help her SAHM friend's mild depression, and asks if part-time daycare is really all that bad. Several commenters defend stay-at-home mothering, and offer suggestions on how to alleviate the depression. Then bbell chimes in with some advice he says comes from his wife, who "at one point had a 4-year-old, 20 month old, and a set of newborn twins at home." Here is the advice:

1. Shower, dress and put on makeup. Being slobby is not going to help your mental state
2. get other SAHM friends including non LDS SAHM friends. The non LDS SAHM friends will be guilt free friends who will not see you thru a pressure filled LDS SAHM prism. You will be able to relax a bit in their presence
3. have lots of sex with hubby
4. Make the bed in the morning
5. Clean the house. Do not have a messy house it will kill you mentally
6. Work out. Get a jogging stroller and go every day
7. Get unlimited long distance and call lifelong friends regularly
8. Do not use food to help you feel better. Getting fat will not help you feel better
9. Date night on the weekend
10. New hobbies
11. Buck up
12. Make your husband cook, clean, laundry, dishes etc. at night Never go to bed with a messy house. Its a horrible feeling to wake up to a mess

And now, here is how some women reacted to that advice:

"I believe you, bbell, that these are your wife's suggestions. But somehow, I wish she had commented herself. I don't know why, but it makes me MORE depressed to hear a man tell me that the way to cure my depression is to have lots of sex with my hubby, don't get fat, don't look slobby, and clean the house..."

"buck up is quite possibly the worst advice i've ever heard. ever."

"I don't think bbell's list would help someone who is already depressed. Those items take a lot of energy and ambition. When I had depression, I'd make lists like that too. Then I'd stare at them and cry..."

"That list looks like exactly the thing that creates that guilt-inducing pressure that mormon women suffer from. You will only be happy if you wear makeup every day, your house is clean, you work out, aren't fat, and have a great sex life. I mean, duh, I think every woman wants her life to be like that. But isn't the point that you get bored, depressed, and often overwhelmed? How is adding tasks to the day going to make someone less overwhelmed? How is telling a woman unfulfilled with her life as a SAHM that she would be happy if she were just, you know, skinny and cute and sexy every day, going to help her? yeesh."

When I was a young SAHM, I was given similar advice in the form of a book by Daryl V. Hoole, The Art of Homemaking, published by Deseret Book. A representative piece of advice in this book is the following:

"Not only is your attitude of great importance, but your appearance also plays a vital role in a happy home. One of the most common complaints unhappy husbands have is that their wives have neglected their appearance and slop around the house with uncombed hair and in runover slippers which look like two dead rabbits. If for no other reason than to keep the romance alive in your marriage, it is worth it to put your best self forward. Each morning get up and get completely dressed...And remember, as far as make-up is concerned, Even a barn looks better if it's painted!"

As I was looking for a link to Ms. Hoole's book, I discovered that she had written a new, updated book called The Ultimate Career: The Art of Homemaking for Today. I figured that perhaps her views had changed since she wrote The Art of Homemaking in 1967. Perhaps she had advice which addressed some of the challenges of being a homemaker in today's world. I haven't read the book, but Meridian Magazine provided some quotes from this new and improved version:


"The hope is to have many more good days than bad ones and to experience joy in our daily lives. To bring this about, our best efforts are required; yes to be happy at home is the result of all ambition. Now, while you're waiting for more to come in the months ahead, treat yourself today to a quick lift and some instant satisfaction by doing three simple chores:

First, sweep your front porch or outside entry way. This stops dirt at the door and provides a welcoming experience for family and friends who approach your house.

Second, wash the window over the kitchen sink, if there is one. As you look through a clean, sparkling window the entire world brightens up. If you don't have a window, shine your sink.

Third, pick up and put away, give away or throw away ten pieces of clutter..."


Now, I am sure there are many "feminist Mormon housewives" out there who will tell me that the advice to "buck up" has changed their lives, or that shining that sink can give one a whole new perspective on life. But to me, this type of advice is at best, silly; and at worst extremely damaging to a woman today. To a woman plagued with guilt, boredom, and depression, one need not pile on more inane and worthless chores such as sweeping the front porch or putting on makeup each day for hubby's viewing pleasure.

Our Family is Complete--The Decision

I was recently asked the question, "When did you decide your family was complete? Did you have any sort of revelation/answer that you are 'done' with having children?"

I remember exactly when I started feeling scared about having so many children. It was right after #5 was born. She was about a week old and I was feeling well enough to go for a walk. I had baby in a sling, #3 and #4 in the double stroller, and #1 and #2, who were only 5 and 6 years old, were on either side of me on their bikes, with training wheels, not really able to ride well yet. We started walking down the sidewalk in a big parade. I thought, "What have I done?!! There is no way I can do this."

For the first time, I had postpartum depression with this baby. It was sort of a "functional" depression--from the outside I looked like I was OK. I held Church callings, homeschooled like crazy, (I taught all of my kids to read by age 3, had them all working 2 grades ahead of their ages), and did projects like stripping all of the wallpaper off a large home and repainting.) But I lost a lot of weight and lived an entire fantasy life inside my head. My husband and I had horrible fights, I hurt myself and had suicidal thoughts constantly. It was an awful year.

How did I deal with it? After about a year, we moved, which sort of put everything into a new perspective, I read a book called "Cognitive Therapy" and started practicing it (more on that later) and I became more realistic about what "being a good mother" entails. Then I had another baby. My husband went back to school to get his PhD. We lived on less than $10,000 a year for 3 years. Here's a pic of my stairstep children that year. They are ages 8,7,5,4,2, and newborn:



In spite of all this, I have never had a revelation/answer that I was done having children. In fact, I still get twinges every once in a while that maybe I should have more. (I am 47!!) The story of why I stopped at eight children is less than spiritual. When I was 40, and #8 was 2 years old, my husband wanted to have another child. I was barely feeling healthy again, and I didn't want to. I asked him, "if I had another one right now, it would cause a lot more work for me. What would you be willing to change in your life?" He said, "Nothing, I'm doing everything I'm supposed to do already." His answer made me furious. So I decided the time was not right for another one. I think if I had stuck to spirituality, I would have 12 kids and be a raving lunatic. So basically I have no good answers on that one.

Blog friends, how do you balance faith and logic when deciding when your family is complete? Have any of you had revelations that there were no more children waiting to come into your family? Have you felt pressure to have more children? Do any of you deal with the guilt that perhaps you should have had more children, but your faith or your physical or emotional strength was too weak?

How have you come to peace with your family size?

The Weeping Mormon

The clouds in Vernal today were so close to the ground, it seemed you could reach out and touch the face of God. They were grey-blue in color, and the celestial palette was that one you see on certain spring days when the sun shines through the rain and the leaves are the brightest emerald green. It struck my heart so strongly that the pain has been there all day. As I read through the blogs, I've mourned, and I've wept, and I've wished to comfort those faceless souls I know only through their passionate words.

First, I came across a tribute by John Remy:

...today I realized that when I hear Regina Spektor sing, I think about Jana. Her music makes me hyperaware of Jana’s presence in my heart, my mind, my soul.

People at Church seem to remember two of my pseudo-sermons across the pulpit. One was my apology-ridden ‘doubtamony,’ and the other was when I declared that Jana was my goddess.

Mormons take this god and goddess business serious–every one of us is a literal child of god and are therefore godlings, beings of Godly potential. And Jana has always been my goddess. In a life stripped of much of the divinity and meaning that it once had, Jana is my Ishtar, my Innana, my Isis. She is the one being left to me to invest all my irrational faith in, to spend my life in adoration.

I like to think that ours is a love of legends–that some day someone will write songs about it. When I listen to Regina Spektor, I feel like someone already has.

Strange that reading this would make me weep. I read this, and I wondered what my life would be like if someone loved me so much.

A poignant image of the "Mormon Circle" written by Margaret Young also touched me deeply:

[My father] would continue giving priesthood blessings to me and to my siblings throughout our lives—the most difficult one being at my brother’s hospital bedside after we were told he would not survive the injuries he had sustained in an accident. That brother, Dad’s namesake (Bobby), lifted his arms as high as he could when Dad walked into the ER room. Bobby was threaded and tubed to monitors and IVs, and being transfused. He said one word: “Hug.” And that’s it—that’s the picture. Dad is maneuvering around the ganglia of wires and tubes to embrace his son, and then to bless him. It’s a godly scene. It expresses the image I have of God—a corporeal being who can reach around our mortal mischief and earthbound wiring to embrace us in the fullness of His glory, no matter how damaged we are.

Later, when Dad’s pancreas failed, it was Bobby who blessed him. That’s the Mormon circle.

Love, eternal union, the Mormon circle. They are so beautiful and so ethereal they make one want to sing and to weep, at the same time. But like the clouds I watch above the Uintah Basin, they can be elusive. There is another side to the story. There are those who have been evicted from the Mormon circle.

Mayan Elephant wrote, concerning the PBS special:

Will y'all think I am a lesser elephant if I admit that I cried? It's fine if you think that. It is true. That was brutal to watch. Effing brutal.

I lost it.

Margaret Toscano did me in. I was just amused without seeing anything very interesting, until Toscano came along. Then, it all changed.

I don't know if there are others on here that have sat on the jury side of a Mormon church court. I have. I was a High Priest in the church. I was in the seats they pictured in that video, the jury seats. Damnit. There is no redemption for that. None. Not ever. It is part of me now. I dont expect to ever be redeemed for having been a part of one of those courts. I can only hope to adjust after having made that part of my life experience.

Hearing Toscano tore me to pieces...
On one hand, I saw Toscano, and I knew she would sit in that chair, and take the bullet for me, for my local leaders, for my mission companions, for my wife and kids, for all women, for Mormons. She could do it because she loved Mormons. Does anyone get that? She loves that community.

Toscano being denied the chance to dress her sister is unreal. If anyone reads this and claims families are forever, remember that image, of a sister, divided from her family, her heritage and ritual...

Tribes and families take care of their own. Cults threaten their own and brainwash them to think its a blessing.

This is not what my people gave their lives for...

Equality's words on the same subject:

And then Margaret Toscano told her story. Toscano's sister Janice Allred was excommunicated for publishing a scholarly article on Heavenly Mother (and whose heart-wrenching account of her own kangaroo-court church trial can be found right here) and her story hit me like the sucker punch that killed Houdini. I was floored, overcome with a wave of undifferentiated emotion--a mingling of anger, sadness, liberation, enlightenment. I had read Allred's story and some of the stories of the September Six. But Toscano tells her story so eloquently and passionately that I could not help but be deeply, profoundly moved. And then I went to the PBS web site and as I read her whole interview, two years of searching, praying, meditating, discussing, reading, and thinking about Mormonism and my relationship to it coalesced in my soul.

The totality of thoughts and feelings from hour upon hour of exploration and examination gathered into tight focus. And I was left with a conviction stronger than the cords of death. I now believe that, in good conscience, I can no longer sustain an organization that finds women like Margaret Toscano a threat; an organization that inspires a misplaced zeal that tears families apart; an organization that inspires the kind of unblinking obedience that keeps a missionary from coming home for his mother's funeral (and whose death was a direct result of sacrificing reason on the altar of a misguided faith); an organization that fears the search for knowledge, discourages the publication of accurate history, and punishes the telling of truth; an organization that scapegoats gays, subjugates women, and vilifies intellectuals; an organization that, in short, dehumanizes people to advance its own interest in self-preservation. In sum, I have arrived at the conclusion that the LDS Church "as presently constituted" does violence to my sense of morality.

I saw it happen before my eyes again today on a thread at FMH. A commenter seemed to relate to Margaret's story and shared some of his private pain. He spoke of how Mormon ritual can get in the way of human compassion and the process of grief, and sever the family in one of its most vulnerable moments. "We probably all know someone who wasn’t able to attend a marriage ceremony because they hadn’t met ritual requirements. Many of my own family couldn’t attend my wedding for that exact reason," he said. "Now that I no longer number myself among the faithful, I will not be ritually qualified to fully participate in the celebration of any new child born into my family."

Rather than words of comfort or encouragement, those in the Mormon circle assigned words of blame:

"No one is banned from those spiritual steps except by their own choice."

"The apostasy and/or the sinful life which separates from the individual from the gospel is the source of the violence in the separation. It creates the conflict the, the rest of it is symptomatic of the situation."

"Nowhere does it say that Christ allowed those who were not worthy and did not seek worthiness or forgiveness the same blessings that those who did do what was required received."

"I think it’s that you are choosing to separate yourself from her. It is her decision to marry in the temple. Your choices separate you from the temple."

"the Lee guy from the MMM argued to his deathbed (if I get the facts wrong, I am just arguing a point) that he was justified in killing those pioneers. Should he have full access to the rituals because he felt like he was acting with integrity?"

"I’m not sure I believe your assertion that you have found peace. I hate to point out the obvious but your very presence commenting on this blog is a good indication that you haven’t."

"There seems to be an intentional naivete, a willful simplicity about how you understand love and family which allows, indeed, causes you to think you see a contradiction where others do not."

"You seem to like to put this issue in the darkest, most insulting light. That is my point. You could choose to see it as a positive expression of deep personal conviction, but instead you let yourself be insulted and excluded."

Today I am the weeping Mormon. I see the Mormon circle and it's beauty--I see its exclusivity. We like to believe that someone is being excluded because they choose to remove themselves through sin. Our Savior never let sin stop him from holding one of his sheep close to his bosom. We don't know what sin or righteousness resides in others' hearts. In reality we are excluding people because they are different. We leave them out because we do not understand.

Today I hear these stories, and I wish to be a part of their circle. A circle of integrity, of questioning, of questing. I admire their great souls, stretched large with travail and heartbreak. I wish in my weeping to share a bit of the pain. I wish you to hear their words and feel their humanity and their longing.

Johnny writes:

The most valuable thing I learned from being Mormon was the experience of losing it. Honestly, it is the deepest pain I have ever gone through. If God asked me to do it again, I would plead for him to rip out my finger nails one by one instead. I feel the angst that Satre’s protagonist in his novel Nausea felt. “Then the Nausea seized me, I dropped to a seat, I no longer knew where I was; I saw the colours spin slowly around me, I wanted to vomit. And since that time, the Nausea has not left me, it holds me.”

I don’t know of anyone else who has has experienced this the same way, and if I do, they have never actually told me. Emerging from that has taken a lot of courage, and I feel like I can face existential struggles with more strength then I ever had in the past. Also, choosing to leave went against everything that my underlying psychological desires would have led me to. Thus, I feel like I can say that I don’t believe things based upon purely psychological motivations.

I know it sounds strange to say that the most valuable experience I gained from Mormonism was leaving it, but for the first time I took a step in the dark and that was a defining moment for me.

Mormons take this god and goddess business seriously-–every one of us is a literal child of god and are therefore godlings, beings of Godly potential.

FMH Bloggersnacker

What a privilege it was this weekend to attend the FMH Bloggersnacker and meet some of the great women bloggers of our time! I've admired these women online for quite a while, and I must say they are even more extraordinary in person. Our hostess was FMHJanet, who provided us the venue in one of those older Utah homes which I absolutely adore. The "Eliza R. Snow" of the blogging world graced us with her presence--none other than FMHLisa along with her green jello dish.

The food was a smorgasbord provided by Mormon women anxious to impress each other with their cooking prowress. Whoever made those peanut butter brownie type thingies, that was my favorite. Ham, fried chicken, hummus, dips, taquitos, Greek olives, homemade bread, (and other things that I don't know the names of, but you can find here), I tried it all. I became an unabashed "Cafeteria Mormon" for the evening. For your viewing pleasure is the following picture of our feast:


That picture truly does not do justice to the succulent food that was available for our tasting pleasure. So I'm also posting this sensuous photograph of breasts and green jello which I am considering for submission in one of the more upscale food magazines:



The infant, four babies, and 14-year-old daughter were all well-behaved and charming. A few men were daring enough to join this event. FMHJanet's husband seemed quite happy to remain in the kitchen much of the time, though he wasn't wearing his apron. MarkIV made an appearance, conversing comfortably with all the ladies. And one of the bloggers' young husband made a good showing for himself when he found himself seated in the midst of an explicit conversation about tandem nursing and midwifery.

My favorite quote from the evening came from FMHLisa when the talk turned to early Mormon women and their gatherings. She surveyed the group and remarked, "If we were living back then, we'd already be speaking in tongues by now!"

I could only spend 2 1/2 hours at the Bloggersnacker, and they flew by like I had only been there 15 minutes. I'm so glad I met you all, and I'm looking forward to our continued association.

Three Nephites Sighting

I went to Provo this weekend for a Coaches Meeting and spent some time at BYU. In the Family History section of the HBLLibrary, one of the little old workers was telling an exciting story of one of the Three Nephites who had visited him in his home to bring an important message. I must tell you, people, these stories are a serious hindrance to my faith. I won't go as far as to say that I don't believe in them. It's just that I really doubt that three pre-immortal beings are running around Provo visiting people in their homes. And yet these people are as sure of their Three Nephites sightings as I am of any of the spiritual manifestations I have experienced.


Another impediment to my faith: Daughter #3 came back from BYU-Idaho for the summer; and every third word out of her mouth is "frick."

BYU Blondes

This was originally posted at The Cultural Hall. Go there for comments.
My daughter went off for her first semester at BYU and called me a week later, very upset. She couldn’t really articulate the cause of her agitation. The only explanation she had was that “all the girls here are blonde.”
“Surely,” I replied, “not all the girls are blonde.” Even when I was at BYU years ago there were different ethnicities represented at BYU.
“Yes,” she insisted, “everyone is blonde.”

I later learned that my daughter was reacting to the homogeneity of thought that one often encounters among large Mormon populations. This daughter had attended a very large high school with very few Mormon students. She had developed her own ideas, politics, and moral code while remaining true to LDS standards. When she went to BYU she discovered that it is difficult to be perceived as righteous if you are not wearing the “right” style of clothing, for example. Or if you don’t belong to the “right” political party. (pun intended)

These things that I believe are completely non-essential to being a believing Latter-Day Saint are emphasized to a greater or lesser extent within the stakes and wards of the Church. While still in a student ward, I had two children ages 1 and 2 and one on the way. I was perceived as being a thoroughly faithful TBM while others who were pursuing graduate degrees and had postponed their families were suspect. (little did they know I was clandestinely studying early Mormon history and post-Manifesto polygamy!)

For a while I believed this situation was improving in the Church. The word “diversity” was beginning to be mentioned in many Relief Society settings in a positive way. In a 1991 General RS meeting, for example, Chieko Okasaki, herself one of the few examples of racial diversity in the governing bodies of the Church said: look around the room you are in. Do you see women of different ages, races, or different backgrounds in the Church? Of different educational, marital, and professional experiences? Women with children? Women without children? Women of vigorous health and those who are limited by chronic illness or handicaps? Rejoice in the diversity of our sisterhood! At the time, my daughter was 6 years old. In the late 1980’s and early 1990’s there were several strong voices celebrating diversity in the Church.

But there soon came a retrenchment in thought regarding diversity. In 1996 in a news article announcing that more than half of Church members now lived outside the United States, Dallin H. Oaks was quoted as saying that that the growing diversity among the members is simply a condition, not a Church goal. The real goal is unity, not diversity, he wrote.
Boyd K. Packer said in 2003: If they throw the word diversity at you, grab hold of it and say, “I am already diverse, and I intend to stay diverse.” If the word is tolerance, grab that one, too. After the turn of the century (2000), one is hard pressed to find a positive mention of the word diversity in talks by Church leaders. The sole example I could find (in an admittedly quick search) was by Gordon B. Hinckley in CR May 2006 where he emphasizes the need for greater kindness in “accommodating” diversity and specifically mentions racial diversity. However, in almost the same breath, he lambastes men who will not go to work and force their wives to have a career to support the family.

By the time my child went off to BYU, there was perhaps greater actual racial diversity than I encountered there in the early ‘80’s, but less tolerance for other areas of diversity. Thus her perception of all the BYU coeds as being blonde.

I appreciate the efforts of John Dehlin and the “NOM movement” to legitimize those who diverge in a wide range of areas. There are those who believe that diversity can strengthen the Church, and those who fear it, especially when it manifests itself in religious thought. I have come to no certain conclusions about the matter. I only hope that I and my daughter have a place in this Church, for we are both brunettes.

Changes in Latitude, Changes in Attitude, Changes in Vocabulary

This is a post I recently wrote for The Cultural Hall. Please leave comments over there.

I joined the Church at age 19, and it took me no time to learn Mormon vocabulary. By the time I left on my mission, no one could tell I wasn't born and raised in the Church. Recently, I've become interested in the reverse phenomenon. When a long-time member's Church vocabulary slowly begins to change, what alterations in their lives does this portend? What does it mean when "I know that God lives" changes to "I deeply believe that the universe was created by a Divine Intelligence?"
When "I know the Book of Mormon is true" changes to "I am convinced that living the principles taught in the Book of Mormon can lead to a fulfilling life?"
When "I know the Church is true" changes to "I have found joy and happiness in participating in the Church organization?"

(Now, I haven't read all of Fowler's Stages, only a synopsis.) So some of you may enlighten me: Did Fowler include a change in vocabulary as signifying entry into a different stage of belief? I'm postulating that all those who examine their faith deeply will begin to express themselves rather differently than with the standard Mormon usage. This includes those who will deepen their faith in the principles of the restored gospel as well as those who will eventually leave or who will come to consider themselves NOM's.

Mormon vocabulary is so distinctive it seems impossible to make much of a change without being noticed in the community. So I have some questions for the readers of this blog.
1. As your beliefs shifted, did you struggle with your use of Mormon language?
2. Did others notice a change in your vocabulary? Did this make you "suspect" in the eyes of traditional Mormons?
3. Have you noticed other Mormons who have transformed their vocabulary away from "Mormonspeak?" Does this generally portend changes in their religious affiliation?
4. What are some specific examples you've heard, read, or changed to? (For example, I no longer begin personal prayers with the phrase, "Dear Heavenly Father.")

The Good Neighbor Award

It's snowing in Vernal! We just got back from a big swim meet in SLC, the light was fading from the sky, and the driveway was completely covered with the white stuff! I grabbed the kids and a couple of shovels and we started in on it. It's a really long, wide drive, with a circular part, and it can take an hour and a half to finish. We'd barely started, when Brother Wilson came roaring into the drive in his little tractor with a snowplow attached. Like a maniac, he scooted up and down as we grabbed the little one (who was making snow angels in the middle of the driveway) and moved out of his way. Five minutes later, he was on his way to the next driveway, and so on down the street.

Good neighbor award to Brother Wilson today!