Exponent II's Blog, page 259

R-Rated Scripture

[image error]

Ammon Defends the Flocks of King Lamoni, courtesy of LDS Media Library

Through a little skit, Mormon children were learning a Book of Mormon story. In the scripture story, a missionary named Ammon gains favor with a king by cutting thieves’ arms off. The young girl portraying Ammon  passed a bunch of paper arms to the person playing King Lamoni. “Thank you,” ad-libbed the King. “But I don’t like arms.”

I don’t either, at least, not bloody disembodied arms that have been amputated by force. I don’t like gruesome stories in general, especially those in which the protagonist happens to be the perpetrator. These stories make me squirm even when presented in scripture format. I feel even more antsy when kids are in the room. One night, after family scripture study, I admitted that I hoped the kids hadn’t understood a word of what we had read—it was Nephi’s account of chopping off Laban’s head.

Such stories aren’t limited to the Book of Mormon. The Bible is another rich source of questionable subject matter. Many of these stories are wisely deleted from children’s lessons—I’ve never heard the Lot family incest story in a Primary setting—but others are kids’ favorites. Consider the battle of Jericho, which features kid-pleasing trumpets, magically toppling walls, and um, genocide.  That’s part of the reason that I enjoy sharing Bible stories with my children in Veggie Tales format, where wars are portrayed as pie fights and King David’s voyeurism is directed toward a rubber duckie instead of a bathing woman.

Mormon adults are studying the Old Testament in Sunday School this year. As I review these Bible stories with my fellow Mormons, it occurs to me that these stories aren’t necessarily uplifting to adults either. The most common way scriptural text is interpreted in Mormon circles is as an accurate, historical account that also serves as a perfect model for how we should live our lives. With this premise, discussions  can delve into why murder or slavery or rape or whatever other objectionable action that particular scripture hero performed was good and right in that particular circumstance.  The best explanation derived is usually that the hero’s actions were justified because he was perfectly inspired or perfectly obedient. Unfortunately, a side effect is concluding that immoral behavior can be excused when obeying orders or simply feeling inspired.

For grown-ups, pies and rubber duckies are probably not the solution. (Although personally, I would love to spend Sunday School reviewing Veggie Tales.) But letting go of the compulsion to interpret scripture in a way that mandates such extreme moral relativism could help. Here are some other ways to interpret the text:

1. Read the text as an historical account that is descriptive, not prescriptive. Instead of starting with the assumption that everything a scripture hero did was right, readers can first discuss whether or not it was. Moral lessons can be derived not only from emulating scriptural heroes, but from not repeating their mistakes.

2. Read the text as an historical account that may be flawed and biased because of the limited perspectives of its human writers. Nephi himself admitted that his words were “written in weakness.” (2 Nephi 33:4) Because virtually all scripture was written from a patriarchal viewpoint, feminist theologians often employ this strategy. How would the story have been different if it had been written from someone else’s perspective? Consider the biases that might have led the text’s author to interpret his own story in a certain way and the blind spots that may have prevented him from acknowledging his own errors.

3. Read the text as an allegory. We can derive insights just as well from fictional stories as from true ones, so in this kind of interpretation,  historical accuracy is largely irrelevant. Mormons have a great deal of training in this kind of reading; we apply it regularly as we read scriptures that are overtly identified as parables, but several other scripture stories that we traditionally read as if they are history might be more uplifting when viewed from an allegorical perspective (especially considering that the literal historicity of many aspects of these accounts is questionable). Could chopping off those arms be a metaphor for eliminating  barriers to serving people of another culture?  Could the tumbling walls of Jericho symbolize overcoming our fears?

Guest Post: Prodigals

[image error]

art by Charlie Mackesy

by Caroline Crockett Brock

Prodigals

I imagine a cosmic welcome party thrown in our honor.

The prodigal daughters have come home to their Mother.

Long lost in the world and enslaved to foreign Masters,

They return.

And Mother’s embrace fills an ache as deep as the ocean.

I imagine a cosmic welcome party thrown in their honor.

Our Husbands, sons and brothers–prodigals no more.

Their spiritual amnesia gone, they cry out “Mommy!”

She answers.

Like a mother standing in the doorway of her sleeping child’s room,

She’s been there watching, waiting all along.

 

Caroline Crockett Brock: Lover. Mother. Writer. Goddess in Embryo.

LDS Church to revise Hymnal & Children’s Songbook for global church and to fill doctrinal gaps!

[image error]

Did you see this statement by the church newsroom?  They’re assembling a committee to revise the Hymnal and Primary Children’s songbook!

More information also here at the LDSCHurchNews site.

What’s so notable about this?! Everything!

They’re going to make every hymnal have the same songs on the same page in every language, including translating language specific hymns into English!  Hopefully this will be a representative work of many styles of music from all the various cultures of the world where the church has members.

Did you see the teeny snippet about making sure the hymns fill “Doctrinal Gaps”?!?  Wouldn’t it be great if this means we’ll be seeing hymns and primary songs about Heavenly Mother?!

Please, oh please, poets and musicians of the Exponent II ilk, submit your songs about inclusion and Heavenly Parents to them for consideration!

Guest Post: #MormonMeToo — Actionable Steps

[image error]

Photo by Rosie Fraser on Unsplash

Assembled by Dana HC

This list grew out of a “Mormon Me Too” discussion at the 2018 Midwest Pilgrims retreat (May 4-6 in Morgantown, Indiana).

Actionable Steps to Prevent and Address Domestic Violence and Sexual Abuse

General

1. Publish and distribute any Church protocols for addressing domestic violence and sexual abuse so that all members can access them.

2. Ask ward and stake leaders to publicize the updated guidelines for interviews from the pulpit.

3. Ask bishoprics to invite occasional Sacrament Meeting speakers to address the importance of healthy relationships, mutual respect, and appropriate boundaries using Preventing and Responding to Abuse.

4. Call for general Church leaders to create a domestic violence and sexual abuse survivors’ hotline that is independent and run by third-party professionals with a prompt response protocol.

5. Call for general Church leaders to establish church-wide protocols that direct every victim or survivor to a licensed clinical social worker (LCSW) or professional therapist and local support resources.

6. Call for general Church leaders to state in public written materials that Church leaders are generally lay people who rarely have expertise in the areas of psychology, mental health, or family law. Further, lay leaders cannot be expected to function as professionals in fields outside their expertise and must refer members with specific health or legal needs to outside experts.

7. Call for general Church leaders to create a protocol for situations where a Church leader such as bishop may have conflicting stewardships over both an alleged perpetrator and an alleged victim.

8. Call for general Church leaders to direct all members to respond to information about possible abuse by contacting appropriate child protection, law enforcement, or other government agencies before contacting Church leaders.

9. Ask leaders to designate and train a female advocate for sexual and domestic violence in each ward and stake.

10. Encourage wards, stakes, and other Church units to support violence shelters as part of humanitarian or community service. Help organize volunteer hours, donations, food, etc.

11. Post fliers and pamphlets about community resources for domestic abuse and sexual harassment on Church bulletin boards and in restrooms. Make this information readily available, not secret and shameful.

12. Discuss domestic abuse and sexual violence as part of ministering. Offer a listening ear, emotional support, or help accessing professional resources, if needed.

Children and Youth

13. Set aside an annual Sharing Time for the bishop to explain interviews (including the option to have an adult present). Teach in age-appropriate ways about personal boundaries. Invite parents to attend.

14. Send all parents of children and youth under age 18 a paper copy or email link to Preventing and Responding to Abuse.

15. Conduct interviews with minors in rooms with windows if no adult other than the bishop is present.

16. In a Sharing Time, teach children to identify five trusted adults they could tell if they (or another person they know) were being abused. Role play telling an adult about a friend who is being scared or hurt. Emphasize that Jesus taught that children should be cared for lovingly, and that we honor Jesus when we keep children safe.

17. Teach children that no adult should ask them to keep a secret (except about happy surprises like birthday gifts, etc.).

18. Ask bishops to share a list of interview questions with parents, teachers, and youth in an annual combined Young Men/Young Women meeting.

19. In a combined YM/YW meeting, teach youth to recognize warning signs of “grooming” (a perpetrator identifying and gradually acclimating someone to abuse), steps to report abuse, and local resources that can provide support. Role play reporting an abusive situation to a trusted adult.

20. With YM/YW, highlight the fact that most perpetrators of sexual violence are acquaintances, family members, or romantic interests of the victim.

21. Teach that respecting adults (including sustaining Church leaders) does not include allowing them to violate personal boundaries.

22. Make sure that children, youth, and adults are aware that 1/3 of child victims are boys. To reduce stigma, include examples about boys and men as victims and as helpers.

23. Consider watching and discussing the movie Spotlight (rated R) with older youth or young adults.

24. Share videos or writings of LDS abuse survivor Elizabeth Smart with youth. Invite parents to join a discussion.

25. Teach youth that blaming the victim is wrong.

26. Do not attribute sexual assault or abuse to the victim’s clothing. Do not imply that modest dress prevents assault or abuse. Perpetrators are not motivated by sexual desire but by the desire to exercise power over another person.

27. Teach that “virtue” cannot be taken from someone. Discuss the 2016 revision to Personal Progress books to eliminate the verse on rape.

28. Offer healthy relationship classes for YM/YW and through Young Single Adult wards.

29. To help youth function successfully in broader settings, teach the concepts of sexual consent and sexual harassment as currently used in many U.S. schools and workplaces. Note that consent applies to hugging, kissing, and touching as well as intercourse. Teach youth that they have legal as well as moral agency.

Adult Classes and Meetings

30. Look for ways to mention Preventing and Responding to Abuse in class discussions. Normalize talking about domestic violence and abuse so that victims and others can speak freely and without fear of judgment.

31. Make reference to recent news about LDS people involved in domestic violence and abuse to underscore the relevance of these topics for LDS audiences.

32. Discuss the pressure some members may feel to portray their marriages or families as celestial or perfect. Since a focus on appearances may make people less willing to report actual domestic abuse, talk less about “the family” and more about the wide range of “families.”

33. Ask if Relief Society presidents or other women leaders could be available to sit in on interviews if requested by the interviewee.

34. Role play ministering to a woman who seems afraid in her home or who hints at abuse. Role play contacting local authorities.

35. Teach parents not to make a child hug or kiss relatives, family friends, grandparents, etc., but rather affirm the child’s agency in choosing appropriate boundaries.

36. Invite a LCSW or other social services/mental health/justice system professional to teach adults and youth about domestic violence or sexual assault during a 5th Sunday combined meeting.

37. Invite women to lead combined 5th Sunday discussions on these topics.

38. Include men in discussions of domestic violence and sexual abuse. Do not allow abuse to be a woman’s issue.

39. Use 1st Sunday Council Meetings to discuss these issues. Ask Relief Society leaders to take ideas and recommendations to ward councils. Follow up on implementation.

Language

40. Teach ward leaders to model direct, plain language (assault, rape, abuse) rather than vague euphemisms (non-consensual immorality, getting physical, etc.). Professionals can provided guidelines on helpful, accurate language.

41. Avoid language that communicates shame (worthiness, purity, etc.).

42. In any discussion about the importance of marriage and family, mention that unsafe home environments are not “of God.” Marriage is not more important than physical or psychological safety.

43. Adopt language of empowerment (choose, want, prefer) rather than of obligation (should, supposed to, must, need to, have to, etc.). Emphasize each person’s fundamental agency.

44. Do not equate virtue (behavior showing integrity) and virginity (the state of never having had sexual intercourse).

45. Avoid or explicitly point out flaws in traditional purity metaphors: chewed gum, licked cupcake, crushed rose, etc. These metaphors objectify women, undermine the concept or repentance, and communicate harmful views of sexuality.

46. Reject as irrelevant any information about a person’s dress or sexual history in cases of abuse or assault.

Resources

• January 2018 BYU Benjamin Ogles Speech about Sexual Assault (text and video) https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/benjam...

• October 2002 BYU Chieko Okazaki Speech “Healing from Sexual Abuse (text) http://www.ldswomenofgod.com/blog/wp-...

(video) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rs4XJ...

Template for (More) Successful Recommendations

1. Situation/The Nod: Using neutral, uncharged language, describe a single issue in terms your audience can agree with. Both parties should be able to nod in agreement.

“Historically, church leaders have interviewed children and youth alone in private offices.”

2. Complication/The Blood Pressure Spike: What has happened to alter the situation? To minimize defensiveness, externalize the problem (“the world has changed”) rather than highlighting internal deficiencies (“you blew it”). If possible, create sense of urgency and show the danger of inaction.

“Recent abuse scandals in the Catholic Church, the Boy Scouts, and the US women’s gymnastics team have highlighted the need for greater protections for children and youth. Organizations that fail to safeguard minors betray their most basic stewardship. They may also be vulnerable to criminal and civil charges.”

3. Question/The Set-up: Ask a question that sets up your recommendation.

“What can we do to facilitate safe, appropriate interactions between church leaders and children or youth?”

4. Answer/Your Recommendation: Simply and clearly, make your point.

“Inform children, youth, and their parents that a second person can participate in any interview. Meet in rooms with windows. Provide list of topics or questions in advance,” etc.

A Love Letter to My Fellow Mo-Fems

[image error]

I just wanted to send off a quick missive to let you know that I see you, and I love you.

I see that you notice the damage that white patriarchy does to people of all ages, races, genders and sexualities. I see you working to build a better world, struggling to find your place, and worrying about the vulnerable people in our society.

I see you, re-writing lessons to remove damaging quotes, marching in pride parades, teaching your children to notice who needs help.

I feel the same pain of a society that often values power over humanity. A society that takes resources from native peoples and then calls them non-citizens, that uses the strength of immigrant labour to produce food as cheaply as possible and then denies them health and family, that allows men to harass women in the workplace in the name of creativity or idiosyncrasy – as long as it leads to profits.

I know that you’re doing the best you can, even if that sometimes looks like sitting on the couch with netflix and ice cream, or crying in the shower. It’s okay to have times like that, because sometimes your best is amazing. Sometimes your best is having a difficult conversation with your spouse about gender roles in your marriage, because bringing your whole self into the relationship is more important than sticking to the roles you expected to carry out when you were young and your eyes weren’t yet opened. Sometimes your best is drawing boundaries with your family, which is difficult and sucks. Sometimes it’s preparing for social events, to have the words and emotional bandwidth to explain why those sexist/racist jokes aren’t funny. Sometimes your best is making sacrifices to support other people financially. Sometimes your best is a blog or Facebook post showing others the gap you see between where the world is and where you know it could be.

I love to see so many of you living in that uncomfortable gap. We don’t fit in the new world, and it’s not easy to feel ourselves stretching to fit there. But this, I think, is what it means to work out our salvation before God. If we want to be like Them, to return to Them, we have to be able to feel what they feel. That surely includes a lot of pain and anger at injustice, but it also means feeling joy with those who are rejoicing, and building hope (and heaven) together.

I think about this Ira Glass quote pretty often, and it occurred to me that we can see social justice work as, ultimately, creative work:

“Nobody tells this to people who are beginners, I wish someone told me. All of us who do creative work, we get into it because we have good taste. But there is this gap. For the first couple years you make stuff, it’s just not that good. It’s trying to be good, it has potential, but it’s not. But your taste, the thing that got you into the game, is still killer. And your taste is why your work disappoints you. A lot of people never get past this phase, they quit. Most people I know who do interesting, creative work went through years of this. We know our work doesn’t have this special thing that we want it to have. We all go through this. And if you are just starting out or you are still in this phase, you gotta know its normal and the most important thing you can do is do a lot of work. Put yourself on a deadline so that every week you will finish one story. It is only by going through a volume of work that you will close that gap, and your work will be as good as your ambitions. And I took longer to figure out how to do this than anyone I’ve ever met. It’s gonna take awhile. It’s normal to take awhile. You’ve just gotta fight your way through.”

It’s okay for your intersectional feminist awakening to take a while. It’s normal to take a while. I see you, living in the gap between what you know can exist and what you’re currently capable of, and I love you. Stick with it, stay with us, keep fighting your way through. We’ll get there in the end.

And if you want to tell me what you’re proud of, or what you’re struggling with, I’m right here. I love you.

Wolf Pack Patriarchy

[image error]

Earlier this year I helped my 1st-grader make a wolf habitat diorama and discovered that wolves take their pack hierarchy very seriously.

Remember Benevolent Patriarchy and Chicken Patriarchy?  Today we’re adding Wolf-Pack Patriarchy to the list.

Wolves are highly social animals that live in extended or intimate family groups. The pack is led by a mated pair: the Alpha male and female. These family leaders can bond for their lifetimes and are the only breeding members of the pack allowed to reproduce.  The Alpha male breeds with the Alpha female when she is in heat, then guards her from all other interested lower-ranking wolves by biting, barking and growling at them to stay away.

He similarly deters any possible suitors away from lower ranking female wolves when they are in heat (but does not mate with her himself.) This makes sure that only the Alpha genes continue in the pack. Controlled access to females limits which males are allowed to mate.  All other wolves in the pack are single and not allowed to mate with each other.  (with an occasional exception for the Beta male and female)

Lower ranking single wolves often stay at the den to babysit the pups when the Alphas go out to hunt with the pack.

Alphas establish the rules of the pack: who eats first, where each wolf sleeps, who stays with the pups and so on.

Wolves hunt as a pack so they can take down larger prey animals together, since no single wolf can hunt a deer or elk alone. Packs are territorial in where they live and hunt, rarely overlapping with other packs.

The lowest ranking wolf of the pack is the Omega. This wolf is picked on, bullied, teased, dominated and forced to submit.  The low-ranking wolves can be ousted from the pack and forced out on their own. (The “lone-wolf”)  Without a pack, these lone wolves can starve to death.  Sometimes lone wolves or other outcast Omegas band together and become their own pack, with a former Omega male and female becoming the Alphas of a new pack.

The Alphas use the lower ranking wolves for help raising the pups and for hunting as a group, but low-ranking wolves are significantly underprivileged with restrictions about eating, sleeping, procreating and general status in the pack.

Similar hierarchy systems exist in Mormonism, with Alpha male and female – or AlphaMormons (monogamous couples sealed in the temple, one or both returned missionaries) being the acknowledged “ideal” and given leadership callings within the church. Bishops, Stake Presidents, Mission Presidents and Temple Presidents, Area Authorities and Apostles must all be temple-married at the time of their calls.  Individuals married to a non-member are like BetaMormons: allowed a few more privileges than single people, but still not fully respected or allowed to lead. Single people are the Omega -automatically lower ranked and not considered for leadership callings, with the exception of single women being called as auxiliary leaders at local and general levels.  Like members of the wolf pack, childless women are told that they are “all mothers” as they nurture other people’s children.

The “Patriarchy” part of this analogy is that the AlphaMormons in power are the ones who control access to reproduction and the raising of children. For example, chaste single women in the church are discouraged (and sometimes disciplined) by church leaders and handbook policies from having a child via artificial insemination and raising them as a single parent.  Single people are discouraged from adopting or fostering children. Through church policies, it is dictated that same-sex couples may not marry or raise children.  No exceptions seem to be made for single people who are exceptional nurturers or who would make excellent foster parents, nor for committed same-sex partners to experience the joys of family life. The “joys of family life,” it seems, are reserved only for AlphaMormons, and the rest of the pack is barred from full participation.  Even those who have chosen a satisfying and fulfilling life without spouse or children are told that they’ll get those “blessings in the next life” as though it’s automatically assumed they want those things and are missing out on something in the meantime.

Children aside, the Wolf-Pack-Patriarchy mentality means that any non-Alphas are forbidden from having any sort of sexual expression as a part of their single life. (ironically one of our “God-Given” inclinations)

By extension, AlphaMormon Heaven is exclusive of single people, relegating them to the status of “ministering servants” to the fully exalted couples, as though heaven didn’t have enough room for everyone to have full privileges.

How did Jesus treat single people, or those with differing marriage practices? We know Mary and Martha (single women and sisters living together) were his beloved friends and disciples.  The Samaritan woman at the well had been married 5 times and was cohabitating with a man to whom she was not married but was the first to receive his declaration of his divine mission.  The woman taken in adultery was not condemned, but forgiven and excused to go and sin no more.  For those who will argue “it’s not man’s prerogative to change the patriarchal structures God has put in place,” let’s reaffirm that Jesus is not the source for discriminatory actions against single people, nor does he place restrictions on who can care for children, so long as they don’t abuse his “little ones.” Jesus declares himself both “Alpha” and “Omega” – showing that his empathy is for both leader and outcast.

It’s time to abandon the language of hierarchy and superiority when it comes to marriage, children and sexual expression.  In our deepest hearts, we know this exclusive mindset is discordant with the wishes of a loving Mother and Father God for their children. Salvation is individual and unique!  It’s time to make our worship services and church fellowship fully inclusive of all individuals, without teaching that some members have more ideal lives than others. Nobody should be judged for having a “counterfeit” lifestyle when they are in the pursuit of what brings happiness and goodness to their lives.

This analogy shouldn’t have been so easy to write.

 

Newsreel: Baptist women petition for change, feminism at Cannes Film Festival and the Mormon/Boy Scouts break up

[image error]New Children and Youth Development Initiative Coming January 2020

LDS.org
Listen and subscribe for free below:

The Mormon Handshake

I grew up in the church, so was well indoctrinated in Mormon hand-shake culture. I knew that as I entered the chapel, a man—whether I knew him or not—would put his hand out for me to shake. I was supposed to shake it in return, and perhaps even have some brief small talk.  I liked it as a child—I felt “big” by engaging in something that otherwise I had only seen adults do.

 

As I have become older, I have become less and less comfortable with this Mormon handshake culture, so I tried to think of why it doesn’t feel right. I’m not alone in my discomfort. In feminist Mormon facebook groups, handshake discomfort discussions happen on occasion, usually filled with comments reflecting every aspect of hand shaking in modern, international, and church cultures. I am not the only one who finds it uncomfortable, and like me, women describe embracing or dodging the the Sunday-chapel hand initiation using a variety of techniques.

 

I clearly recall the first time I “pushed back” against the handshake. It wasn’t even the handshake itself. The bishopric member of the singles ward I attended at that time had just shaken several female congregant’s hands as we entered into the chapel. He was old enough to be my father, or maybe even older, and he happily greeted us with, “How are you girls today?” Besides the fact that I was new to the ward and knew none of the other females who had just entered, the comment was lobbed at us as a whole.

 

Importantly, we were all at least in our twenties, we were all girls to him. A female business professor of mine used to agitate for college-age women to call ourselves women. She repeated noted that student males spoke of each other as men, but student females often spoke of each other as “girls.” “You are not girls,” she admonished. “Girls are children. You are over the age of 18. You are adult women. Don’t let anyone take that from you.”

 

My response on that Sunday was a reflex, “We’re great. How are you BOYS today?” Immediately,  I felt an adrenaline rush, and I wondered if I should or would regret my words.  My annunciation of “boys” startled him, and he opened his eyes wide. He paused. I was scared. He said, “Great lesson. Lesson learned! Thank you!” He pumped my hand in gratitude, and I felt safe.

 

Phew!

 

And yet….. the Mormon handshake still felt ….Not optional. Okay at best, uncomfortable at worst. But why? I shook hands without hesitation at work and school– what was my issue with church handshake culture?

 

Hand-shaking in Anglo cultures has a long history—most often in years past, it was used to seal a financial or political agreement. There is a historical argument that a woman should never accept a man’s hand when extended to her, lest she be considered “loose.” (I could not find a reference for this, but I have had it referenced often when people discuss discomfort in handshaking at church.) In modern times, we see handshaking as greetings, introductions, and in business mergers. We see it in episodes of American Pickers (a show where the leads travel around the US finding private storage sheds filled with collectibles that they hope to purchase and then re-sell at their antique store), and we experience sometimes as means of securing the purchase of a car.

 

Outside of church, I happily shake hands when meeting people via places of employment for myself and my husband, and even at my children’s school, when I meet with teachers, principals, school board members and parents. There are hundreds of professional blogs dedicated to sharing American business culture handshaking, even those that address the awkwardness of the male- to-female handshake, and the question of the female to female handshake (should we do it? YES!)

 

 

So why am I still uncomfortable with the Mormon handshake? Is it a simple as the fact that Mormon women do not serve as door greeters at church for handshaking? Or it is something else? Even something sinister?

 

As I thought about this, I could not shake the memory of the 2007 PBS Mormons interview of Margaret Toscano where she discussed her excommunication. The men in her high council pronounced her as an apostate. Then, each wanted to shake her hand. It sounded almost laughable to me at the time– as if they were making a used-car sales deal with her. It seemed as if those handshakes were symbolic of a business deal, rather than an excommunication. It was as though the handshake solidified that she agreed with her excommunicated, even though she didn’t.

 

In her words:

 

I afterwards talked about sort of the horror of niceness — that on the one hand they’re cutting me off from eternal salvation and telling me that I’m this apostate, which really is considered very bad in Mormon culture, and then I’m this nice woman that they’re going to shake my hand. There’s something vicious about niceness that struck me in this — that the niceness covered over the violence of what was being done, because, in fact, excommunication is a violent action.

 

In this, the handshake represented power. Perhaps the men had fooled themselves into thinking that they were somehow being polite, or even consoling. But to even presume that they could offer consolation means that they perceived that they had the power to offer sympathy and compassion either as an ecclesiastical leader, or social officer. No matter the reason, it was continued, symbolic recognition of the power that they have over the women they command as unworthy to remain within the structure of the church. It is, and was, about power.

 

Men, as always in the LDS church, have all of the power. Lack of priesthood keys ultimately [image error]means that women are utterly powerless. Thus, in Mormondom, we would be mistaken to presume that the handshake is a greeting.  It is not. It is symbolic of the surrender of autonomy of women to men. Even men who enter and are not in “leadership” position yet secure their place with a handshake. However for men, there is a construct which allows them the opportunity and position of power equals as they are all united in the “marvelous brotherhood of the holy priesthood of God.” This is not the case with women. Women are being hand-shaken into a chapel run by men. Women read, share and discuss lessons approved by men, and we answer to men in our branches, wards and stakes regarding our most private things—of sexual conduct, of sins, of hopes and dreams– all in the name of priesthood power. We don’t have say; we are not in the “marvelous brotherhood.”

 

Thus, for women, the Mormon handshake is the symbol of surrender—not a surrender to God, but a surrender of Mormon women to Mormon men. Mormon men who control all we do within the church.

 

I recently read about an Algerian woman who was in the process of becoming a naturalized French citizen. Her husband is French and they live in France, so citizenship for her seems natural. However, in respect of Islamic culture, she refused to shake the hand of the municipal officiator at the citizenship ceremony, because he was male (similar Jewish culture as per the Old Testament). Her citizenship was denied. She filed a lawsuit to challenge this, but again, she was rejected on grounds that she was not welcoming enough of French culture to be granted citizenship, as was symbolized in her refusal to shake the male officiator’s hand.

 

This happened in April 2018. Could something like this happen in Mormondom as well?

 

[image error]Most recently, the new Elder’s Quorum president who was called to replace the previous High Priest and Elders Quorums presidencies, thrust his hand at me, as we threaded in opposite directions between the pews at church. Prior to this, I slid in sacrament meeting behind my husband, usually purposefully carrying so many things that I did not have a hand to spare for the obligatory shake offered by the door crew. Even when the bishop came into Relief Society in order to shake the hand of every women in the room, I had enough time to drop out of sight, or gather handbooks, or help a young mother juggling her children, so I could avoid being forced to share a part of my body with a man I did not want to touch. The bishop still noticed.

 

Yet at that moment, passing between the pews following sacrament meeting, I was in a position of giving up my body via my hand to the new Elder’s Quorum president– a man who I wasn’t even sure knew my name. I hesitated. I could be over in 2 to 3 seconds. Instead, I said, “I don’t like shaking hands,” smiling as kindly as I could. “It’s just not my thing.”

 

“Oh! Okay,” he said, chuckling and smiling back, continuing on his way.

 

Phew! Was it that easy? Did I only have to say that it wasn’t “my thing”?

 

Two weeks after this, I was told in an email from the bishop that there was spiritual hesitation on his part in regard to my attending the temple.  He didn’t say that he was taking the recommend away, but he did say that he didn’t feel good about me holding a calling. I can assure you that I am temple-worthy, and nothing in my behaviour would warrant this censure.

 

Well, nothing but for the fact that I avoid shaking his cold, clammy, empowered hand.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kintsugi: Focusing on the Cracks

I was surviving fast and testimony meeting ok and then it came… The testimony that went something like this, “I visited another church and didn’t really learn anything new and I’m so glad to be a member of the ONLY true church, because while other churches may have nuggets of truth, OURS has ALL because when the apostasy happened truth shattered and with the restoration we were given a new vase.”

I remember this analogy. I’m pretty sure I used a version of it on my mission. But as one who attends another denomination regularly and doesn’t believe the “only true church” rhetoric, the testimony felt a little smug and left me in a grumpy mood.

BREATHE. I made it through church and joined a couple of friends in the hall who were talking about some of the things that need to change in the church and what they were doing about it. That conversation went something more like, “The church is not perfect and if so, what would be the point for us? We have work to do!” That conversation was balm for my weary soul.

So maybe the church isn’t this perfect vase that was restored in perfect form to Joseph Smith that could be a perfect receptacle for all the wisdom God intends to pour down on humanity. Maybe the church is a broken vase lying in fragments on the ground and there’s still a lot of work to do to piece it into the shape God has in mind.

I love the Japanese art of Kintsugi: repairing broken pottery and highlighting the cracks with gold. Behind this practice is the philosophy that breaks and flaws don’t need to be disguised, but can add value to a piece and witness that the object is worth repairing.

To me the Church feels like a broken vessel on the floor, surrounded by a million hands sorting through the pieces, doing the hard work of setting things right. Some are weary. Some are angry and have left the work. I can only thank them for their efforts, having also tasted sorrow and pain. There are days when policy changes, reports of abuse, or gender issues feel like a hammer coming down to smash the shards that are left into something that feels beyond fixing.

But I do have hope. Like with kintsugi, a broken object can become more beautiful as the flaws are acknowledged and repaired. I believe in a God who can work wonders with any material. Even shards of a vase.

Exponent II Call for Submissions – Fall Issue 2018

[image error]Our planned theme for the Fall issue of Exponent II is Mormon Women and the Creative Process.  

Are you an artist? Are you a writer? Are you a maker of beautiful things? Do you solve problems with elegant designs? Do you appreciate the creative work of others in enhancing your life?

How do you find space and time for your work? What inspires you? What keeps you going when you are not inspired? What does it feel like to experience the finished product – the creative output of yourself and others? How do we celebrate creativity in our community?

What do you think of Mormon art? Have you played a part in the renaissance of Mormon art in recent years? Have your opinions or understanding of “Mormon art” changed? Who are the Mormon artists who inspire you? How could we better incorporate Mormon art and literature into our culture and worship?

What is your creative process and how to you support the creative process of your sisters?

Tell us about it.

Submissions should be between 700 – 2400 words and should be in Word or Google Doc format. The deadline is July 1, 2018. Please send to exponentiieditor@gmail.com.