Exponent II's Blog, page 282
November 19, 2017
Tarot as a Spiritual Practice
The Hermit
I spent much of my teenage and younger adult years with just a small handful of spiritual practices, with prayer and scripture reading at the heart of those. These were both referenced continually at church and there was some encouragement at various points in my life to be accountable for reading and praying on a particular schedule. Prayer was thanking and asking Heavenly Father for blessings and scripture was reading the words of men who talked with Him. I got a lot out of both of those practices in the past and continue to use them, but not in the same way that I used to.
There is something powerful in the countercurrent spiritual practices that I have witnessed in Mormon feminist circles. I have seen and participated in women blessing women, women re-interpreting scripture, and recognizing the sanctity of hard conversations and working through our prejudices individually and collectively. In these moments, I have seen women claim their own authority to reflect and connect with the divine in the ways that they themselves have devised. Several of my most powerful spiritual experiences have been with spiritual practices that were forbidden in LDS circles. These experiences left me craving a more creative approach to spiritual formation and self-reflection as I began to realize that there were more ways to connect to God and community than what had been presented in my religious education.
I first encountered tarot at a Mormon feminist retreat. Someone I had (and still have) a lot of respect for was doing readings for others. She read my cards that summer, the following summer, and the one after that. The readings were insightful and gave me some solid guidance, but I didn’t understand what it was all about. I felt ministered to during these encounters with tarot and I liked that it was about a dialogue between me and the person who was interpreting the cards.
A year and a half ago, I bought my own deck of tarot cards. I’ve been through periods of time where I have read my own cards 4-5 times a week or just occasionally. I don’t believe in divination and I don’t see my reading of tarot is an attempt to predict the future, but rather as a way to understand and reflect on different aspects of the many stories that are taking shape in my life. I start from the premise that all of the cards represent things that I may feel or experience. When I pull cards from the deck and spend time with those cards, I am asking myself to speak to and reflect on those specific feelings or experiences. Sometimes it is obvious to me how the themes of a card are related to my life and sometimes it takes more time to put my thoughts and ideas together.
More than any other spiritual practice I have engaged in, tarot reading draws on my ability to observe visual details and create connections and stories from those details. I am an art historian and have spent the last two decades learning to read images. The visual nature of this spiritual practice is appealing to me and I have felt empowered to read the individual cards and establish the boundaries and patterns of my own spiritual practice without a person or institution telling me that I have to read the cards in a particular way or that a certain schedule of reading is “ideal”. I give myself permission to define my own spiritual practice in a way that works best for me.
This practice has helped me feel aware of and connected to myself and my story, to God, and to my various communities. I can read the cards on my own, or take on the role of facilitating readings and self-reflection for others, which I see as an act of love and spiritual mentoring.
What spiritual practices have you modified or developed to best meet your needs and draw on your strengths?
November 17, 2017
Emotional Labor: A discussion guide for partners and roommates
[image error]
Are you about to enter a house-sharing relationship with someone? Would you like to reboot the divisions of emotional labor in your existing house-sharing relationship? Between getting married, living with roommates or extended family, we should discuss how we will divide up the non-paid work of keeping the household running.
Without cooperative discussion about how divide household labor, we may find ourselves falling into inequitable default modes. We might automatically do it the way our parents did or give a “pass” to the higher wage earner. We may fall into gender-role stereotypes of who should do what rather than consider individual talents and preferences for the task.
The term emotional labor includes the process of noticing, remembering and completing the tasks that benefit the individual or collective members of the household. The person doing the emotional labor of a task is the one holding mental space to make sure the task gets done, often by doing it themself.
There’s no one way to divide. A healthy relationship will have ongoing dialogue so everyone’s needs can be met in the best way, and regular changes might be part of the solution.
Here’s a way to have that conversation.
1. Establish that all partners/roommates want:
To show love to the other
To cooperate
To help bear the other’s burdens
To raise their children in love
A fair and equitable house sharing relationship
2. Clarify expectations and acknowledge contributions
“What do you see as your contributions to our home, family and interpersonal relationship? What do you see as my contributions? Are you satisfied with the division and balance of tasks? Am I? Are you willing to work together to recalibrate the division of tasks? Have we fallen into any inequitable default modes that should be changed?”
Especially ask this question: “What do you do that I don’t even know about?”
3. Identify needs and resources
Needs: housing, food, childcare, transportation, finances, etc.
Resources: working adult’s income(s), stay-home partner’s time, part-time income, free family babysitting, etc.
Suggestions: agree that money earned by either spouse is the “family’s money” and tasks required to keep the house running are the “family’s tasks.” Just because Dad is at work all day and Mom is at home all day, doesn’t make it “his money” and “her chores.”
If there is a separation of bank accounts, assign each partner/roommate specific expenses to cover or pool money equally to pay bills.
4. Improve your ability to NOTICE
Things get done after being noticed. Noticing is a powerful relationship tool. Even inattentive or scatterbrained people can learn to notice when something needs to be done or when someone does a kind deed on their behalf.
5. Discuss the process of Emotional labor, and what to do when you’re the recipient of someone else’s labor.
The Emotional Load Bearer will:
Notice the need
Do, delegate or automate the task so the need gets met
The Emotional Load Bearer’s Partner should:
Notice the need/completion of the task
Express gratitude/acknowledgement
Reciprocate effort
“The sink was overflowing with dinner dishes. I quickly rinsed and loaded them into the dishwasher before sitting down with my book. My partner acknowledged, ‘I noticed you took care of the dinner dishes for us. Thank you! I’ll take our trash out to the can.’”
*A special note for partners who struggle to notice or follow through on tasks: it’s emotional labor for your partner to nag or remind you to notice or follow through. Do what it takes to accept responsibility for the tasks you have agreed to cover and find a way to do them in a timely manner. This will build your partner’s confidence and trust in you. Set an alert on your phone, use a list or to-do app, but do whatever it takes to assume the emotional load for the work you do. When your partner trusts you to follow through, it relieves their energetic burden and allows them more mental space for their own tasks. When tasks are shared and accomplished equally, it leaves more time to have fun together.
5. Now you’re ready for the household tasks inventory. Try to list every single possible task you and your partner can imagine doing in your household.
For each task, discuss:
Who strongly enjoys this task?
Who strongly dislikes this task?
Who is the fastest or best at doing it?
Is it worth it for the other partner to learn how to do this task, even if they are slower or don’t do it with the same quality as the other? (Beware of “learned helplessness” and the misogyny of incompetence)
What is the importance of this task?
What is the worth or $$ value of this task?
How much would it cost to outsource it?
What is the consequence if this task goes undone?
Do you have a preconceived notion of which partner is best suited to each task? Did you assume that they would do it without discussing it?
A partial list of possible household tasks is attached to this post as a PDF. You may find it useful as a springboard for discussion. There is a blank sheet at the end for you to include any additional tasks.
6. Divide up the task inventory in a way that will work for everyone. Let each person do the tasks they like. Be generous in taking on the task your partner hates. Be open-minded to learn how to do new things, even if it’s something your partner usually does faster. Treat time as your most valuable resource. Notice when your own tasks need to be done, but ask for help when necessary. Be flexible about covering for each other. Notice and acknowledge your partner’s work. Take collective ownership for house jobs: “our laundry. our dirty toilet.”
When one spouse works full-time and the other stays home, the trade of paid work for non-paid work is a tricky exchange. A common assumption in this situation is for the stay-home spouse to assume all responsibility for house upkeep and childcare while the working spouse shoulders all financial burdens. Even with only one adult wage earner in the family, the amount of non-paid household work is too much for one person.
There are creative ways for the working spouse to share some of the emotional load with their stay-home spouse. (Order groceries from the office and have them delivered to the house, email the kids’ teachers, make a dentist appointment, call the plumber, etc.) Be generous and understanding to each other, as you’re both under pressure and deadlines. Cover for each other when your partner gets overbooked. When things are quieter at work, take on extra tasks at home. Make sure the at-home partner also gets an occasional chance to have a full night’s sleep and a few energetic, wakeful hours of the day for creative output or personal development. The working spouse should aspire to a work-life balance which allows them time at home to help keep the household running and to facilitate their stay-home partner’s growth and ambitions.
When both spouses work or go to school, the same discussions about diving emotional labor should happen. Be sure to include ways to outsource or automate tasks neither partner can cover.
How have you negotiated division of labor in your house? What are effective ways to communicate and cooperate to meet everyone’s needs? What other tasks also belong on the inventory list?
November 16, 2017
On voting and vulnerability
“Those in favour, please show by a raise of hands.”
Counting, recounting, recording.
“Those opposed, please show by a raise of hands.”
Counting, recounting, recording.
“The yeses take it.”
I breathed a sigh of relief–not because my preference was passed but because despite the strong words shared on both sides of the issue being voted on, everyone seemed to be okay. No one stormed out. No one was called unfaithful. The vote was noted, we closed the meeting, put the chairs away and gave one another hugs over doughnuts and over-cooled coffee.
After years of raising my hand to sustain new callings, church officers and to show a vote of thanks, I’ll admit that my first experience voting in a church business meeting was exciting and unnerving. To this point in my religious life, voting in church had largely been a point of formality. The bishop, stake president or general authority read a name and we sustained them. I never saw a contrary vote in my 30 years of attending LDS meetings. I know they exist but they’re certainly rare.
But right here, right now, voting carried some weight. I was putting my own opinions and judgement out in the open. As a member of less than a year, my vote mattered as much as everyone else’s—old, young, convert and lifetime member. And I’ll admit that the thought of conflict seemed suddenly scary. I didn’t want anyone to be hurt and I didn’t want to be wrong.
It was watching this process one year ago that fueled my excitement about being part of a church again. I realized that I didn’t just want to attend, I wanted to have a bit of skin in the game. As I watched my fellow congregants raise their hands for or against motions regarding everything from the election of a pastor to the adoption of a budget, it was exciting and a bit overwhelming to realize that no one person had all the answers. No pastor, no bishop, not even a prophet, could do this alone. Revelation and the inspiration that prompted it was a communal act. Every member was entitled and empowered to a part in it. And I wanted to part of that.
I try to be careful to not draw too many comparisons between my experiences growing up in the LDS faith and my experiences now in Community of Christ. Both continue to teach me to draw deep from the well of faith, to aim for goodness and to practice mercy. But as I raised my hand and voice on a touchy and controversial matter, I wish I could have told my budding Mormon feminist self that there would come a day in my life when conflict and difference of opinion at church would be a sign of involvement rather than disobedience or hardheartedness. God has granted all of us a measure of the Spirit with hands and heart for building Zion. We are best served when we recognize the unique contributions, experiences and opinions of one another and not only dare to do right, but also dare to be vulnerable, mistaken, passionate and even gloriously wrong. We’ll be okay. And then we’ll end with hugs, doughnuts and over-cooled coffee.
November 15, 2017
Australia’s Public Opinion Survey Shows Support for Gay Marriage
Australians participated in a public survey asking if they were in favour of same-sex marriage. The debate had facebook users, private homes and others displaying prominent YES (pro-gay marriage) or NO (anti-gay marriage) frames, signs and posters, and even an LDS chapel was targeted with graffiti for the presumption that all Mormons were against same-sex marriage. The historic vote came in with 61% of Australians in support of these unions, making way for legislation to be introduced in parliament.
Australian news sources:
australia-votes-yes-same-sex-marriage-survey
Penny Wong breaks down in tears as she hears same-sex marriage result
International news source:
Australia Votes for Gay Marriage, Clearing Path to Legalization
Guest Post: Our Guided Reins
[image error]By Brittany Anne
I was terrified to ride her. But not terrified enough not to. On the back of a painted horse, I breathed in the free night air and let the outside sounds harmonize with my heart’s nervous trepidations. It was a beautiful awareness to have that honest, open sky above me and such a powerful creature beneath me. I wanted to be as present as possible, quiet and sentient of another beating heart beneath my own. I had entrusted my safety to the will of this wild and beautiful beast, and that made my heart tremble. But then… I was an intruder in her existence, a timid but earnest stranger thrust upon her unwitting back. Perhaps she and I were similar creatures. Maybe, like me, the heart inside her trembled for its own reasons; terrified, like me, of the things she wanted most.
Until that night, I had never ridden a horse, and as it is prone to do, my fatalist mind ran rampantly with the potential perils of the occasion. But simultaneous thrills ribboned through my bloodstream at the prospect of how many different places this creature might take me. So, as they so often seem to do, the coetaneous emotions of fear and excitement contended for my affections, and the visions of galloping atop that horse, barefoot and bare soul with mysterious night air in my midst and wildflowers in my wake triumphed over any involving my pulpy cranium.
Could I have summoned the courage to mount her back and gallop into the dark alone? I don’t know. I have always seemed to need a steady, guiding hand. Luckily this night, for this ride, I had one. A companion who knew both horse and terrain like they were simply continuations of his own being. He was ever attentive when I requested* (*begged) that he please (oh please!) guide my reins along with his own because I did not have the self-possession to guide myself. That there was someone with me who possessed every needful thing to protect and pilot me was the bridge over my reservations, and I crossed willingly into this expedition. Our ride was hours long and each minute that passed was a chaotic, beautiful one. My fear never really subsided altogether but it was quieted somewhat by the knowledge that my reins were in the hands of someone far more experienced than I. It wasn’t until the whole thing was nearly over that I realized… Somewhere along the journey, he had relinquished control of my reins without my knowing and I had been guiding myself for a great portion of the night.
Within those few metaphoric hours was a hidden gift. We have so many dreams. There are so many avenues beckoning. And the thought of them alights our hearts. But they may also intimidate the delicate parts of us that are still trying to grow. Taunting pangs of insecurity gallop across our souls, and so, all those things hoped for- those soul-awakening things- continue to sit lifeless and unadorned deep inside where all our fragmented pieces of Self commune. And yet, despite the enfeebling thoughts I had that night, not only did I get on top of that wild and kindred creature, but, with some help, I guided the night. I was excited and petrified and unsure, but by the end of it all, I had fallen in love with the whole experience- the terror and the glory of overcoming it.
There is a force more compelling than fear, and more sovereign than insecurity, and that is the pull we feel toward the divinity within us. Just like I was not alone in my ride in the dark, we are not unaccompanied in the things our identities crave. There is a Master of all our lives can be, who knows our destination- all its perils and all its promise- and can guide our reins and lead us there with all the wisdom and direction that only a Father could. This experience was so much more than just one of life’s amenities; it was a glimpse from my Heavenly Father of something I very desperately needed to know: that I am made for things far better than fear. And I hold within me everything that I need to pursue those better things.
Brittany Anne describes herself in this way: Wife, daughter, sister. I love: stained glass, Vincent Van Gogh, dictionaries, and tacos. I do not love: mayonnaise, collarbones, those big red soda machines, Anne Hathaway.
November 14, 2017
Who is my mother? A contradiction in the Proclamation
So let’s just say, for a moment, that it’s canonized as doctrine. What would be interesting to me then, is that this would make it fodder for a fun mental game I like to play: finding paradoxes and contradictions in religion. This is fun not because I get my jollies from poking holes in my faith, but because I sometimes find that paradoxes are windows into enlightenment. Here are some apparently paradoxical things that I’ve wondered about:
Losing one’s life to find it in the service of God
Self-reliance and relying on God
Forgiveness and protecting myself from further harm
Faith and works
Obedience and spiritual discernment
Divine intervention and unanswered prayers
Service and not running faster than I have strength
Iced tea and caffeinated soda
I see a contradiction in the Proclamation [Ref 1], which is that it places family relationships in an a very privileged position, and this is something Jesus did not do. When Jesus called his disciples, among the many things he said to them was this:
For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household.
He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.
And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.
He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it. (Matthew 10:35-39)
Maybe that was just hyperbole to get them to understand that being his disciple wouldn’t be easy. But then he also said this (recorded in Matthew 12 and Mark 3):
While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him.
Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.
But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren?
And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!
For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother. (Matthew 12:46-50)
Kierkegaard commented on this in his writings on how Christ’s love is the fulfillment of the Law, the Law being the standard for salvation, something we can never hope to meet on our own. He wrote, “Christ’s love made no differentiation, not the tenderest differentiation between his mother and other men, for he pointed to his disciples and said, “These are my mother.” Nor did his love make the distinction of disciples, for his only wish was that every man would become his disciple, and this he desired for every individual’s own sake.” [Ref 2]
So if Jesus didn’t regard ancestry or marriage as being particularly important in fulfilling the Law, why are we, as his disciples, so obsessed with family? I guess you could say Jesus really did think family was super important, but the New Testament just didn’t record that part of his teachings. But you have to at least acknowledge an absence of explicit veneration of family ties. What’s there instead, if only as rhetoric, is a debasement of them.
The people of the Old Testament were also super obsessed with family and lineage, though in a different way. It mattered so much that they tied a red string around a baby’s wrist so they would be sure to get it right as to which twin was born first. [Ref 3] Jesus challenged that. He told the Pharisees that he was able to make stones into seed of Abraham, so they’d best get over themselves. [Ref 4] He was there to tell them that being born “chosen” wasn’t the way, He was the way.
And this is what bugs me about the church’s fascination with The Family. How can family relationships be privileged, eternally and ritually privileged, and be in harmony with Christ’s non-distinction between people? Isn’t Christ saying in these New Testament passages that the highest relationship is the one between an individual and God? Are we in the LDS Church taking family temple sealings and idolizing them the way the Pharisees idolized their own genealogy? Are families the Way or is He the Way?
Obviously we can try to do both. We can try to take up our cross and follow Jesus and try to love our families and make covenants along the way. But I think it matters what we have our eyes set on at the horizon. Is the family a means to true discipleship or is discipleship a means to true familyhood? This matters not just as a theological abstraction but because it informs how we use our resources. When Jesus said “feed my sheep” did he mean build temples and spend every weekend at you can doing vicarious ordinances for the dead, or did he mean build schools and spend your weekends tutoring poor children? It also informs what we think is possible in God’s family. When Jesus said “come unto me” did he mean absolutely everyone or did he ultimately mean married, cis-gendered straight couples? [Ref 5]
Points of tension are where a paradox is supposed to yield to a deeper truth. What might that be? Are families not as important as current church practice and rhetoric would indicate? Or are they the whole point? Said another way, do they matter not so that people form eternal pairs that will have endless progeny, but because the meaning of salvation is being sealed to Christ, and sealing to one another in this life is a faint image of all that might involve? If it is an image, are we too preoccupied with it? Is there a contradiction here at all? I think there is, but it doesn’t seem like tension between the contemporary Church’s focus on the family and the content of Jesus’s teachings is perceived by the Church hierarchy, let alone examined.
Ref 1. The Proclamation is a symbol for me of the deification of the family I see everywhere in the Church. This deification was boiled down to a sound bite by Elder David A. Bednar when he said, “The basic purpose of all we teach and all that we do in the church is to make available the priesthood authority and gospel ordinances and covenants that enable a man and woman and their children to be sealed together and happy at home. Period. Exclamation point. End of sentence. That’s it.” Interestingly, the training video in which he said this has been removed from YouTube. I should find another quote I can pull to make my point here, but I’m too lazy. And this one is burned into my brain. I wrote about it here. Rebecca J of BCC wrote about it here.
Ref 2. Works of Love by Søren Kierkegaard, page 107.
Ref 3. When Tamar gives birth to twins in Genesis 38, the midwife tied a scarlet thread around the hand of the one that put out the hand first, so they wouldn’t get the birth order wrong. Genesis 38: 27-30. This is just one of the more odd examples, there are plenty more cases where birth order matters a lot to the ancient Hebrews.
Ref. 4. Matthew 3:9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
Ref. 5. By “ultimately” I mean in the afterlife. There’s a rationalization for limiting marriage to straight people that goes something like this: Life is a three act play and we’re in Act 2. Just because things look unfair in Act 2 doesn’t mean it ends that way. In Act 3 God will heal everybody so they become cis-gendered and straight. To be saved in the highest degree of heaven these things are required and God wouldn’t leave anyone out unfairly, so all these temporal aberrations will be wiped away. I’ve heard this spoken without a trace of irony from high-ranking Church leaders.
November 13, 2017
Mormon Feminism in 1977 and Today
This week marks the 40th anniversary the National Women’s Conference in Houston, Texas, a culmination of the International Women’s Year (IWY) celebrations in the 1970s. I recently went to Houston for the 40th anniversary celebration of this historic event and delivered this speech about how Mormons reacted to IWY back then and what Mormon feminism is like today.
Video: Mormon Feminism in 1977 and Today
Full Text:
Mormon Feminism in the 1970s
[image error]
Click here for the video version with graphics.
International Women’s Year in 1975 and the National Women’s Conference in 1977 took place at a pivotal time for Mormon women. In the 1970s, Mormon women began new feminist organizations and organized International Women’s Year events. Meanwhile, Mormon officials fought the Equal Rights Amendment and attempted to solidify traditional gender roles.
Founding of Exponent II
In 1970, Mormon women in Boston began a consciousness-raising group, similar to others of the women’s movement. One day, one of their members discovered a suffragist newspaper written by nineteenth century Mormon women and brought copies to their meetings. It was called the Woman’s Exponent. 1
Mormon women have a fraught relationship with our foremothers. Many of us still cringe when we think about their plight as wives of polygamists, but within the pages of the Women’s Exponent, we see another side to these women. They were among the first American women to achieve the right to vote and many were pioneers in fields such as medicine, politics, and manufacturing.
The Boston women began their own feminist newspaper in 1974, naming it Exponent II in homage. In its first issue, editor Claudia Bushman declared that Exponent II to be “poised on the dual platforms of Mormonism and Feminism.” They aimed to show that feminism was compatible with Mormonism through both their words and their lives. 1,2 They reached 4,000 subscribers within their first year. 3
Mormon Politics through the 70s
I happen to be both a Mormon and a Utahn, but I can assure you that the two demographics are not synonymous. 45% of Utahns are not Mormon 4 and 87% of Mormons live outside of Utah. 5 However, as the only state with a Mormon majority, Utah’s political history is the closest indicator we have to how Mormon political opinions have shifted over time.
During its first several decades of statehood, both major parties were competitive in Utah. 6 Spikes in Republican support in Utah could often be traced to events transpiring in the Mormon community. For example, the Republican party was popular in Utah in the 1950s when Ezra Taft Benson, who was an apostle in the Mormon Church, simultaneously served on the cabinet of Republican president Dwight D. Eisenhower.
Within the Mormon Church, only fifteen men are called as apostles. They are the highest-ranking members of the Church and revered by Mormons as prophets, seers and revelators. All apostles are all men. The Mormon priesthood is male-only, with virtually every Mormon man and boy age 12 and up ordained to its lay clergy, while all women are banned from priesthood office.
When the Eisenhower administration concluded in 1961, Benson’s term on his cabinet came to a close and Utah politics returned to balance again, with another short-lived spike in Republican support in response to Roe vs. Wade in 1973. 6,7
Equal Rights Amendment
1973 was also the year that the Utah Legislature began considering whether to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). It looked promising; polling showed that 65% of Utahns favored the ERA, including 63% of Mormons and 73% of other Utahns. 8
Conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly came to Utah in 1974 to lobby against the ERA and contacted Barbara Smith, who was president of the Relief Society, the Mormon Church’s organization for women. 8 Schlafly may have overestimated Smith’s authority. Although all Relief Society members are women, Relief Society presidents are not elected by women; they are chosen by male priesthood leaders who supervise them and they must receive permission from these male priesthood leaders for any initiatives.
Smith told Schlafly she didn’t think priesthood leaders would take a stand against the ERA because they only became involved in politics with regards to moral issues. However, after talking to Schlafly, Smith brought the question to the male leaders of the church and found that they did want to oppose the ERA. 8
They justified their involvement by declaring the ERA a moral issue after all, but their stated reasons for opposing it focused mainly on legal concerns such as “vague language” and its effects on “the constitutional division of powers.” 9
The night before Utah’s 1975 legislative session began, Mormon Church News published a statement in opposition to the ERA. Overnight, support for the ERA in the Utah House of Representatives dropped from 34 to 16. It was defeated by a 2 to 1 ratio. In the general public, the ratio of support for the ERA among Utah Mormons dropped to only 31%, while Utahns of other faiths continued to support the ERA by a two to one margin. 8
International Women’s Year
[image error]1975 was declared International Women’s Year by the United Nations and as it came to a close, the United States Congress passed a bill calling for Americans to continue the work by organizing a National Women’s Conference, proceeded by smaller conferences in each state, to “identify the barriers that prevent women from participating fully and equally in all aspects of national life, and develop recommendations for means by which such barriers can be removed.” 11
Jan Tyler chaired Utah’s conference committee. She was a Mormon and a professor at Mormon church-owned Brigham Young University, but she was also a fervent supporter of the ERA. About half of the women on her committee were also Mormon women. 12,13 They wanted the Mormon Relief Society to be represented in the proceedings but were stunned when Ezra Taft Benson, the same Mormon apostle who had served on Eisenhower’s cabinet, instructed Mormon clergy to assign 10 women to attend the convention from every Mormon congregation in Utah. That meant that the Mormon church would be sending about 12,000 women, a number that would certainly out-vote anyone else in attendance. 8,12,14
Thanks to Benson’s directive, Utah’s state conference had the highest attendance numbers of all states, with 14,000 attendees, overwhelming Tyler and her committee, who had expected between 300 and 2,000 people. The much more populated state of California had fewer than half as many attendees as Utah, and California had held one of the biggest women’s conferences in the nation. 8,15
Conservative Mormons, many of whom also had leadership roles within local Mormon clergy, invited the Mormon women who were assigned to attend the conference to political planning meetings and told them to “vote no on everything.” The church didn’t technically endorse these meetings, but many of the Mormons who came didn’t know that. 8,13
When the conference opened, some of these women stationed themselves in front of contribution boxes to prevent other women from donating funds to the event. 12 Mormon women voted as a block against every item on the national platform, even the most uncontroversial and innocuous resolutions—just as they had been instructed to do at those planning meetings. 13,14,15 All of the delegates they elected to represent Utah at the national convention in Houston came from a list distributed by a conservative lobbying group. 8 At one point, an angry mob of Mormon women even dismantled the booth of the National Organization for Women. 15 When the conference closed, they refused to leave the venue until General Relief Society President Barbara Smith intervened. 12
Although Smith had become the church’s spokesperson in opposition to the ERA, she was dismayed by the mob mentality that had characterized Mormon women’s actions at the conference and regretted that she had not done more to reign in conservative lobbyists. 8
Mormons for ERA
Even so, the Mormon church continued to align with conservative and anti-feminist lobbying groups as they embarked on campaigns to prevent or rescind ERA ratification in several states. 10 In Virginia, some Mormons pushed back, starting an organization called Mormons for ERA to support ratification of the amendment. 3
Mormons for ERA lobbied and held marches in several states. 16 Sometimes, they hired airplanes to fly pro-ERA banners over Temple Square in Salt Lake City. 3,16
One of the founders of Mormons for ERA, Sonia Johnson, appeared before the Senate Constitutional Rights Subcommittee in 1978. 3 Johnson was excommunicated from the Mormon church by her bishop about a year after her testimony to Congress. 3 A bishop cannot excommunicate a Mormon man—only someone higher up on the chain of command has that authority. But bishops are allowed to excommunicate women.
While using excommunication to silence reformers hurts everyone, Mormon women are particularly vulnerable. Mormon women are disciplined by panels made up entirely of the opposite sex, are not permitted to read the rules and procedures by which they may be punished, and are not afforded the same protections that men enjoy. 17
Ironically, church leaders claimed that favoring the ERA was not grounds for excommunication. 9 Johnson’s bishop argued that he had not technically excommunicated her for her support of the ERA, but rather, for diminishing “support of church leaders.” However, the way she had supposedly diminished support for church leaders was by disagreeing with them about the ERA and successfully persuading others toward her opinion. 18 When Mormon leaders say that they do not be punish people for their opinions, they only mean that they don’t punish anyone for their private thoughts—and perhaps they would, if they could only read minds. Several Mormon activists, including me, have been warned by our church leaders that sharing our opinions is a punishable offense.
However, it would be infeasible to excommunicate every vocal Mormon. Instead, the church’s strategy has been to make an example of just a few of the most influential Mormons. 19 Ironically, excommunicating Mormon activists actually draws more attention to their ideas. Membership in Mormons for ERA doubled during the weeks following Johnson’s excommunication. 20
Mormon Feminism today
Mormon Politics Shift to the Right
The 1970s were the last decade in which Democrats were competitive in Utah. Prominent Republican Ezra Taft Benson became president of the Mormon church in 1985, ushering in a new spike in Republicanism in Utah. He would serve for nine years and after Benson’s presidency, political balance never returned to Utah nor to Mormonism generally. 6,7 Mormon feminists like myself, who were raised in the eighties and beyond, have only ever known our faith as the bastion of conservatism that it is today.
Blogs and Facebook Communities
[image error]
Some wonder how feminism can exist within such a patriarchal environment. Actually, feminism thrives where it is needed most, so Mormonism is fertile ground for a feminist movement. The Mormon feminist organization Exponent II has continued to inspire Mormon women since its inception in 1970. Many of its original members from Boston continue to mentor younger Mormon feminists through the Exponent’s magazine, annual retreat and online communities and today, new generations of Mormon feminists have taken leadership roles in the organization. No longer limited to Boston, the Exponent community has expended to serve a worldwide network of Mormon women.
The Exponent is now joined by several other Mormon feminist communities, most centered around blogs and facebook groups. Thanks to the Internet, Mormon feminists from around the world can meet each other and discuss women’s issues. You don’t have to live in a progressive haven like Boston to be active in today’s Mormon feminist movement; online communities are the consciousness-raising groups of our era.
Retreats
But in-person interaction is important too. Within the United States, at least, Mormon feminists learn from each other and support each other in person at any of several retreats that take place each year in different parts of the country. Most of these retreats are limited to women, but one of my favorites, Feminist Mormon Girls Camp, welcomes whole families, including men and children. At this annual camp, our kids can earn merit badges for learning about feminism while grown-ups take turns leading feminist workshops or less serious crafts and games.
Activism
The scriptures teach that faith without works is dead 21 and I would argue that the same is true for feminism without activism. In recent years, Mormon feminists have demonstrated our need for a more egalitarian church through several activist events. For Mormon women, wearing pants to church is much more conspicuous than wearing an awareness ribbon. Although it’s a pretty tame act, when Mormon feminists decided to demonstrate by all of us wearing pants instead of dresses on the same day, at least one Mormon man was so peeved that he threatened violence. 22 Mormon feminist Nikki Hunter created a beautiful quilt from pants and other clothing worn by feminists that day.
Shortly thereafter, we campaigned to let women pray in General Conferences, our most important biannual religious meetings. Happily, Sister Jean A. Stevens did offer the first prayer by a woman at the next General Conference. 23,24
However, as long as Mormon women are banned from the priesthood, persuading men in power to change small and great inequities in the church one by one is an uphill battle for Mormon women. That is why I would argue that Ordain Women has been our most important activist initiative of this decade. Ordain Women has sponsored several actions, but none has attracted as much attention as our attempts to attend the male-only priesthood sessions of Mormon General Conferences. Hundreds of us marched to Temple Square, where we politely requested entry. We were not admitted, but we got noticed. 25
Unfortunately, church leaders retaliated in a familiar way—making an example of one influential Mormon woman. They excommunicated Kate Kelly, one of Ordain Women’s founders. 19 And history repeated itself in more than one way. Just as Mormons for ERA membership roles spiked following the excommunication of Sonia Johnson, after Kate was excommunicated, Ordain Women received an influx of new website profiles from Mormons who wanted women to be ordained. 26
Like the feminism of our foremothers, modern Mormon feminism looks beyond our own church. A new Mormons for ERA seeks to undo the damage our church did to the ERA in the seventies by getting the amendment passed now. 27
And Mormon feminists have been active participants and organizers in nondenominational feminist events such as the Women’s March. 28
As we work with other feminists, Mormon feminists sometimes encounter scorn from those who can’t understand why we don’t leave our patriarchal religion, as if simply abstaining from patriarchy is a more feminist act than combatting patriarchy. I remind them that religious sexism doesn’t only affect religious people. The success of the Mormon church at squashing the ERA is only one example of how religious patriarchy spills over into all areas of society, affecting the way people vote, work, and even how they think about the women that surround them on a day-to-day basis. Other feminists need the help of religious feminists to address one of the greatest barriers to success: the sexism people learn to tolerate at their places of worship. We’re making our own community and culture better, and that’s the first step to changing the world.
Resources to Learn More
Makers: Voices of Utah Women
Nancy Green, producer
Pedestals and Podiums: Utah Women, Religious Authority, and Equal Rights
Martha Sonntag Bradley, author
Mormon Feminism: Essential Writings
Joanna Brooks, Rachel Hunt Steenblik and Hannah Wheelwright, editors
The Birth of Ordain Women: The Personal Becomes Political
Lorie Winder Stromberg, author
Available within Voices for Equality: Ordain Women and Resurgent Mormon Feminism, edited by Gordon Shepherd, Lavina Fielding Anderson and Gary Shepherd
References
http://www.the-exponent.com/exponent-birthrebirth-series-mother-and-model-the-womens-exponent-by-claudia-bushman/
https://archive.org/details/exponentii11arli
Mormon Feminism Essential Writings. Joanna Brooks, Rachel Hunt Steenblik and Hannah Wheelwright, editors. Oxford University Press: 2016
http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/religious-tradition/mormon/
http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/facts-and-statistics/ & http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/facts-and-statistics/country/united-states/state/utah [accessed October 2017]
http://utahdatapoints.com/2014/11/update-the-2015-legislature-will-be-utahs-2nd-most-republican-since-the-depression/
https://www.Mormon.org/manual/presidents-of-the-church-student-manual/ezra-taft-benson-thirteenth-president-of-the-church?lang=eng
Pedestals and Podiums. Martha Sonntag Bradley. Signature Books: 2005
https://www.Mormon.org/ensign/1980/03/the-church-and-the-proposed-equal-rights-amendment-a-moral-issue?lang=eng
http://www.nytimes.com/1979/11/26/archives/many-mormon-women-feel-torn-between-equal-rights-proposal-and.html?mcubz=3
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-89/pdf/STATUTE-89-Pg1003.pdf
https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/008-11-14.pdf
https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/Dialogue_V11N01_60.pdf
http://www.nytimes.com/1977/07/25/archives/mormon-turnout-overwhelms-womens-conference-in-utah.html
http://www.pbs.org/video/utah-history-makers-voices-utah-women/
http://exhibits.usu.edu/exhibits/show/mormonsforera/mormonsforerastanceonera
Most disparate church discipline policies differentiate between men with the Melchizedek priesthood and other church members. Virtually all men who have been active Mormon church members for any portion of their adult lives are ordained to the Melchizedek priesthood. All women are banned from the Melchizedek priesthood. Hence, with a few exceptions, these policies discriminate solely on the basis of sex. The policies are written in Church Handbook of Instructions Volume 1. Access to this volume is restricted to Mormons rotating through certain lay clergy positions, nearly all of which exclude women. The author accessed the policies through a leaked copy of the 2010 edition.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1979/12/06/mormon-bishop-excommunicates-woman-who-is-supporting-era/2194cbc1-806e-4014-8884-d1a527620a3f/?utm_term=.190c571517af
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/06/lds-church-mormons-apostasy-excommunication
http://people.com/archive/sonia-johnsons-excommunication-by-the-mormons-cut-the-big-string-that-held-her-marriage-together-vol-13-no-6/
James 2:20
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/20/us/19mormon.html?_r=0
http://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=56116507&itype=CMSID
https://news.hjnews.com/news/woman-leads-closing-prayer-at-mormon-conference/article_f0207c64-9eea-11e2-834b-001a4bcf887a.html
https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/04/the-movement-to-ordain-mormon-women/360533/
http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/commentary/2015/01/24/op-ed-ordain-women-supporters-are-worthy-of-their-congregations-love
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67wqc7trung
http://www.the-exponent.com/mormon-women-march/
November 12, 2017
Guest Post: The Problem in Writing Truth vs Fiction in Mormondom
This is co-written by Spunky and Kaki Olsen. Kaki Olsen is Boston-raised and BYU-educated. Her serious writing ranges from nonfiction to science fiction, but she writes academic papers on geeky things for fun and has been a finalist in the Mormon Lit Blitz.
Kaki and I are in several online LDS writing groups. The groups are great– we beta-read each other’s’ work, brainstorm re-writes and encourage each other. And sometimes we sound off with things that are frustrating. Normally the frustrating points discussed have to do with re-writing nightmares, writer’s block, and rejections from publishers. But every now and again, there is something different.
“Why can’t we write what’s real?” lamented a group member. She went on to describe an Elder’s Quorum Presidency meeting that she overheard at a fastfood restaurant in northern Utah. One of the men asked the others what he should do about a woman who texted him following a date.
[image error]“Tell her it was a Mormon one-night stand,” advised his mates. “You don’t have to go out with her again no matter how hot it was. Block her.”
Between bites, the talk became more sexualised. “My wife can’t get new drapes unless she [pleases me with a specific sexual act],”
laughed one of the men. “So when you see those drapes at my place….” he said, followed by deep, knowing laughter.
And finally, “Okay— let’s start this meeting.”
We could not imagine a Relief Society presidency meeting having nearly that level of sexualised discussion. And yet, here were a group of men in position of ecclesiastical authority, discussing sexual conquests and sharing exploitation strategies between bites of burgers and fries.
These men are the ones we are supposed to rely on for spiritual guidance. They are the ones we are supposed to call when we need blessings of temporal health and spiritual strength. They are the ones we and our sisters are “supposed to date” as preferential to men of lesser callings or non-members.
Reality Bites. And astounds. And depresses. And makes one yearn for something better in a naturally combined sense of feminist justice and Christian rage.
[image error]
But the lamentation within this writing group stung in a professional way. Not only were these men behaving atrociously towards the women in their lives, as LDS authors, their existence is forbidden. We can’t recreate or disclose this kind of conversation in our FICTIONAL or even non-fictional writing, because this is not what LDS editors and readers want. We have to pretend that this is not what LDS people are like. Even when it is.
As for fictional writing, repentant characters are most certainly welcomed. The sins made by these penitent characters are usually depicted as being in error. Or at worst, someone who let things slip, or were unfairly manipulated before they succumbed to a “Mormon one-night stand” — a night of forbidden passionate kissing in the front seat of a car.
These repentant characters aren’t meant to be the *current* Elder’s Quorum president– because that would be too unbelieveable. The Elder’s Quorum presidents are meant to be heroes, or at least loveable oafs whose sins of omission are both innocuous and accidental, meant for comic relief, or intended as dramatic and/or learning devices. There is no room for the reality that men in these positions might sexualise women– even their wives– in front of other males, and passively brag about it by reminding the men in their company that when they see drapes in his window, it is a sign of manipulative marital sexual audacity and bravura.
But the darkness is true. And these are not characters, but members of a real LDS Elder’s Quorum. Truth is stranger than fiction, as they say.
So what about reality writing? What if we wrote this or– even reported it to a bishop or other ecclesiastical leader?
[image error]
To put it in a different context, let us consider a court ruling from 2005 that we are aware of personally. A BYU student met, dated and married a returned missionary she had known from freshman year on. His family welcomed her in and encouraged the relationship from the start. Eleven months after their temple sealing, she was granted an annulment. Why? Because this BYU RM would punch his new wife in the face or throttle her in their student housing. He had physically assaulted a sister-in-law and had outbursts against his family. But mostly– the family knew about this before they were even dating seriously, but still encouraged the marriage. Even his roommate at BYU witnessed his flare-ups and still concealed them, offering to set the young man and woman up on dates. What they saw as behavior that wasn’t relevant information became domestic violence. Thus, in the end, a judge granted the annulment on the basis of the fraud perpetuated- not just by the man, but by the surrounding friends and family who wanted to deny this part of his personality.
There has to be a middle ground between “Gosh-golly-shucks, my dreamy home teacher accidentally stole my car from the DI parking lot after the service project” and “I’ll let her redecorate if we get it on” in reality and in fictional writing. Logically, we understand that this is the case. As avid readers, published authors (and Kaki is a professional editor), we have seen both ends of the spectrum. We are constantly asking that authors don’t pigeon-hole male characters, and yet…. When an author delivers the ideal man or woman by making everyone else drunk, abusive, socially inept and selfish, they show off the rugged hunk who hugs puppies and cries manfully when discussing his feelings. They also detach us from reality and cheat our perception of human nature.
There is the suggestion that depicting the “reality” of Mormon culture, this Elder’s Quorum for example, would be slanderous. We believe that the intent is the key here. Ideally, we are not writing these characters in order to be anti-Mormon or anti-man. We are not trying to turn them into the Mormon Shylock and leave them wailing “Hath not an RM personality?” on the pages of every novel. To quote Natalie Portman’s Evie Hammond, “Artists use lies to tell the truth.” Likewise, it is our duty to find ways to tell the truth “In all times, in all things and in all places.”
Lessons on pornography and instructions on violations of the law of chastity are not taught because we should know that they will never happen. Failing to discuss the best and worst of humanity would be akin to an obstetrician failing to disclose the details of high-risk pregnancy. In an ideal world, the adversary has no sway over the hearts of people in wards, branches, missions and stakes, but it is up to us to acknowledge it.
In the case of this BYU student, she sought help from her home teacher the night before her court date and he responded that “By leaving your eternal companion, you are dishonoring the priesthood.” Is it not the greater dishonor to not educate ourselves and those around us in ways that all fall short of the glory of God at the same time that we look with brightness of hope for the healing that the Atonement can bring? And, in truth, wouldn’t it be better to read of a story where a woman overcame such horrors and retained her testimony in spite of the things said and done to her? Perhaps a reason why this is so difficult to write is because stories like this are real, and common, and tightly closeted because repeated pain is inflicted or because painful truth is hard to discuss in Zion.
Or in other words, shall we remain in a state where socially-approved fiction is idealized, but reality is deemed false? Shouldn’t we hope and seek and demand for truth, even when it is deeply, darkly ugly?
November 10, 2017
All Things Bright and Beautiful: Learning to be a Modern-day Mormon Pioneer
As the days grow colder, I find myself thinking of my ancestors. Recently my father told me the story of one of our pioneer ancestors, a Danish farmer who came to Utah to build Zion with the saints. For a farmer, he was incredibly cultured. He was a gifted violinist and musician. Like many early saints, he sold most of his possessions to come to America, including his treasured violin.
When he got to Utah, it was nothing like Denmark. Where Denmark was lush and temperate, Utah was arid, scrubby, and desolate. According to the story, when he and his family arrived at their assigned plot of land, he sat down on the bare earth and wept.
[image error]
Modern-day Denmark, photo by Mizrak
After that first day, he picked himself up and got to work. It wasn’t long before he’d built a small cabin for his young family. He didn’t cry again, not after that first day. Instead, he coaxed crops from the land and built a life for himself and his children. And yet, sadly, he never touched a violin ever again. Not even to play a song on a friend’s fiddle. He simply gave it up for the rest of his life.
I don’t know what to make of this story. It breaks my heart to think of the suffering my ancestors endured in cutting ties with their old lives. They gave up so much to live as Mormons in a strange land. Were they happier? Were they grateful? What am I doing to honor their legacy?
More than anything, stories like this cause me to reflect on my own experience with Mormonism. Mostly, I remember all the good that came from my Mormon upbringing. One of my best memories is my own baptism.
A few days before the ceremony, I stood foot-to-foot with my father in my grandparent’s basement, practicing. He had one arm around my back, the other supporting my hands. He showed me how he would dip me under the water, how I could plug my nose with my free hand, how I would bend my legs to go all the way under.
The day of my baptism my mother took a hundred pictures of me and my father in the church foyer, dressed head to toe in our whites. In the pictures, I smile a toothless grin, my eyes squinting behind giant coke-bottle glasses, my curly hair frizzing its way out of my tidy ponytails.
[image error]
I still remember stepping into the baptismal font, easing into the warm water where my dad waited for me. My dress ballooned, pillowing around my elbows like a cloud. I remember people crowding around outside the font, their faces a happy blur. I remember my sisters and cousins pressing their smudgy fingers and noses to the glass, how I could hardly recognize them with my glasses off. They were like a swab of paint, a blot of pure, deep love smeared across my vision.
My dad held me in his treelike arms, gently dipping me under the water, just like we practiced. He caught me as my tiny body tried to parachute upwards in my billowy white dress. When I was back on my feet, wiping the water from my eyes, my dad wrapped his arms around me and kissed me on the top of my head, like he always does.
My mother met me in the bathroom with my glasses and a thick fuzzy towel. Even after climbing the steps in my cold, dripping dress I felt warm and held. My mother undid my braids and put bow barrettes in my hair. When we got back to the congregation, my grandma, who gave a talk, gifted me an antique key that she’d kept on her nightstand for as long as I could remember.
“Being baptized is like getting a key straight to heaven,” she said, placing the key on a string and tying it around my neck. I wore that key for nearly three years, almost never taking it off, not even to sleep. I don’t remember much else from that day, except that every part of me felt warm and glowing and golden.
Now that I’m grown, I long to give my children access to spiritual milestones like these. They make up the beautiful, beating heart of our religion, and I want desperately for my children to speak that same spiritual language. And yet, despite such potent memories, I find it difficult to square the Mormonism of my past with the Mormonism of my present.
For one thing, I’ve come to realize that my experience with Mormonism was one of immense privilege. I wasn’t black. I wasn’t gay. My home life was stable, predictable, and nurturing.
[image error]
Jane Manning James, early saint, activist, pioneer
It wasn’t until much later that I realized that this wasn’t everyone’s experience. I was exposed to stories of people who had been deeply traumatized by Mormon culture and doctrine. Some had even been physically hurt or abused by people in positions of power. Hearing these stories, I began to realize that some aspects of Mormonism have actually caused me deep pain as well. I had (and still have) deep shame about my body. In my youth, I constantly felt that I was not worthy enough, pure enough, or pro-active enough in my gospel dutires. I also internalized the idea that I was supposed to endlessly sacrifice in order to live the gospel—that my own boundaries and desires didn’t matter. Since then, I’ve also had ugly encounters with leaders in church, and have faced both rejection and censure from people who were supposed to be guardians of my spiritual growth.
And so, as I’ve grown older, my relationship to Mormonism has evolved. In many ways, it’s grown to be more expansive, more inclusive, more transparent than it ever was in my youth. In other ways, it’s grown more obtuse, less articulated, and less concrete. This is one reason I feel so heartsick when I think of the pain that Mormonism has brought into my life and into the lives of my loved ones. Because for all its bitter flaws and tangles, Mormonism still feels like home.
And as for my current family, we still haven’t discovered what our spiritual heritage will look like. My hope is that it’s both the same and different than the Mormonism I grew up with. Right now, it’s mostly described by all that I hope for. Not only for me, but for all of us with deep ties to Mormonism.
For one, I hope that we’ll find safe corners, that we’ll build circles of love and protection where we can be vulnerable and loving and true. I hope that we’ll be like our pioneer ancestors, that we’ll turn our backs on the ugliness of our past, not to forget, but to forsake and heal. I hope that we can pass on our religious traditions in a way that’s both meaningful and respectful to those who have suffered inside the church. I hope that we can welcome those who are vulnerable into our circles, to hold space for them and grieve with them when they need us.
But most of all, I hope that the future feels bright and full of promise, like me at eight years old—a golden girl dressed in white, standing barefoot in a pool of blue, encircled by all that’s bright and beautiful.
[image error]
Me and my great grandmother at my baptism
![[image error]](https://i1.wp.com/www.the-exponent.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Screen-Shot-2017-11-19-at-8.05.04-AM.png){kind=link}
![[image error]](https://i2.wp.com/www.the-exponent.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/vulnerable.png){kind=link}
![[image error]](https://i1.wp.com/www.the-exponent.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/4462059533_afb59795b4_z.jpg){kind=link}
![[image error]](https://i0.wp.com/www.the-exponent.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/5135458255_a053ac3258_z.jpg){kind=link}
![[image error]](https://i2.wp.com/www.the-exponent.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Jane_Elizabeth_Manning_James_3.jpg){kind=link}
![[image error]](https://i2.wp.com/www.the-exponent.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/baptism.png){kind=link}