Exponent II's Blog, page 3

Finding Hope in Pain

“Faith”

“Love”

“Hope”

“Family”

“Community”

“A story of redemption”

These were words used by parents and dancers at my daughter’s Christian dance studio to describe the meaning of their annual production of the Adventures in Narnia. For 23 years, kids across the city have come together to tell the story of the four children who found the land of Narnia through the wardrobe and learned to trust a savior as they also learned to distinguish good from evil. There wasn’t a dry eye in the meeting (except for maybe my husband’s 😉) as this dance community described their love for the show.

This year my daughter will play Mr. Beaver. But she will be the last Mr. Beaver. After 23 years the show is coming to a close. 

(not an important part of what I’m writing, but for the curious: apparently Netflix bought the rights to the story, so the little foundation in the UK who normally gives this tiny dance studio permission to perform this no longer has the ability to do that and they have little hope in Netflix giving them permission)

As the dance studio decides on a show to replace their annual production of Narnia, they want to uplift the core values these dancers and parents discussed. The new show will be a story of redemption, a place where the dancers find family, a moment to build their faith and the faith of the audience members, and a place of hope, love, and community. 

I don’t dance. I’ve got no rhythm and can’t even follow the beat when a step aerobics or Zumba teacher is standing in front of me shouting it into a microphone. If I’m being honest, I’m not really sure the appeal and sometimes I struggle to understand why my daughter loves it so much. 

But I value the beauty of it. Each year when I watch Narnia, my eyes weep as I see the story of redemption unfold on the stage in front of me. 

Since that information meeting, I have been thinking about those values and the beauty in them. Where else do I feel that beauty? Where else could I feel that beauty? Do I have anywhere else I can look for that beauty?

I’ve been sad lately. We’re just over halfway done with the year, yet 2025 has already been extremely rough globally, professionally, and personally. 

As I’m writing this, Trump is meeting with Putin to “end the war” with potentially no regard for the sovereign nation that was overtaken by Putin.



As I’m writing this, Israel is planning to overtake Gaza.



As I’m writing this, I’m worried about global health priorities and the US’s refusal to be a part of the World Health Organization.



As I’m writing this, I’m worried about climate change and the US’s decision to regulate less.



As I’m writing this, I’m worried about the future of science due to the sudden changes in government grants.



As I’m writing this, I’m dealing with the impending implosion of my research job due to these same sudden changes in government grants.



As I’m writing this, I’m worried about my own future (do I need a career change?) but also the future of humans. I do social science research where I look for ways to better support people. But supporting people is no longer a priority of the US.

And that’s just scratching the surface of all my worries. I could go on for pages of bullet points, but I think it’s enough to simply say “I’m worried.”

During this rough year, questions swirl my mind:

How do I find hope? 
How do I feel a story of redemption? 
How do I find a community of love and family?
How can I build my faith even when my faith in humanity feels so bleak?

Perhaps it comes to my hope?

I hope there’s a God who loves me for who I am and I’m hoping I have a Savior who understands my every pain. 

And I hope that Savior understands my worries. I hope that God hears me when I pray:

When I pray hoping I can figure out a career where my talents are used to bless others lives even when I worry that the US government is taking my current career away from me



When I pray hoping I can always enjoy the fresh air outside even though I’m terrified we’re not doing enough to keep that air fresh



When I pray hoping that with my kids and my husband we feel love inside our home even when turning on the news shows wars void of love



When I pray hoping there is good in humanity, even when I fear there’s not

Are some of these hopes merely wishes? Maybe.

Is that okay? I hope so.

So I sit here. 

Hoping. Wishing. Hoping.

As I think about my faith. My love.

Wishing. Hoping. Wishing.

As I immerse myself in a community that cares.

Hoping. Wishing. Hoping.

Hoping for a story of redemption for myself, for my community, for the world. Wishing for places to find it.

Where do you find hope?

***********************************************************************************************

PS- Last month I also wrote about hope and trying to find it in hard times. So, if you want more, check that out here: https://exponentii.org/blog/a-dim-lig...

PPS- I chose the picture because I liked the juxtaposition of thinking about hope even in a pile of rocks. Art courtesy of Nick Fewings on Unsplash.

“He Who Presides Decides?”

I was recently speaking with a member of my bishopric about an upcoming sacrament meeting. I am the ward music leader and we are trying to highlight the power of music and some of the new hymns. He said, “You can choose how to do it. But when in doubt, ask the bishop, because he who presides decides.” I have not been able to get that phrase out of my head since then. 

Does Anyone Really Understand What it Means to Preside? 

When I ask “Does anyone really understand what it means to preside?” I do not mean, “can anyone provide me with a dictionary definition of presiding?” I mean, “what does it look like to preside? How is presiding different from leading or deciding?” 

Before I wrote this blog post, I read a lot about presiding, because I thought I may just be misunderstanding something. Reading quotes and conference talks and the handbook did not clarify anything. 

For example, this LDSLiving Article differentiates that women can lead under the presiding keys of leadership in the area, while not holding the keys themselves. In giving the example of a husband and wife teaching a primary class, the author explains, “The priesthood is not a man, and since both the man and the woman in this case have priesthood authority through one who holds priesthood keys of presidency, they both preside in the class.” To me, this sounds like women can preside (or at least co-preside) in meetings where they have been given stewardship. 

Similarly, in 2012, Julie B. Beck explained that “The formation of a presidency is also a priesthood pattern…To preside means to stand guard, to superintend, and to lead. This means that Relief Society and quorum leaders in a ward carry the responsibility to supervise, oversee, and regulate the work of the Relief Society and the quorums on behalf of the bishop.” Again, this seems to say that Relief Society Presidents can preside over their callings. 

Both of these articles seem to suggest that a bishop can delegate the responsibility to preside, not that it belongs solely to him. 

However, this Church manual explains that “The Lord has assigned to men the chief responsibility for the governing and presiding over the affairs of the Church and the family.” This, to me, seems to plainly say that women do not preside in the Church or family, whether instructed to by the bishop or not. 

In 2022, President Dallin H. Oaks spoke to a special women’s session of General Conference. He explained that women would be conducting the session, under the direction of the First Presidency. While this opened the door for women to conduct more general meetings, he seemed to separate the role of conducting the meeting from that of presiding over the meeting. His usage of “direction of the First Presidency” also suggests that the decisions made were all made by the First Presidency, while the female leaders were allowed to share them and implement them. 

All of this left me confused about what it even means to preside. Is it as simple as my bishop’s counselor said, “he who presides decides?” Does presiding just mean deciding? 

He Who Presides Decides

Even if we could come to a simple definition of presiding, I still found myself itchy after my bishopric member told me “He who presides decides.” It’s like in the Lego Movie, “All this is true, because it rhymes.” 

But if we assume this is true, it really is only “he” who presides. It won’t be “she” (even though that rhymes). Simplifying the definition of presiding to “making all of the decisions about meetings” and placing that in the hands of men pushes women out of the decision-making process. 

It comes dangerously close to conflating presiding with masculinity. It could lead some to suggest that he presides, because he is a man and she does not preside, because she is a woman. That is a gross over-simplification, but I think many members default to this thinking. 

That is part of what made it itchy to me. Though I am the ward music leader and have spent countless hours dedicated to the study of music and countless more hours dedicated to music in the Church, the bishop gets the final say because he presides. And because I am a woman, I never get that final say. 

What About Counseling?- We Who Provide Decide

Aside from it being only men who get to decide, I also struggle with the phrase “he who presides decides,” because it is incredibly inefficient and leads to decisions being made by the ill-informed.

I believe the Church recognizes that bishops are left with hundreds of decisions to make each week, because they preside over the ward. The Church encourages ward councils to share knowledge with each other to help the bishop make good decisions. On a macro level, this is good. There are representatives to help the bishop make large decisions with as much information as possible. For example, M. Russell Ballard, shared the story of a bishop who did not know how to help a family in his ward. Once he opened himself to ideas from the ward council, especially the Relief Society president, the group created many ideas and a concrete plan. 

Think of the ideas that bishops are missing out on when they decide “I preside, so I decide.” They may very well be missing out on revelation that could help both them and the ward. That does not even mention that “He who presides decides” starts to stink of unrighteous dominion. 

Furthermore, if bishops are the ones who preside over the ward, there are too many decisions for one man to make, especially if they are to be done mindfully. This is why there are so many people with callings! So, bishops need to delegate the deciding.

Rather than he who presides deciding, I propose that we, the people providing services, decide. Especially on decisions that pertain directly to our callings. Music leaders make all decisions about music: they do not need to receive approval. The primary president decides what is best for the primary and delegates accordingly. Young Women’s leaders can lead their classes. 

If there are concerns about general policies, is that not exactly what the handbook is for? (Though that is, as far as I can tell, also decided by they (masculine), who preside). 

Let Bishops Go Home and Let Women Lead

I am not suggesting that we do away with bishops entirely. Rather, I am suggesting that we take them off of the presiding pedestal and share the decision making power. Encourage true counseling and delegation. Empower all of the leaders in a ward to make their own decisions and stand by them. This leaves bishops with more time with their families and it lets women lead with true leadership and priesthood power. 

That doesn’t rhyme, though. 

Guest Post: When mission rules become abuse

Guest Post by M.

The following is a copy of a letter the author sent to the Brazil Area Seventy regarding abuse in a Brazilian Mission. The Exponent II blog team has decided not to publish the name of the mission or the name of the mission president.

To the Brazil Area Presidency,

I am writing to you because I am seriously concerned about the behavior of Mission President ______ ______, who presides over the _________ Brazil Mission. As a trained therapist, I know how to recognize abuse. I have also read the Church’s teachings on abuse as are available on the Church website, and these teachings are in line with my professional training. Based on my training and the definitions provided by the Church, I believe him to be engaging in abusive, negligent, and otherwise toxic behavior. Not only are the behaviors and actions in question generally inappropriate and harmful, but they are also the antithesis of the Christ-like leadership one would expect of a Mission President for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. For this reason, I am writing to you to make you aware of these behaviors.

As someone who has read the Book of Mormon multiple times in two languages, I feel I have a duty as taught by Jesus Christ to mourn with those that mourn and comfort those that stand in need of comfort. This is how I am fulfilling that duty. My hope is that after reading this letter, you too will feel compelled by the Spirit to take action to protect the precious and valiant Sisters and Elders who are suffering the effects of this deplorable behavior.

The following information has been relayed to me by a source that I wish to keep private. President ______ has a history of retaliating against missionaries who confide in outside sources such as their parents, friends, or church leaders. He retaliates with verbal threats of being sent home, verbal reprimand for talking to people about him, and/or punishing them through punitive measures such as sending missionaries to isolated regions or withholding money or help. Because of this history of punishing those who speak out, I will not be disclosing the names or other identifying information about the missionaries from whom these stories come.

The following is a short list of the concerning behaviors:

A returned missionary reported that they came home from their full-time mission traumatized because of President ________ and how he runs the mission. For example, they said he requested that they spy on one another and report to him about any “bad” behavior. They said the pressure to spy and tell on each other was so overwhelming that there was a cloud of darkness over the whole mission. This missionary also reported that President ______ once reprimanded them for doing something that was not previously classified as against mission rules- instead, he created the rule on the spot in order to justify his anger and contempt towards them. This is just one example of how he has set up a system of fear and distrust amongst the missionaries.

He also shows up unexpectedly to do interviews in which he asks the missionaries to tell on one another, and he threatens missionaries with being transferred to remote areas or other “punishments” if they do not gossip about their companion.

Another missionary was told that unless they spied on and told the President all the “bad” things their companion was doing, he would send that missionary home. When the missionary assured President _______ that their companion was indeed obedient and faithful, the President accused them of lying and again threatened the missionary that he would send them home. He also told the missionary that they would never be a senior companion (despite being out for over a year) until this missionary complied and made up bad things to say about their companion. It has gotten to the point that the missionaries are too afraid to even talk to one another about anything because they feel they cannot trust their companions to not offer up what they say to the President as a way to avoid his arbitrary penalties.

Another missionary reported that for three weeks in a row, they wrote to President ______ begging him for help because their companion was verbally and physically abusing them. The companion refused to train this missionary, threw things at them, yelled at them, gaslit them, and even threatened their life. Despite all of this being reported to President _______ in the weekly letters, he did not offer any help to this poor missionary. Even when this missionary reached out to the President through their fellow missionaries in leadership roles, their pleas for succor were ignored or dismissed. When this missionary finally turned to their parents for help with the situation, President _______ reprimanded the missionary for talking to their parents about what was going on.

There was another missionary who President _____ wanted to send home. Not for egregious disobedience, or even minor disobedience, but because the President simply did not like the missionary. But this missionary desperately wanted to continue faithfully serving the Lord, and refused to go home. In retribution, President _____ deactivated their money card so they were unable to buy food. Eventually, this missionary ran out of food and was forced to leave a mission that they sincerely wanted to serve.

President ______ commands the missionaries that they must not speak with their parents about him or any of the issues within the mission. He has directly told them, “You are not to talk to your parents about your mission. You must talk to me. I am your father now.” This quote comes from several sources. Anytime a missionary is experiencing difficulties, they are told that they must not inform their parents of their struggles or concerns under threat of punishment.

This lack of communication goes for the parents as well. Whenever parents attempt to contact the President about their children, there is no communication from the mission office.

They are told they can only send one email a week and may not respond to any family or friends who email them.

They are forbidden from doing any kind of service for members and new friends without his permission (which he never gives).

The missionaries must remain isolated from one another and may not socialize or converse with the fellow missionaries within their districts on P-days.

I had an amazing Mission President when I served my own full-time mission, and his kindness made my mission the wonderful experience that it was. Because I served a mission, I know that President _____’s actions are, at a minimum, absurd. I wish I could say that they are only absurd, but in fact, they are also abuse tactics meant to keep the missionaries living in isolation and fear and under President _______’s control. I find his actions deplorable, and I will not stand back and watch these missionaries experience abuse at the hands of someone called to guide, love, and serve them.

Sincerely,

  

M is an avid believer in justice, divine femininity, and sweet treats. She was raised in the Church outside of Utah, but has now lived in Utah for the last 10 years after graduating BYU.

Doctrine and Covenants Come Follow Me Lessons Plans: Fall and Winter 2025

In 2025, we’re studying Doctrine and Covenants for the Come Follow Me curriculum, and we’re here to help with our bloggers’ feminist and nuanced lesson plans! Finish out the year strong with our longstanding strategy of teaching lessons with a feminist perspective, historical context and inclusive content and language.

Here are some nuanced lesson plans covering Doctrine and Covenants Come Follow Me that align with the September, October, November and December Come Follow Me curriculum. Is the lesson you need to teach not here yet? No worries! We’ll continue to post new lesson plans as the year goes on. Keep checking our Doctrine and Covenants Come Follow Me Lesson Plans collection to find the new lesson plans we’ll add throughout the year.

Come Follow Me: Doctrine and Covenants 89–92 “A Principle with Promise”

Come Follow Me: Doctrine and Covenants 89–92 “A Principle with Promise”

Come Follow Me: Doctrine and Covenants 94–97 “For the Salvation of Zion”

Come Follow Me: Doctrine and Covenants 94–97 “For the Salvation of Zion”

Come Follow Me: Doctrine and Covenants 102-105: “After Much Tribulation … Cometh the Blessing”

Come Follow Me: Doctrine and Covenants 102-105: “After Much Tribulation … Cometh the Blessing”

Come Follow Me: Doctrine and Covenants 106–108 “To Have the Heavens Opened”

Come Follow Me: Doctrine and Covenants 106–108 “To Have the Heavens Opened”

Come Follow Me: Doctrine and Covenants 121-123 “O God, Where Art Thou?”

Come Follow Me: Doctrine and Covenants 121-123 “O God, Where Art Thou?”

Come Follow Me: Doctrine and Covenants 121–123 “O God, Where Art Thou?”

Come Follow Me: Doctrine and Covenants 121–123 “O God, Where Art Thou?”

Come Follow Me: Doctrine and Covenants 121–123 “O God, Where Art Thou?” & The Family A Proclamation to the World “The Family Is Central to the Creator’s Plan”

Come Follow Me: Doctrine and Covenants 121–123 “O God, Where Art Thou?”

Come Follow Me: Doctrine and Covenants 125-128: “A Voice of Gladness for the Living and the Dead”

Come Follow Me: Doctrine and Covenants 125-128: “A Voice of Gladness for the Living and the Dead”

Come Follow Me: Doctrine and Covenants 137–138 “The Vision of the Redemption of the Dead”

Come Follow Me: Doctrine and Covenants 137–138 “The Vision of the Redemption of the Dead”

Come Follow Me: The Articles of Faith and Official Declarations 1 and 2 “We Believe”

Come Follow Me: The Articles of Faith and Official Declarations 1 and 2 “We Believe”

Come Follow Me: The Articles of Faith and Official Declarations 1 and 2 “We Believe”

Come Follow Me: The Articles of Faith and Official Declarations 1 and 2 “We Believe”

Come Follow Me: The Family: A Proclamation to the World “The Family Is Central to the Creator’s Plan”

Come Follow Me: The Family: A Proclamation to the World “The Family Is Central to the Creator’s Plan”

Come Follow Me: The Family: A Proclamation to the World “The Family Is Central to the Creator’s Plan”

Come Follow Me: The Family: A Proclamation to the World “The Family Is Central to the Creator’s Plan”

Come Follow Me: The Family: A Proclamation to the World “The Family Is Central to the Creator’s Plan”

Come Follow Me: The Family: A Proclamation to the World “The Family Is Central to the Creator’s Plan”

Come Follow Me: Doctrine and Covenants 121–123 “O God, Where Art Thou?” & The Family A Proclamation to the World “The Family Is Central to the Creator’s Plan”

Come Follow Me: Doctrine and Covenants 121–123 “O God, Where Art Thou?”

Come Follow Me: Christmas, an invitation to come unto Christ

Come Follow Me: Christmas, an invitation to come unto Christ

Come Follow Me: Christmas or Matthew 1; Luke 1 “Be It unto Me according to Thy Word”

Come Follow Me: Christmas or Matthew 1; Luke 1 “Be It unto Me according to Thy Word”

Come Follow Me: Christmas The Birth of Jesus Christ: “Good Tidings of Great Joy”

Come Follow Me: Christmas The Birth of Jesus Christ: “Good Tidings of Great Joy”

Come Follow Me: Christmas with the women of the Nativity

Come Follow Me: Christmas with the women of the Nativity

Find more Doctrine and Covenants Come Follow Me lesson plans.

Who’s Welcome at God’s Table?

Recently I attended a local United Methodist church, ostensively for book research but also out of curiosity. I haven’t visited a non-LDS church in several years and never a Methodist one. I’m interested in learning more about other denominations after a lifetime of listening to Mormons belittle other churches as just “playing church.” My deconstruction journey has shown me just how wrong we can be about other Christians.

Three main things stood out to me at the Methodist service: openness, joy, and welcome. These are three things I haven’t truly experienced at an LDS church service in… possibly ever.

As I walked into the United Methodist church, I was immediately taken in by the gorgeous architecture. I have so much holy envy for beautiful spaces of worship. This building was a large A-frame with huge stained glass windows. Behind the altar, there was an alcove with more tall windows pouring in light and framed with growing green plants. The expanse above my head filled with light and color. I felt myself immediately in a place where I could breath easily. Below the large windows were more stained glass depicting scenes from Christ’s life. As the service commenced, the space filled with laughter, praise, and music, swelling with overwhelming joy.

I couldn’t help feeling frustrated as I thought about the LDS churches I was used too–so cookie cutter, stale, and uninspiring. Our chapels typically lack windows, or have them obstructed by closed curtains. There is no artwork at all and no color beyond a few shades of beige. You can’t even have a picture of Jesus! Chapels are lit by hanging boob lights and walls are lined with scratchy carpet. Aside from the pews, this space could be any generic building. There’s nothing there to indicate if the church goers worship Jesus, Satan, or a flying purple monster.

Whenever I enter an LDS chapel, I feel immediately smaller. The room is neither open nor natural. The rows of pews confine you, locking you in to look up at a row of men in dark suits. I feel no inspiration from the space, no desire to explore or display the truest parts of me before God. Instead, I’m pre-programmed, repeating the same actions and emotions to display my worthiness before the congregation through restrictive dress, prayer, talk, and music. But as I sat in that A-frame church, awash in the light and color that pointed me upward to the heavens, I felt peace. I felt curious, contemplative, and connected. I didn’t feel confined to a specific role or performance. No one looked at me funny for wearing pants. I wasn’t judged for my bare shoulders. I didn’t feel intense pressure to be quiet and ask no questions.

The moment I walked through the sanctuary doors, I was greeted by congregants who asked my name, handed me a program so I could follow along with the service, and genuinely welcomed me. I sat down in a back pew, expecting to quietly hide and observe but was immediately greeted by several more people who engaged me in conversation. Later in the service, they all stood and greeted each other in the name of Christ for several minutes. They walked around the room, shaking hands, and exchanging hellos and introductions, all the most genuine smiles I’d seen on church goers in a long time. They also came up and greeted me just as they did their friends. I was so overwhelmed by the pure love radiating through the room as this little congregation of Christians became one in purpose and friendship. Even as a complete stranger, I felt wanted with no ulterior motives. No one introduced me to missionaries or suggested I needed to do something to be a part of them. They invited me to join them afterwards for coffee and told me I was welcome anytime, no reservations or requirements.

Again, this joyful reunion of congregants was so polar opposite of a lifetime of LDS church meetings where members are told to come in “reverently,” which is defined as quiet. We’re discouraged from making small talk or even greeting others, as that’s supposed to be done in the foyer. I wrangle four kids into a pew and immediately start shushing them. Last year, we had a fifth Sunday lesson that was direct from general authorities on how to make sacrament meetings joyful and welcoming by being more silent and solitary in the chapel. It felt like I was being punked. Meanwhile, the Methodists are walking around greeting each other, blessing each other, and filling their space with a kind of joy and welcome I’ve never received in Mormonism.

As the service went on, the female minister (young, married with three little kids that her husband was chasing around, I might add) spoke in normal, inclusive language. It was like listening to a friend, no airs of authority or decorum. Sometimes a congregant would speak out loud an audible “amen.” At times she even asked the audience to respond out loud to questions. I didn’t feel like I was sitting in a lecture hall. She didn’t have to appeal to the authority of a man or quote anyone but Jesus. I was in awe of how she spoke and prayed openly for social justice issues. It was so moving to watch a woman bless children, to hear a female voice conduct without restriction, to watch as individuals of all genders lead music, read scripture, and passed communion.

Communion was the most beautifully inclusive part of the service. There were no rote prayers required to be so exact they had to repeat it over and over. Instead, she prayed for God to bless it in her own words. The minister also mentioned the mysteries of God, signaling a willingness to not have all the answers. She called on grace, not works or obedience. She invited with openness, making me feel for the first time, that sacrament was something that truly belonged to all of us, regardless of faith status, gender, sexuality, or race.

She told us that this was God’s table, not hers, and not the church’s. It belonged to God alone and as God loves all, it includes everyone. She specifically said that anyone could come and partake, even if they weren’t Methodist, weren’t baptized, or didn’t even believe in God. Her final words stuck in my soul: “This is God’s table and all are welcome at it.”

Then she and other members stood at the front and distributed the bread and wine. (Which was available communally or individually wrapped.) I watched as they broke off a piece of bread and handed it to each individual in line–adults, teens, children. There was no “boys only” club to pass it. We didn’t have to wait for the highest male authority to take it first. Everyone was truly equal before God.

After the line concluded, she walked around to the congregants who couldn’t stand. When she came to a woman by me, I saw her smile, look directly at her, and hand her a piece of bread saying, “The body of Christ broken for you, Jane.” My heart about stopped. It was the closest I’ve ever seen to Jesus himself giving the sacrament. She called her by name and offered love for her individually. If that isn’t the embodiment of the atonement, I don’t know what is.

One of my biggest Mormon secrets is that I’ve never connected with the sacrament. It’s never been meaningful to me. That’s not to say I didn’t desperately try my entire life to make it so. I tried every technique or tip I heard. I read scriptures, prayed, contemplated, and quite frankly, begged, God to make the sacrament holy to me. To give me an honest testimony of the power of sacrament. But I never felt it. I faked it, I pleaded, I craved it so, so much. But a couple of years ago, I finally had to be real with myself and God and admit what I’d been burying for decades–the sacrament just isn’t a connecting and meaningful part of worship for me. I still participated in it but I stopped trying to force it. Now I wonder if maybe the problem isn’t me, but that the way we do it is too exclusionary and narrow for all to experience it equally.

Sitting in that Methodist church, I might have felt the power of the body and blood of Christ for the first time in my entire life. I watched everyone equally participate in a sacred ritual without the dominating shadow of authority or regulations. I saw the young, the old, and the in-between come forward with desire and be offered the bread and wine as unique individuals. There was no assembly line of passing trays to each other, making me feel more like another cog in a wheel rather than a human that Christ uniquely loves. And there was music. There was chatter and silent prayer. It could all co-exist at once. It reminded me that community is reverence. Community is the body of Christ. Silence and perfection might be a form of reverence for some people but it is not universal.

It struck me also that there were no worthiness requirements for the sacrament. I’d been taught that only those “worthy” should take the sacrament. I remember Sunday school lessons stating that if you feel you’ve been extra sinful, it’s best to skip the sacrament. There are also formal stages of church discipline that require members to forgo the sacrament to repent (something which has never made sense to me). But the Methodists showed me that there are no requirements for coming to God’s table. I was reminded of the scripture telling us to come and feast without money or price. It was truly holy to witness God’s word in actual action, not hidden beneath layers of exceptions and footnotes.

I drove home from that service and cried in my car. I don’t know all the ins and outs of Methodism. From what I’ve read, there’s a history of past sexism and discrimination that they’ve been repairing and changing, including allowing female ministers and supporting LGBTQ marriages and rights. I’ve no doubt there are strains of patriarchy they are still overcoming as a church. I’m sure there are problematic parts to be reckoned with. But from what I experienced, there was overwhelming joy, openness, and welcome. There was true inclusion and Christ-like love. I didn’t come face-to-face with oppressive power structures like I do every single time I step into an LDS chapel. For the rest of the day, I felt like I was floating on air. I kept smiling and took the time to lay out in the sun and soak up the warmth with a gratitude I haven’t felt in so long.

The LDS church has a sign outside every building that says “Visitors Welcome.” We give lip service to everyone being welcome at church. We speak about being inclusive and how God loves all. And then we put up strict boundaries and rules that directly contradict. We worship God with our lips but our hearts are far from Them, focused instead on proving worthiness, obedience to patriarchal men, and great and spacious temples. We gatekeep baptism with an interview you have to pass. We require interviews for further worthiness at all levels: as youth, to get a temple recommend, to declare our tithe-paying, anytime the bishop deems it necessary.

We divide more than we bring together. We separate people into actives and inactives, members and nonmembers, worthy and not worthy. We force boundaries onto genders that determine our entire life path and enforce power structures that uphold white maleness as superior. Trans individuals are “welcome” but not allowed to attend meetings of their gender or even go to the bathroom unattended. LGBTQ members are allowed as long as they live a celibate, half-life that denies who they are, sometimes to the point of encouraging suicide. We love bomb potential converts, then dump them onto the covenant path with no community and wonder why they stopped coming. The prophet tells us that we shouldn’t take counsel from nonbelievers, that God’s love is conditional, and that we must obey everything they say to be accepted. The temple divides families and creates a “sad heaven.” Culture pressures us to push out those who don’t conform. I could go on and on.

In the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, not everyone is welcome at God’s table. Not everyone can take the sacrament or sit in our spaces. We cannot show up as our truest selves and openly be included without gossip, perfectionism, or worthiness rearing it’s ugly head. Our participation and power is restricted by the sex organs we’re born with and our race, sexuality, wealth, and location all play a part in the roles we’re called to or how we can engage with the church. Mormonism is rife with boundaries and power structures that uphold patriarchy, sexism, racism, and homophobia in the name of God. We claim to set up a feast but most members will only ever receive table scraps.

So if Christianity is about worship and love in Christ’s name, who’s really the one only “playing” at it?”

Guest Post: Grappling With Legacy and Offering an Apology

Guest Post by Kate

This is not your run of the mill polygamy story. Unfortunately, it’s so much more than the usual amount of discomfort, putting things on the proverbial shelf, etc. 

A friend of mine recently asked me to read through a draft of a book he was writing. His topic was leadership throughout Church history, and he included many notable and inspiring figures like Esther and Gail Halvorsen (the “Candy Bomber”). He also chose to include Levi Savage Jr. If that name sounds familiar, it’s because he’s the protagonist of the movie 17 Miracles and a real-life pioneer who helped lead the Willie Handcart Company across the plains.

I was especially excited to read that chapter. Levi Savage Jr. is my third great-grandfather.

I’ve brought that fact up in countless conversations over the years. Ever since I was a little girl, I’ve been immensely proud to be of pioneer stock and part of a multigenerational Latter-day Saint family. At Church dinners and activities, I’d often say things like, “Oh, you saw 17 Miracles? That’s my great-great-great-grandfather!” And, more often than not, someone else would chime in, “I’m related to him too!” We’d open FamilySearch, use the “Find Family Members Near Me” feature, and discover we were fifth cousins or something close.

When I learned that Levi would be featured in the book, I offered to help. I had access to a plethora of materials—his journals, newspaper clippings, photos, and other family memorabilia. But once I started digging, I discovered something deeply upsetting.

Levi Savage and Wives

The reason so many people are related to Levi is because he was a polygamist (I already knew that). He had four wives: Jane Mathers, Ann Brummel Cooper, and—this is where it gets disturbing—Ann’s two daughters from a previous marriage, Adelaide and Mary Ann Cooper.

Yes, you read that correctly. After Levi’s first wife, Jane, passed away, he married Ann Brummel Cooper, a widow with two daughters. Then, after adopting those daughters when they were just seven and nine, he later married them when they were 15 and 17.

Proof of Levi Savage and Mary Ann’s marriage record Adelaide Savage Obituary with proof of marriage to Levi Savage

At first, I hoped this was one of those “eternity-only” sealings, a historical oddity that supposedly didn’t involve actual marital relations.  But as I dug further I found he had children with (read, raped) Mary Ann, the older of the two girls.

Mary Ann Spouse and Children

I emailed my friend immediately and told him, “Maybe you shouldn’t include Levi in your book… he’s done some pretty disgusting things.” To my surprise, he replied that he already knew. He had been wrestling with the decision of whether someone with such serious moral failings could still be held up as an example of leadership.

He made the right call and decided not to include Levi in the book.

A few days after that, I called my dad. He is very familiar with church and family history. I asked why he’d never told me about this part of Levi’s story. He looked down, ashamed, and said, “It was so weird and gross, I didn’t know how to explain it… but it was a different time, and we can’t judge…”

A familiar script played out.  The thought-stopping phrases we all seem to use when faced with uncomfortable truths about leaders in church history.

I don’t blame my friend for initially wanting to include Levi in his book. And I don’t even blame my dad for trying to defend him. Because this kind of compartmentalizing happens all the time in our community.

We’ve all done it. To accept Joseph Smith’s marriages to teenagers, Brigham Young’s many wives and his racist rhetoric, or John Taylor’s views on polygamy, we have to mentally separate the “bad stuff” from the “prophetic stuff.” We shelve the uncomfortable parts so we can keep admiring the good. But if you stop shelving those things, the cognitive dissonance becomes hard to ignore. How can someone be called of God and also be a predator? And how can there be no consequences?

Levi Savage Jr. took two more wives after Brigham Young personally authorized it. Why he chose his stepdaughters, I truly don’t know. His journal has a 16-year gap around that time. His wife Ann, the girls’ mother, doesn’t mention it. The girls’ own journals are silent. The only reference I could find was in his son’s journal. Levi Mathers Savage wrote that the girls were raised like his sisters and called Levi “Father.”

Letter from Brigham Young authorizing the polygamist marriages

Like I said at the beginning of this post.  This isn’t your run of the mill polygamy story.  This is pedophilia.  I hope by writing this I can apologize on behalf of our community to Mary Ann and Adelaide.  I’m  sorry no one protected you.  I hope we can protect those like you going forward.  

After learning all of this, I stopped bragging about being related to Levi Savage Jr. and I don’t feel pride in his story being portrayed in a movie anymore, even if it was well done by Church movie standards. I’ve chosen not to compartmentalize his life. 

And maybe that’s the point.

Maybe we’re supposed to see the fallibility of the men we’ve been taught to honor. Maybe that’s why scripture includes the stories of leaders like David and Solomon who fell from grace. They were held accountable by God. So why shouldn’t we do the same with our own historical figures, family members, and church leadership?

The fearful part of me hesitates to do this as many of us are still under covenant to not “speak ill of the Lord’s anointed.”  Even as I write this my brain is spinning trying to frame this from a faithful perspective.  However, maybe losing faith in people is what’s needed.  Alma 32:34 says “34 And now, behold, is your knowledge perfect? Yea, your knowledge is perfect in that thing, and your faith is dormant;”

I don’t need to have faith in the authority of men once my knowledge of what they did surpasses the faith I once had in their divinely issued authority. 

No amount of good deeds, impressive church leadership credentials, or charisma make up for the harm someone causes. It’s not a moral transaction. 

We will only move forward as a faith community if we hold everyone equally accountable, protect victims, let knowledge overcome blind faith,  choose to have our eyes opened, and choose spiritual discomfort over the comfortable garden of stagnation and tradition.  

Kate got her degree in Genetics and Biotech from Brigham Young University Provo. She is a mother of two, wife, and active member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. She loves anime, playing the piano, baking, and running.

Purity Culture Messes Up Men – and It Hurts Women

Last week I came across a reel on Instagram where an LDS man was describing the challenges he faced as a missionary seeing women dressed immodestly during the day. (I’ve transcribed his exact words at the end of this post if you’re interested.) At night he would have a hard time sleeping because he was constantly thinking sexual thoughts. Desperate to stop these “intrusive thoughts”, he asked his mission president for help, who in turn told him to call him on the phone whenever it happened.

At 12:30 am one night, he called his mission president, who instructed him to do sets of 25 pushups until he no longer could think about the intrusive sexual thoughts, only about the pain in his arms. 

This was told as an uplifting story. It’s not.

It’s completely normal and healthy human development to be an 18-year-old who lies in bed thinking sexual thoughts. (It’s normal to be a 60-year-old who lies in bed with sexual thoughts.) It’s totally normal to have sexual thoughts!

Ordinary sexual thoughts are not “intrusive thoughts” like a person struggling with anxiety or obsessive compulsive disorder experiences. These are not thoughts planted by Satan because the missionary hadn’t been valiant enough in his daily spiritual activities. And of course, these aren’t thoughts that “immodest” women were responsible for planting in the mind of a missionary trying to remain pure. Sexual thoughts are normal, healthy, human thoughts – that’s all!

Humans are wired to be a certain way. For example, we think puppies are cute and we laugh at videos where people fall and hurt themselves. Imagine a missionary calling his mission president at 12:30 am, filled with guilt over laughing at a video of someone falling off their skateboard and into some bushes. How would that conversation go?

Elder: “President, I feel terrible. I keep trying to think about something else, but every time I close my eyes I see that video of the person falling off their skateboard and I start laughing again. I know it’s wrong. I know he probably broke some bones. I’m laughing at someone who was badly injured – help me get rid of these intrusive thoughts from Satan!”

Mission President: “Elder, you don’t need to call and wake me up about this. Everybody laughs at that video. Go to sleep.”

This is how the phone call about sexual thoughts should have gone between the elder and his mission president. The instruction should have been, “Go to sleep. You’re normal.” Yet the purity culture within the LDS church is so intense that we don’t even allow people to think about sex. The level of guilt this man felt over thinking about things is awful (and not his fault!).

This type of teaching to priesthood holders hurts not just men, but women too. Women are objectified so often that we become temptations for men to overcome, rather than actual human beings. Men see female bodies, feel normal sexual feelings, and are so ashamed they go to extreme measures to make it stop – like physically hurting themselves to the point of distraction. Imagine how this can harm a young man’s future sexual relationship with his spouse if he’s trained his body to expect punishment and pain every time he feels aroused. Future wives suffer when young men are taught things like this.

Instead of seeing women as sexual temptations to resist, what if we taught young men that feeling sexual arousal towards women is normal and healthy, and not something to feel bad about? What if we focused lessons on how to act respectfully towards women even when they are attracted to them? Young men should be taught to embrace their sexuality because when they don’t, women become dangerous objects to avoid. And when women are thought of as sex objects, they lose out.

In the workplace women aren’t given equal mentorship from their male bosses who worry about controlling their thoughts, college girls are proposed marriage quickly by young men who can’t handle getting to know them without also having a sexual relationship, and married women are expected to satisfy 100 percent of their husband’s sexual desires because she is his only approved outlet after a lifetime of white knuckling it to the wedding night. Even the possibility of basic equality to men is erased. My bishop once told me that women could never be ordained to the priesthood or placed in leadership roles with men, because that would mean early morning bishopric meetings with a male bishop alone with his female counselor. Affairs would follow, he insisted. Male-only priesthood is keeping women from having cheating bishop-husbands! 

Yet women are not threatening, seductive temptations from the adversary for men to overcome. We’re human beings.

We have to do better.

*****

Here is the exact transcript of this story from the Instagram reel:

“On my mission, there were attractive girls and at times they were immodest. When I tried to go to bed at night, there were just tempting thoughts, just flooding my mind and it was so hard to sleep. And I told my mission president about this, and he told me, “Elder, the next time you struggle with this, call me.”

It was 12:30 at night and I called my mission president. I said, “President, I’m struggling”. He said, “Elder, give me 25 pushups”. I got on the ground, did 25 pushups, got on the phone. “Elder, are the thoughts still intrusive?” “Yes, President.” “Give me another 25”. Went down, 25 pushups. “Elder, are the thoughts still intrusive?” We repeated this process until the only intrusive thought was the pain I was experiencing in my arms. I said, “President, I’m good now”, and he said, “Good night.”

Guest Post: “Lord, To Whom Shall We Go?”: Latter-day Saint Women and the Rehabilitation of Heavenly Mother – Part 1

Guest Post By Paige

This is the first in a three part series about Heavenly Mother. Parts 2 and 3 will be published the next two Sundays.

Part one: Why a Non-Mormon Cares About Heavenly Mother: Reflections on Gender, Power, and Theology

Mormon feminist scholarship comes into discord on the question of Heavenly Mother and her role. How are we meant to address binary sexual difference? How much should we be emphasizing motherhood and maternity? Do non-monogamous or non-heterosexual imaginings of the Godhead pose a threat to Heavenly Mother? Do they pose a threat to women?

The movement to reclaim Heavenly Mother reflects a broader struggle within LDS theology: the negotiation of gendered divinity in a religious tradition that has historically prioritized male authority. The task of rehabilitating Heavenly Mother has been taken up by many different types of feminists and non-feminists alike. It is unlikely that the tensions between trans-exclusionary and queer, monogamous and polygamist, and orthodox and progressive perspectives are going to
ease up in the near future.

As Heavenly Mother makes a resurgence, contemporary feminists work towards reclamations of her divinity that are resonant for an increasingly diverse Church.

I’m not a Latter-day Saint. But as someone who studies religion and cares deeply about the ways faith traditions shape identity, power, and possibility—especially for women—I find myself drawn to the story of Heavenly Mother. What’s striking to me is that the seeds of empowerment are already there in LDS theology: the belief that humans are made in the image of divine parents, the idea of eternal progression, the possibility of theosis. These are radical ideas. In a tradition that teaches people can become like God, what would it mean to truly see women reflected in the divine? And yet, that possibility feels continually deferred.

During my work as a religious studies student, I’ve come across so many contemporary LDS thinkers and artists that are taking on courageous efforts to carve out space for a more expansive vision of God, but they continue to meet institutional resistance. I believe the image of God matters. If the divine is only ever envisioned as male, then there are consequences for who is seen, heard, and valued.

Latter-day Saints continue to question the characterization of their Heavenly Parents, asserting their agency as representatives of their faith. Examination of recent scholarship alongside contemporary Mormon art, especially Caitlin Connolly’s In Their Image showcases the opportunity for rehabilitations of Heavenly Mother that offer a more inclusive and expansive theology. Heavenly Mother will continue to grow into a figure that is not fixed, but fluid and deeply engaged in the self-perceptions of Latter-day Saint women and their relationship with the Church.

As a vernacular faith, Mormonism is defined by the lived experiences, interpretations, and practices of its members. As Latter-day Saints continue imagining and recreating Heavenly Mother, they create opportunities for deeper perceptions of the divine.

A Tool for Control: How She Has Been Employed to Subjugate

Birth and Motherhood are often central features in articulations of divine femininity. However, when Motherhood, even notions of motherhood beyond child-rearing, is elevated and understood as central to femininity, it can often function to serve complementarian and patriarchal ideologies.

Taylor Petrey notes this historical function: “Nineteenth-century polygamist men like Orson Pratt found in the doctrine of a divine mother a patriarchal model for several heavenly wives who would bear spirit children to populate new worlds…As Mothers in Heaven, these wives were turned into ‘gods in subjection.’ In the politics of parturition, reproduction was the value of divine women, not only contingent on men but located only in the value [of] their wombs.” 1 In this view, childbearing marks women’s divinity for its role in creating spirit children. Also embedded in Pratt’s view, though, is the critical nature of polygamist celestial marriages, meaning a woman’s divinity was also contingent on her sealing to a man, who would have multiple wives.

Author Carolyn Pearson specifically takes issue with Orson Pratt’s description of a polygamist patriarchal model. Her book, The Ghost of Eternal Polygamy addresses what Pearson believes to be damaging misogyny by the ongoing belief in and policies regarding polygamy. Under continued belief amongst Church members and leadership that polygamy is a true
principle, Pearson explains her belief that “…being female, I was destined eternally to receive second prize. To be second prize. To be, if I was sufficiently righteous, in that sweetest, most intimate relationship we all long for—one of many.”2

Pearson maintains that the concept of eternal polygamy is still highly visible in the teachings and policies of the church. Alongside doctrinal statements and personal narratives, she notes the Church’s continued sealing policies, which allow widowed men to be sealed to multiple women but force widowed women to choose which husband they want to be sealed to, reinforcing the idea that Mormon cosmology is polygynous, and in turn, patriarchal. The historical and theological residue of eternal polygamy, Pearson argues, influences current Mormon marriages, their power dynamics, gender roles, and
expectations, creating anxiety, insecurity, and feelings of diminished worth amongst LDS women.3

In regards to nineteenth-century polygamists, Petrey notes Peter Coviello’s suggestion “that the ‘bio reproductive familialism’ of plural marriage is the very thing that stunted women’s claim to divinity.’”4 If these nineteenth-century ideals are still present as Pearson is attempting to highlight, then LDS women’s divinity is still stunted.

On the Church website, President M. Russell Ballard is quoted as teaching “In our Heavenly Father’s great priesthood endowed plan, men have the unique responsibility to administer the priesthood, but they are not the priesthood. Men and women have different but equally valued roles. Just as a woman cannot conceive a child without a man, so a man cannot fully exercise the power of the priesthood to establish an eternal family without a woman. In other words, in the eternal perspective, both the procreative power and the priesthood power are shared by husband and wife.”5

Despite President Ballard’s assertion in this teaching, many Latter-day Saint women argue that Motherhood and Priesthood are not comparable roles. Another Exponent blogger shares her history of infertility and failed IVF treatments. She shares:
“When the motherhood/priesthood statement is made to me or in church settings, it usually comes with the well-intended side comment, ‘But if not in this life for you, the next.’… Has a man who has been ordained to the priesthood, yet refuses to pay tithing been told, ‘Oh, well… you can hold the priesthood in the next life?’ Of course not. He is still duty-bound and entitled to practice the priesthood within his family unit…not only is he invited to practice the priesthood, he is obligated to do so…Once ordained, even if ‘inactive,’ a man still has the agency to call upon his sovereign power of priesthood in order to ordain or bless another. His office as vessel of priesthood power is not reserved for “the next life”…This cannot be equal to women who can never obtain motherhood in this life. Women cannot automatically conjure a child…her childbearing years and her childbearing ability are limited. Her ability to sustain her office in motherhood is confined within a fertility period of her life… Compared to the male, who has priesthood authority that can take precedence in his home, his congregation, and even at an informal BBQ at any time in his life, so long as he is at least 12 years old. His period and place of accomplishment is extended for his entire life. His priesthood power is relatively unlimited, whereas motherhood is very restricted.”6

This post illustrates the argument of many feminist Saints that the titles of Priesthood and Motherhood cannot be compared. God the Father offers men the Priesthood. If women’s path to exaltation comes through Motherhood, how are women for whom motherhood is not a possibility meant to find meaning in the church? This argument also brings forth greater questions about how the theology of Heavenly Parents means very different opportunities for agency between men and women.

Paige is a Religion, German, and American Studies student looking to pursue Divinity school following her undergrad. She is a non-member, but has found much joy in Mormon Studies and has developed a meaningful relationship with the Church through both her studies and personal explorations. She is deeply passionate about Interfaith work, Bible literacy, and napping on the beach.Petrey, Taylor. Queering Kinship in The Mormon Cosmos. Chapel Hill, NC: UNC Press, 2024. pp. 52 ↩︎Pearson, Carolyn. “Exorcising the Ghost of Eternal Polygamy.” Faith Matters, January 15, 2023.
https://faithmatters.org/exorcising-t.... ↩︎Pearson, Carolyn. “Exorcising the Ghost of Eternal Polygamy.” ↩︎Coviello, Peter as Cited in Petrey, Taylor. “Queering Kinship in The Mormon Cosmos”. pp. 52 ↩︎“Priesthood.” – The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, January 1, 2023.
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/s.... ↩︎Spunky. “Men Have Priesthood, Women Have Motherhood .” Exponent II , December 29, 2022.
https://exponentii.org/blog/guest-pos.... ↩︎

Cult Classics and Fan Participation: Rocky Horror Picture Show and the LDS Temple Endowment

The internet felt very new to me as a teenager. One of the very first things I remember doing online was looking up the fan script for showings of Rocky Horror Picture Show in the school computer lab. My best friend and I were about sixteen at the time and she was familiar with such worldly things. The first fifty pages of this script were dedicated to just the opening credits and all of the different ways in which fans were supposed to talk back to and interact with the credits. I’d never seen anything like it. It was weird and intriguing.

Last October, I attended a local showing of Rocky Horror Picture Show with a different friend. She’d been to such events many times, but it was my first time doing this. The film was playing on the movie theater screen in addition to a local cast performing the script on the floor in front of the screen. I threw rice when the newly married couple emerged from the church, wore a costume, danced the Time Warp, and talked back to the drama in front of me. My friend, and many others at the theater, were veterans of this experience and told me what to do and when to do it. It was a ritual that they had participated in many times.

I expected that this would be a singular and strange fan experience, but I was both delighted and horrified to realize that there were so many parallels with the LDS temple endowment.

For starters, both stories are about an innocent man and woman experiencing temptation and corruption, falling from a state of grace, and then moving on with their lives with new knowledge and experiences. 

Both dramas are about creation. The endowment follows the creation story, with many details taken from the Book of Moses in the Pearl of Great Price (a book of LDS scripture). In Rocky Horror, the scientist creates a man named Rocky.

Showings of Rocky Horror Picture Show are famous for welcoming participant interaction with the story, but that is also true of the endowment. To participate in an endowment session is to take on the role of Eve, if you are a woman, and Adam, if you are a man, complete with story-related costume elements. In Rocky Horror, we follow Brad and Janet. In both, new participants follow instructions and cues from more seasoned participants about how to appropriately interact with the unfolding drama in ritualized and well-established ways. 

And, of course, there are significant differences. Brad and Janet, an apparently heterosexual couple, are corrupted by the queerness of Dr. Frank-N-Furter and other inhabitants of the castle. In the endowment, men and women take on particular covenants whose blessings are related to gender. Men are blessed to become like God in the afterlife and women are blessed to become priestesses to their husbands. Heterosexuality and gender hierarchy are taught and ritualized in the endowment drama, but they are played with and upended in Rocky Horror. One is a ritual of corruption, opening up new gendered and sexual paths for the participants, while the other is about ensuring participants stick to a sanctifying, limited path for gender expression and sexual behavior. 

The whole experience left me thinking about ritual, gender, and sexuality, about audience participation, and about coming-of-age rituals in different communities. Ultimately, my experience with Rocky Horror Picture Show helped me to understand both experiences as holding something of value for different communities, and of the role of ritual in forming identity for both communities of fans.

I left feeling more understanding of and compassion toward the endowment, which I have not experienced in a long time. It might even be fun to experiment with new kinds of audience-participation rituals with movies that take on similar themes. A Barbie movie endowment, anyone?

Guest Post: Lucky Gear

Guest Post by Amy

Photo by RDNE Stock project: https://www.pexels.com/photo/close-up...

One of my daughters gestures over to the cottage shop reminiscent of good witches and midwife healers with an elegant elf poised casually in front of it and we drift in. We wander through the fanciful cottage crammed with all kinds of random Made-In-China (among other places) stuff. There are sections of wares galore creatively displayed and stored to maximize the available space without any trans-dimensional tricks. My 2 daughters and myself are temporarily spell-bound by a discrete display of “Stuff I Want to Manifest” charms. The price is “right” for a small bit of luck – a “clock” of a lucky break for me, a romantic charm for my lovelorn 16 year old (is there any other kind?), and a dog for the puppy-besotted 9 year old who is learning to bond with the puppy we got for/on Mother’s Day. I want it clearly understood that the puppy acquisition was not a “Mother’s Day Present”, but more of a collision between the calendar and my child’s desire for a pet and an executive functioning development. 

I was reminded of one of the recurring scenes I see in various rom-com anime we watch. There is a tradition of family and friends gathering around New Year’s at the local shrine to walk the grounds, pay the donation fee, and buy small favors/blessings at the shrine’s shop. It’s one of the “they might be together” benchmarks to be seen in public with the friend who may be or become the “significant other” aka “one who is precious to me” (which is such elegant phrasing to define a relationship in my mind). Sometimes, there are scenes devoted to selecting the perfect item to give to the precious one – an academic charm to do better on an upcoming test, a friendship charm to solidify the relationship, a romantic charm to bring up the unspoken question, etc. And individuals stop by the shrine at other times of dire potential peril to pay for a little bit of luck for a loved one.

As any gamer knows, gear matters. Whether a D&D based druid questing for the complete set of legendary armor or a Minecraft survivalist grinding it out amidst the arrow-slotting skeletons in scentless-dank dungeons while dodging lava lakes searching for the most complete set of harvestable diamonds to complete a helmet, gear matters. Characters will literally saunter to the end of the world (or the map) for specific items to use as-is or as an ingredient in a random recipe for the next upgrade.  There are entire databases and online debates about specific item merits and preference. Some games even allow you to have “cover gear” which makes your heavily enchanted utilitarian helmet look like a cool hat, a fancy beret, or even an invisible accessory so that your amazing tangle-free hair goes free-range.

With the most generous of intentions, we give our 7-9 year old children CTR rings that bear our hopes that they will see the ring and make the most “righteous” choice available because they see the ring they are wearing and they remember. We endow select adults with “garments” and communally whisper that they are “super-talismans of protection” for the wearers – up until the meaning assigned to them is actually “for remembrance” and align more closely with the sacrament and status-signaling. There is also a really weird double standard where garments wear like normal underwear for men, but random poorly-sized devices for women that fit just right for a few minutes every month once the women’s lifestyle (mostly during ovulation probably), fabric of the specific garments (fabric matters, style matters,  and the quality of an exact pair of garments matter) and the weather itself are properly aligned – sometimes. 

It’s enough to make one want to locate the next qualified individual with a basic scroll or spell of “Identify” to get the meaning and stats sorted out. Or that these religious tokens are more of an inkblot test designed for the individual to pull out the pre-sanctioned uniquely personal meaning rather than a gauntlet for a suitably sanctioned virtual-signaling leadership assignment of meaning. Or, at least that our gear is about functionality, tradition, enhancement bonuses, and the push-pull of being connected to each other.

 Amy is a Human Being. Mother of Two. Deep Thinker. Granddaughter of a Philosopher.