Exponent II's Blog, page 30

Guest Post: What About Our Young Women?

by S.D.

This past conference the deacons were celebrated from the pulpit. Young Men’s President Steven J. Lund said that newly ordained deacons are cause for celebration, “seeing this rolling thunder of newly ordained priesthood holders spreading across the earth…There should be parades!” My son, just last year, was one of the newly ordained. He is akin to rolling thunder. He is magnificent to me and while I have this complicated feeling about priesthood and the fact that he passes the sacrament and I never will, I am so proud of the young man that he is.

But when I heard this talk, my heart pled silently, “what about our Young Women?” What about my nieces and my two daughters who will yet be Young Women? Do we tell them they are akin to rolling thunder when they come of age? Do we exclaim there should be parades that our Young Women walk the earth? I guess we know that it would be disingenuous to do so. It would be disingenuous to hold a metaphorical, celebratory parade because at the end of it, we would simply place the Young Women at the chapel doors to stand quietly. I am grateful Young Women can be ushers now. I find it meaningful. Yet, at the same time, I recognize I am grateful for and find meaning in something that feels like breadcrumbs. I see the Young Women stand at the chapel doors each week. I smile at them. I thank them for being there, but I wonder, if they did not come the next week, would anyone notice? I worry that someday they will shrink before our eyes. I worry that they will fade, that they will turn invisible. I worry because I have to wonder, do the Young Women know they are akin to rolling thunder? Does the church know?

Where are the sacred duties and responsibilities of our Young Women? Why can’t our church find sacred duties and responsibilities within the church for our Young Women? Is it because as Elder Oaks said in this past conference, “Ideally, both [parents] are present, with different gifts to guide our growth. If not, their absence is part of the opposition we must overcome.” He is speaking of our mortal life, but our spiritual lives suffer from an absent Mother. Where is she? What does she do? Would I like to do what she does? Am I like Her? How can I be like Her? Are these questions some of the “opposition we must overcome,” because we are without Her? Without Her do we find it impossible to imagine the potential of our Young Women? Without Her do we find it impossible to give sacred duties and responsibilities within the church to Her daughters? Maybe a divine feminine just can’t be revealed within a patriarchy and if the patriarchy did reveal her, would I believe them?

What is Mother like? Where do I find her? What would she say to me? I imagine her running somewhere outside the patriarchy larger than life, divine, eternal, sublime. She is rolling thunder, She is the rising sun. I want to run with Her and hold Her hand and know who She is and therefore know who I am.

The first time I placed questions about Heavenly Mother and the priesthood on my proverbial shelf was during my years at BYU. I remember sitting in a sacrament meeting on campus and just wondering to myself about Heavenly Mother. What in the world does She do? What does my eternal future look like? Do I want whatever that is? I remember ceasing to pay tithing because of my questions about the priesthood and its exclusion of women from ordination. I went to talk to my Bishop about this. I told him I had stopped paying tithing. He asked me if I had used the money to buy extra jewelry or something. How could I ask this person about the priesthood? How could I find understanding from this particular person? I gratefully have found understanding from my husband, from my parents and siblings. I have found understanding from dear friends and some ward communities. But I am shrinking in my current ward. I am shrinking. I am fading. I am turning invisible. I find myself metaphorically standing quietly outside the chapel doors. Am I needed here? Am I valued here? Am I needed in this church? Am I valued in this church?

My calling has kept me hidden away in nursery, which is just as well, because when I attend Relief Society or Sunday School I just weep and I can’t find the words to make the comments I want to. I worry that what I think and feel and believe won’t be understood or accepted as valid.

My “shelf” has been bending under the weight of what has been placed there for years. It recently broke and I find myself reeling. What is true? Who is God and how can I know for myself? I have devoured the words written and spoken by women in these sacred online spaces. Thank you for your words. They have strengthened me. I am gaining courage to share my voice, speak my pain, cause some trouble. Thank you for being here. Thank you for your dissent, your faith, your strength and wisdom. I know you don’t need me to say this, your words make you seem so strong, but please don’t shrink, don’t fade, don’t turn invisible. I need you. Women need you. The Young Women need you. They wait so patiently outside those chapel doors. I weep and weep for them. I will use my voice for them.

S.D. is a forty-six year old mother of four children, ages ranging from 5-12. She writes this missive to the Exponent II community from the beauty of her backyard as she watches her dear ones play.

Guest Post: A Tribute to Pope Francis

by Carol Brown

By At his passing, I honor Pope Francis for his love of the poor, for speaking truth to power, and for showing us what Christlike love looks like, whether it is washing,  drying, and kissing the feet of female inmates, apologizing for past iniquities of the church, and seeking to reduce financial scandal in the church’s hierarchy. “Being homosexual is not a crime,” he told The Associated Press in 2023, urging an end to civil laws that criminalize it. He even allowed women to sit beside bishops and vote with them on important global church decisions.

I celebrate that he reached out to those often forgotten by society—when he washed the feet of a Muslim prisoner, knelt on his hands and feet to implore South Sudan rival leaders to make peace, or often stopped to bless a child.  I honor how he urged mankind to better care for the planet. In 2015, he issued a papal letter that said climate change is a global problem and called for an “integral ecology” that respects both human beings and the environment.

Pope Francis dared to confront international leaders when he believed they were misguided. In February 2016, when asked about then-candidate Trump’s proposal to build a border wall and make Mexico pay for it, Francis said, “A person who only thinks about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian. That is not the gospel.”

In a homily in Colombia in 2017, Francis described “how Jesus took his followers out to the lepers and the sinners and the paralytics, so that they would not rest in the security of precepts and prohibitions but would be forced to ask the uncomfortable question: ‘What would God like us to do?’”  He challenged the Church to” lay aside comforts and attachments” and to “embrace Jesus’ way of life, particularly love transformed into acts of non-violence, reconciliation and peace.”

In February 2025, when Vice President JD Vance used the Catholic concept of ordo amoris to justify mass deportation.  Francis attacked Vance’s claim, saying, “Christians know very well that it is only by affirming the infinite dignity of all that our own identity as persons and as communities reaches its maturity. Christian love is not a concentric expansion of interests that little by little extend to other persons and groups. In other words: The human person is not a mere individual, relatively expansive, with some philanthropic feelings! The human person is a subject with dignity who, through the constitutive relationship with all, especially with the poorest, can gradually mature in his identity and vocation,”

Pope Francis wrote. “The true ordo amoris that must be promoted is that which we discover by meditating constantly on the parable of the ‘Good Samaritan’ (cf. Lk 10:25-37), that is, by meditating on the love that builds a fraternity open to all, without exception.”

Of course, he made mistakes and questionable decisions as well, whether it regarded discrediting sexual abuse survivors in Chile in 2018, failing to remove an anti-gay statement from Catholic policies, strictly opposing abortion, and encouraging an all-male celibate priesthood. But as far as social justice, compassion, and greater equity, he made monumental strides in bringing the Catholic Church into the 21st Century.

Instead of living in the ornate papal residence, he insisted on living in the simple quarters of a Vatican guest house. He refused to wear the traditional fancy red shoes, he wore regular black shoes. In 2020 he even spoke of non-Catholics who inspired him, including Martin Luther King Jr., Desmond Tutu and Mahatma Gandhi.

I am grateful that Pope Francis spoke out for those who suffer. In November, 2023, he said, The poor, whether “the oppressed, fatigued, marginalized, victims of war, migrants, the hungry, those without work or left without hope, are not one, two, or three, they are a multitude,” during a Mass for the World Day of the Poor in St. Peter’s Basilica.

He added: “And thinking of this immense multitude of the poor, the message of the Gospel is clear: let us not bury the wealth of the Lord. Let us spread charity, share our bread, and multiply love. Poverty is a scandal.”

Pope Francis devoted his life to building strong relationships with Jewish leaders and spoke boldly against antisemitism, yet in January, 2025, he also called the humanitarian situation in the Palestinian enclave “very serious and shameful” and in his last Easter message, he again pleaded for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza.

Even President Russell M. Nelson, who visited briefly with Pope Francis in 2019, issued a statement today that described the Pope as “most gracious and warm and welcoming. What a sweet, wonderful man he is, and how fortunate the Catholic people are to have such a gracious, concerned, loving, and capable leader.” This was the first visit an LDS president has met with a pope.

I found the Pope’s tweets and statements often wise, thought-provoking, and sometimes hard-hitting, and I will miss them.  I will miss him. He inspired me to try to be a little kinder, charitable, and like Jesus. He also had the courage to speak out when world leaders were cruel, merciless, and malevolent. Isn’t that what prophets do?

In a break with tradition, Pope Francis has requested that his body be placed in a simple wooden coffin and not be raised on the traditional elevated bier in St. Peter’s Basilica. Instead of being interred in the Basilica, he has asked to be buried in the Basilica of St. Mary Major because of his strong devotion to Mary.  

A writer, volunteer, and community activist, Carol has been inspired by leaders like Martin Luther King Jr., Mahatma Gandhi, Desmond Tutu, and Pope Francis.

 

Guest Post: Why Women Leave First, and Husbands Follow

Guest Post by Naomi McAllister Noorda

Why are we seeing this pattern of women leaving the church, followed by their husbands?

In pondering this phenomenon of women choosing to leave a place that no longer helps them in their development of self, marriage, faith, family, and more, I had an “aha” moment. I have heard this story before. Hundreds of times, in fact. Mostly within the walls of the temple.

Many of us here at Exponent II are so familiar with this allegory that we could recite it word for word, but here is the gist: Eve chose to partake of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, even though it would mean leaving the comfort of the Garden of Eden, because she saw something of value in it. She then shares this fruit with Adam, who at first despairs because she did so without being commanded to, but ultimately recognizes wisdom in her choice and also eats the fruit.

Why do women leave first and husbands leave second?

Because we are daughters of Eve.

It is in our spiritual DNA to be the ones to instigate a difficult but necessary change, and for our husbands to recognize our wisdom (our knowledge of good and evil, if you will) and come with us.

Eve made the choice to leave the Garden of Eden in favor of the lone and dreary world because it meant the ability to have children and progress intellectually. Adam chose to go with her -hopefully because he also wanted these things for them, and not just because he would miss being with her.

Many women in the church today make a similarly impossible decision to leave the comforts of a familiar faith community in favor of a sometimes lonely world because they want the best for their children, and want to continue progressing intellectually, unfettered by institutionalized sexism. Many husbands choose to go with their wives -hopefully because they also want these things for themselves, their wives, and children, and not just because remaining active would now mean getting the children ready for church independently every Sunday.

In both cases, outsiders tend to give way too much credit to Satan for this decision to leave, and not nearly enough credit to wise, thoughtful women making difficult decisions In an effort to move us forward. Leaving the garden in favor of a lonely world requires deep courage and trust in our Heavenly Parents.

Next time an area authority poses this question, maybe we can tell him that we learned this pattern in the temple.

Naomi has a masters degrees in family studies and human development from BYU. She loves thrifting, serving in her ward’s relief society, and being a mom to her daughter.

Our Bloggers Recommend: Recognizing International Mother Earth Day

“The United Nations General Assembly proclaimed 22 April as International Mother Earth Day through a resolution adopted in 2009. The Day recognizes the Earth and its ecosystems as humanity’s common home and the need to protect her to enhance people’s livelihoods, counteract climate change, and stop the collapse of biodiversity.

Across Asia and the Pacific, women and girls – especially those from rural, Indigenous, and marginalized communities – are at the frontlines of climate change and environmental degradation. While they often bear the brunt of environmental crises, they are also powerful agents of change. Women are stewards of natural resources, innovators in climate solutions, and leaders in community resilience. Yet, their contributions too often go unrecognized, and they continue to face barriers to full and equal participation in environmental decision-making.

On International Mother Earth Day 2025, UN Women calls for urgent action to protect our planet while advancing gender equality. A sustainable future is only possible when women and girls are empowered to lead climate and environmental action – when their knowledge, leadership, and rights are at the heart of efforts to restore and safeguard Mother Earth. ” (Text and Photo credit) Read Women’s Stories about how they contributed to International Mother Earth Day.

Come Follow Me: Doctrine and Covenants 41-44 “My Law to Govern My Church”

In 1831, a group of converts to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS) in Kirtland, Ohio, started an experiment in communal living, but it didn’t go well. People were literally stealing the clothes off each others’ backs. Joseph Smith iterated on their good intentions with a new program administered by the Church. In Doctrine and Covenants 41, he called the first bishop, Edward Partridge, to administer the Law of Consecration, based on rules and strategies outlined in Doctrine and Covenants 42. That program didn’t go well either and was eventually abandoned, but the principle of the caring for the poor is still an important tenant of the Church today, and the law of Consecration is a covenant we still make in our modern temple endowment ceremony.

Table of ContentsCommunal Living at Morley Farm in Kirtland, Ohio in 1831The Law of Consecration, Then and NowThe Law of Consecration in the Temple Endowment“Thou shalt receive revelation upon revelation”Communal Living at Morley Farm in Kirtland, Ohio in 1831

In February 1831, Joseph and Emma Smith moved to Kirtland Ohio, where there was a community of converts to the newly established Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

The latter part of January, in company Brother Sidney Rigdon and Edward Partridge, I started with my wife for Kirtland, Ohio, where we arrived about the first of February, and were kindly received and welcomed into the house of brother N[ewel] K. Whitney. I and my wife lived in the family of Brother Whitney several weeks, and received every kindness and attention, which could be expected, and especially from Sister [Elizabeth Smith] Whitney. The branch of the church of church in this part of the Lord’s vineyard, which had increased to nearly one hundred members, were striving to do the will of God, so far as they knew it; though some strange notions and false spirits had crept in among them.

—Joseph Smith, “History, 1838–1856, volume A-1 [23 December 1805–30 August 1834],” January-February 1831, Joseph Smith Papers

Lucy and Isaac Morley Farm in Kirtland Ohio, as it appears today.

What Joseph Smith considered “strange” was that most of the Mormons in Kirtland were attempting a communal living experiment, funded by the generosity of Lucy and Isaac Morley.

When he arrived in Ohio, Joseph found the Saints there to be sincere but confused about the biblical teaching that early Christians “were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common” (Acts 4:32). Many of the Church’s converts in Ohio were members of “the Family,” a communal group that shared the home and farm of Lucy and Isaac Morley in an effort to be true Christians.

—Steven C. Harper, The Law, Revelations in Context, 2016

While the experiment was well-intended, in practice, it wasn’t going well.

The disciples had all things common and were going to destruction very fast as to temporal things: for they considered from reading the scripture that what belonged to a brother belonged to any of the brethren, therefore they would take each others clothes and other property and use it without leave: which brought on confusion and disappointments: for they did not understand the scripture.

—John Whitmer, History, 1831–circa 1847, Chapter 11, Joseph Smith Papers

Why can it be challenging to share worldly possessions?How can we address these challenges?

Joseph Smith called Edward Partridge to be the LDS Church’s first bishop and oversee church members in Kirtland.

9 And again, I have called my servant Edward Partridge; and I give a commandment, that he should be appointed by the voice of the church, and ordained a bishop unto the church, to leave his merchandise and to spend all his time in the labors of the church;

10 To see to all things as it shall be appointed unto him in my laws in the day that I shall give them.

11 And this because his heart is pure before me, for he is like unto Nathanael of old, in whom there is no guile.

—Doctrine and Covenants 41:9-11

Doctrine and Covenants describes how Joseph Smith, Edward Partridge and other church leaders were instructed to determine how best to govern the converts in Kirtland.

2 Hearken, O ye elders of my church whom I have called, behold I give unto you a commandment, that ye shall assemble yourselves together to agree upon my word;

3 And by the prayer of your faith ye shall receive my law, that ye may know how to govern my church and have all things right before me.

—Doctrine and Covenants 41:2-3

Have could this process help us receive instruction from God?

In Doctrine and Covenants 42, Joseph Smith recorded “the Law” that resulted from this process.

The Saints considered the revelation found in Doctrine and Covenants 42:1–72 to be one of the most important the Prophet had received. It was one of the first revelations to be published. For many years, the Saints called it simply “the law.”

—Doctrine and Covenants Come Follow Me

The Law documented in Doctrine and Covenants 42 included some remedial correction for commune members who had been taking advantage of the system.

54 Thou shalt not take thy brother’s garment; thou shalt pay for that which thou shalt receive of thy brother.

—Doctrine and Covenants 42:54

Joseph Smith was satisfied that instituting rules and appointing a bishop to supervise the effort had a positive effect at Morley Farm.

With a little caution, and some wisdom, I soon assisted the brethren and sisters to overcome them [the strange notions and false spirits had crept in among them]. The plan of “common stock”, which had existed in what was called “the family,” whose members generally had embraced the everlasting gospel, was readily abandoned for the more perfect law of the Lord: and the false spirits were easily discerned and rejected by the light of revelation.

—Joseph Smith, “History, 1838–1856, volume A-1 [23 December 1805–30 August 1834],” January-February 1831, Joseph Smith Papers

The Law of Consecration, Then and Now

The Law of Doctrine and Covenants 42 instituted the Law of Consecration, which built on the good intentions demonstrated by the converts at Morley Farm but set up a new church program to administer the effort under the direction of Bishop Edward Partridge.

The Law included both eternal gospel principals and temporal strategies and tactics which have changed over time. Invite the class to silently read Doctrine and Covenants 42:30-34.

30 And behold, thou wilt remember the poor, and consecrate of thy properties for their support that which thou hast to impart unto them, with a covenant and a deed which cannot be broken.

31 And inasmuch as ye impart of your substance unto the poor, ye will do it unto me; and they shall be laid before the bishop of my church and his counselors, two of the elders, or high priests, such as he shall appoint or has appointed and set apart for that purpose.

32 And it shall come to pass, that after they are laid before the bishop of my church, and after that he has received these testimonies concerning the consecration of the properties of my church, that they cannot be taken from the church, agreeable to my commandments, every man shall be made accountable unto me, a steward over his own property, or that which he has received by consecration, as much as is sufficient for himself and family.

33 And again, if there shall be properties in the hands of the church, or any individuals of it, more than is necessary for their support after this first consecration, which is a residue to be consecrated unto the bishop, it shall be kept to administer to those who have not, from time to time, that every man who has need may be amply supplied and receive according to his wants.

34 Therefore, the residue shall be kept in my storehouse, to administer to the poor and the needy, as shall be appointed by the high council of the church, and the bishop and his council;

—Doctrine and Covenants 42:30-34

What eternal gospel principles do you see in these verses?How have the strategies and tactics described in these verses changed since 1831?How do we implement the eternal principles of the Law of Consecration today?

This video by the Conyers Georgia Stake provides an overview of how the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has organized efforts to obey the Law of Consecration using different strategies and tactics in different time periods through the history of the church.

Sharon Eubank, First Counselor of the General Relief Society Presidency, taught how the modern LDS Church cares for the poor in her October 2021 General Conference talk, I Pray He’ll Use Us.

These are all ways, organized through the priesthood, where small efforts collectively make a big impact, magnifying the many individual things we do as disciples of Jesus Christ.

—Sharon Eubank, I Pray He’ll Use Us, October 2021

How can working together in organized humanitarian efforts magnify our individual efforts?

This video contains excerpts from her talk.

Why is caring for the poor one of the pillars of the church?Can anyone share an experience in which you had the privilege of being the answer to someone’s prayers? Or someone else was the answer to yours?

A Message for Children from Thomas S. Monson demonstrates how children can begin exercising the Law of Consecration through small acts of service and kindness.

How have children in your family learned to serve others?The Law of Consecration in the Temple Endowment

The Law of Consecration is one of five covenants in the temple endowment. In the past, fewer covenants were listed in the endowment ceremony and these covenants were traditionally kept secret. Recent changes to the endowment ceremony have expanded the ceremony to include five covenants, with the new third covenant, the Law of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, containing several subsections. In contrast to the secrecy of the past, these covenants have been made publicly accessible in the Church Handbook of Instruction on the church website (Church Handbook of Instruction 27.2, Temple Ordinances for the Living > The Endowment).

Law of ObedienceLaw of SacrificeLaw of the Gospel of Jesus ChristFaithRepentanceMake covenants and receive ordinancesEndure to the endThe Two Great CommandmentsLove GodLove thy neighborLaw of ChastityLaw of Consecration

The temple endowment defines the Law of Consecration this way:

Members dedicate their time, talents, and everything with which the Lord has blessed them to building up Jesus Christ’s Church on the earth.

—Church Handbook of Instruction 27.2, Temple Ordinances for the Living > The Endowment

How do we consecrate our time and talents?

Jasmin Gimenez, whose blog, Temple Light, offers a more comprehensive temple preparation experience than is found in many church classes, describes the Law of Consecration in her blog post and accompanying video, The Law of Consecration | Covenants in the LDS Temple Endowment. Watch her video from time stamp 00:58-5:12 together as a class.

What is a Zion society?How does the Law of Consecration help us build a Zion society?

Steven C. Harper, author of Let’s Talk about the Law of Consecration, explained the link between the Law of Consecration and the two great commandments.

To consecrate is not to give away; it is to sanctify or make sacred or holy. Possessions, time, and spiritual gifts can be made sacred by offering them, but philanthropy is not consecration, nor is making a token offering of one’s abundance, as illustrated by the Gospel of Luke’s account of the Savior distinguishing between the rich men who cast gifts into the treasury and the widow who offered all (see Luke 21:1–4).

Consecration is keeping the two great commandments, where the key words are love and all. “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself” (Luke 10:27; emphasis added). This command to consecrate all is reiterated in the Doctrine and Covenants: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, with all thy might, mind, and strength; and in the name of Jesus Christ thou shalt serve him” (D&C 59:5). The outward manifestation of all of one’s love has been identified by one scholar as “giving all we can” as compared to obligatory donations of what is required. Amounts of money and time may be the same in both scenarios, but one who gives all is consecrated. One who keeps back part is not yet consecrated (see Acts 5:1–11).

—Steven C. Harper, “All Things are the Lord’s”: The Law of Consecration in the Doctrine and Covenants, The Doctrine and Covenants: Revelations in Context, BYU Religious Studies Center, 2008

How is the Law of Consecration related to the two great commandments?How can we know if we have given all we can?How do we abide by the Law of Consecration while also following the scriptural admonition, “Do not run faster or labor more than you have strength and means” (Doctrine and Covenants 10:4)?“Thou shalt receive revelation upon revelation”

The manual authors point out that as we learn…

We learn that we have a lot more to learn.

—Doctrine and Covenants Come Follow Me

Although LDS church leaders implemented the Law found in Doctrine and Covenants 42, instituting the Law of Consecration, this renewed attempt at a modified version of communal living also eventually failed, and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints went on to iterate new ways to care for the poor and build a Zion society. Perhaps anticipating that this particular version of the Law would not be permanent, further instruction about how to seek additional revelation is found in Doctrine and Covenants 42:

61 If thou shalt ask, thou shalt receive revelation upon revelation, knowledge upon knowledge, that thou mayest know the mysteries and peaceable things—that which bringeth joy, that which bringeth life eternal.

—Doctrine and Covenants 42:61

How can learning cause us to realize we have a lot more to learn?How is receiving “revelation upon revelation” and “knowledge upon knowledge” different than simply receiving “revelation” and “knowledge”?

The Temple is Like Sex

The Temple is like Sex – it’s weird, you aren’t allowed to ask questions, and don’t you dare go to the internet to learn about it.

There are two big topics that are part of almost every adult’s life in the church that we never talk about, but should:

The TempleSex

They are both super top-secret activities that you aren’t allowed to know about until you’ve been initiated into the adult club where you’re finally allowed to participate. There is little to no explanation leading up to your first time, no follow up lessons and discussion, and don’t you dare go to the internet on your own to see what you can find out about them.

You’re allowed a little bit of exposure to both topics growing up (like you can kiss someone in high school, or go do baptisms for the dead), but until you’re married or endowed you belong to the little kids club and everyone else talks about it in coded language around you.

I want to compare my experiences with both of these life events:

BEFORE THEY HAPPEN:

Marriage (and sex) preparation:

We are warned explicitly to suppress our sexuality until marriage, especially once you become engaged. Suddenly nobody wanted me to be alone with my husband when he was upgraded from boyfriend to fiance – not my bishop, not our families, and not even our roommates. If you are about to become sexually active with someone for the rest of eternity, apparently you should not spend any time becoming physically comfortable with each other before jumping straight into intercourse on your wedding night. 

I took a very popular class at BYU called Marriage Prep, taught by Brent Barlow. If my memory serves correctly (which it may or may not) there was one single day dedicated to sex education. He pulled out a clear sheet with basic female anatomy printed on it and placed it on the overhead projector he used in class. He said, “This is a clitoris,” and circled it with a dry erase marker. “You men need to learn where this is and what it does.” 

On one hand, that is actually way more helpful than any sex ed anywhere else in the church. On the other hand, it’s not actually helpful at all. (For example, much more helpful would be – “Women, YOU need to know where your clitoris is and what it does. Then you can teach your husband, because he’s not going to know what to do with it if you can’t show him.”) Even more helpful would be literally anything beyond just teaching the name for a female body part. For example, share what the purpose of a clitoris is. Say the word “orgasm” or explain literally anything at all. 

I was also sent to a Provo area gynecologist for a “premarital exam”, where I was given a set of plastic dilators (a set of long round plastic tubes ranging from about pencil sized to penis sized) and told to use them at home to stretch myself out before my wedding night. This is one of the most bizarre BYU/Provo things I experienced. My gut told me that there was nothing wrong with my body, and certainly nothing so abnormal that I needed actual medical intervention in order to have sex the first time – so I just tossed the dilators. I was right. My body was fine, and that was a totally unhelpful and unnecessary anxiety-inducing appointment. What actually would’ve been helpful was a very frank and practical discussion of sex and what to expect (and not expect), and how to know when to ask for help if necessary.

TEMPLE PREPARATION:

Just like the super duper vague overhead projector discussion of my clitoris in BYU marriage prep class, I experienced a super duper vague temple prep class as well. I’ve forgotten a lot of it, but I know we talked about the creation and the book of Genesis. They do cover that same story in the temple endowment, but telling me that ahead of time was about as useful as Brother Barlow telling us that a clitoris exists whilst explaining none of the practical mechanics to anyone. 

Do you know what I needed a heads up about instead? Tell me details ahead of time about what I’d be asked on the spot to covenant to for all of eternity with no explanation or opportunity to ask questions about before agreeing. Tell me I’d be naked under a sheet and touched by an old lady with oil with no warning. Explain to me the sexist parts of the ceremony so I wouldn’t be blindsided by them in the middle of being sealed to my husband at the altar in front of a bunch of people. Let me see and touch the new underwear I’d be expected to put on and wear until my death at least once before covenanting to it forever.

But nope. Those things you just have to learn on the fly, I guess!

THE ACTUAL EXPERIENCE:

YOUR WEDDING NIGHT: It doesn’t matter how fan-freaking-tastic a lover your new spouse has the potential to become, when it’s the very first time either of you have ever done this brand-new thing, and you’re doing it at the end of the longest, most exhausting day of your life – it’s probably going to be “meh”. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this. If we were raised in a culture that allowed for a more spontaneous, private and slow lead up to the first time you had sex, maybe the first time could be awesome for everyone involved. Instead, every person you’ve ever known (included your grandparents, your old primary teachers, your dad’s friends from his office, and your stake president) have had your wedding announcement on their fridge for a month – announcing to the world the date of the first time you’re going the have sex, as well as a picture of who you’re going to do it with! 

This is weird. Can we all admit it’s weird? Your first time having sex is also probably going to be weird.

YOUR TEMPLE ENDOWMENT: I have rarely had a person tell me they loved the temple the very first time they went through. Maybe they went on to love it at a later time (or not), but the first time they went through they were usually surprised at how different the experience was from what they anticipated. They usually went in expecting something life changing and spiritually amazing (at least I did) but left at least mildly disappointed and afraid to admit to anyone that it wasn’t the greatest experience of their life. And just like with sex, there was still a bunch of naked touching going on when I went through the temple in 2002.

AFTERWARDS:

Follow up from your wedding night: There is none! Just make sure you aren’t trying to look up anything about sex on the internet, because that’s pornography and it’s bad.

Follow up from the temple: There is none! Just make sure you aren’t trying to look up anything about the temple on the internet, because that’s anti-Mormon and it’s bad.

With both the temple and sex, you’re supposed to just keep doing it and hope it becomes awesome at some point. If anyone asks you about it, you’re expected to say it’s going very well and you love it, even if it’s not and you hate it. Admitting to anyone that you aren’t totally exhilarated by every moment of your sex life/temple worship would be unthinkable for most people.

Why are we like this? Do members of our church know that other churches don’t only offer, but require, premarital counseling before agreeing to marry a couple in the church? Part of these programs often include counseling about sex and intimacy with a licensed professional. Can we even imagine the benefits of removing the taboos around talking about our sex lives and actively trying to make them better with the help of someone whose entire career is built around giving couples happier and more intimate relationships?

Likewise, can we even imagine the benefits of removing the stigmas around not enjoying temple ceremonies and actually talking about how to make it a better experience that people will go to because they want to, not because they feel obligated to?

I’m going to be totally honest – sex got better for me, but the temple never did. If you’re the same as me, cool. If you’re the opposite of me, cool too. And if you love them both, or don’t like either of them – that’s all totally fine as well. But as a religious community, we’ve simply got to start talking about these things out in the open.

*** Did you know Exponent II is a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization? Learn how to support us here. ***

Easter?

I’m looking back at the poems and service outlines from Lent and Easter zoom services in 2020. We were about a month into the pandemic and it felt like the life had been sucked out of living. The news was full of death and our lives shrunk to the size of our living spaces.

While our context has changed, there are new and pressing concerns about due process, emerging concentration camps, challenges to civil rights, the removal of DEI offices, information, and history, the over-regulation of education, ignoring the need for peer-reviewed information in making public health policy, and the list goes on. Just everything seems to be falling apart right now.

Reading what I wrote five years ago, the themes of grief, loss, and fear are the same, even as the situation is different. I was deep in a place of lament, trying to name all that had changed and every source of pain so that these feelings would not get buried and fester.

I’m not really feeling resurrection vibes at the moment. Easter has not arrived for me yet, but my prayers from that time still resonate for me today.

Dear God,
The cost of Lent was too high this year
We wandered in a wilderness we were not prepared for
Lost people we were not prepared to lose
Experienced new kinds of grief
And we are not yet out of the desert.

Easter is here and we are still here in the thick of it.
We were promised some kind of resurrection.
We are all Mary stuck at the empty tomb.
We have come to mourn our executed friend,
Filled with loss and love and sadness and fear,
Confused at what is happening now.
If there is a resurrection going on somewhere, God
We do not see it is happening here.

Help us to sit in this awful not knowing
Be with us in our fear and grief
Help us to resist easy answers to difficult questions
To trust that there is a next
To find strength to make the next better than the now
Amen.

Guest Post: Where’s the Hope of Easter?

by Rachel

Recently, I volunteered myself into a Primary teaching calling with my husband. Over the last few weeks, the kids have been working hard during singing time to learn a beautiful song, “Risen,” by Shawna Edwards, to perform in sacrament meeting on Easter. As we’ve been learning the different verses, it’s been amusing to see how reluctant the kids are to stop singing before the chorus. Even after the chorister cuts them off, they’ll often keep singing right into the chorus. They love the chorus. I love it too.

Risen, to set the captives free

Risen, to ransom you and me

to bind up every broken heart

to conquer death and sin

Risen, to bring us home again.

These children’s voices create a beautiful picture of the hope that Jesus Christ brings us.

But it’s become hard for me to hear. I can’t separate the song from the images I see in the news. The idea of captives isn’t just a mental image or an object lesson. Every day we can see pictures of people in shackles being led onto an airplane, perhaps to be dropped off in a country they’ve never lived in, or perhaps to be thrown without a trial into a prison known for human rights violations with little hope of ever being found again.

Every day we can see broken hearts as families at home and abroad are torn apart, loved ones captured or killed, or even as we fight bitterly with our neighbors on Facebook about whether or not to build a town hall in a peaceful, affluent suburb. We see a longing for a home as refugee admissions are halted or current refugee status is revoked or immigrant visas cancelled without explanation.

We see our retirement accounts dwindling, children dying of preventable disease, hard workers losing their jobs, women living in fear of losing their right to decide what happens to their bodies, and mistrust, fear, anger, and outrage all being carefully cultivated by social media algorithms to turn our attention into money. We don’t need to sing about “spiritual“ death or captivity–we have actual death and captivity on our hands, and there is no deliverance in sight.

As I live in anxiety about what’s to come in my son’s lifetime, I’m greeted at church largely by platitudes. I watched hours of a global General Conference with little to no mention of the large and immediate problems so many of our brothers and sisters are facing. I sit in church and listen to my fellow members talk about Jesus Christ and I can’t help but wonder, are you okay with what’s happening now? Singing songs of redeeming love means very little if those songs aren’t also sung with the heart to change our world. Being safe on the covenant path isn’t reassuring while our fellow citizens and elected leaders are marching everyone down a path of misery and destruction.

It’s beautiful and fortifying to hear fresh, bright, intelligent children singing about hope. But it also makes me sad to realize exactly how much we’ve put on Christ’s shoulders. It feels as though many of us, however good, hardworking, and well intentioned, have completely given up the project to build the kingdom of heaven on the earth, instead content to kick the can down on the road on the assurance that Christ’s Atonement will make it all right in the world to come. What about the life we have now? Christ’s grace will indeed save us all, but do we deserve any part of it when we’ve abdicated our responsibility to love our neighbors here and now in the life we’re currently living? Isn’t our time in this world supposed to be for something, after all?

On Easter, I’ll be thinking about the miracle of Jesus Christ’s resurrection. I’ll feel hope and pride and comfort as I watch my Primary children sing a beautiful song. But I’ll also be feeling a despair that comes from the vast difference between the words and our reality. I know Jesus Christ will save us in the end. But I also know that we’re capable of doing so much more to save ourselves.

Rachel is a full-time mom and sometimes writer living Utah Valley. She graduated in humanities from Brigham Young University.

Do You Ever Stick Up for Me?

Tears of relief, frustration, hurt, anger, and comrade flowed as I listened to author Lindy West utter the vulnerable, powerful words, “Do you ever stick up for me?” in her essay, “Gear Swap.” They came unexpectedly and continued, warm and cathartic, as West described meeting with two male friends for their podcast in 2017. They sincerely wanted her advice on how to be better male allies post #MeToo. She considered using the academic jargon that often enters this type of discourse to explain how they could use their privilege to help dismantle systems of injustice and oppression. Unexpectedly, West found herself turning to the personal instead, vulnerably asking her friends,

“Do you ever stick up for me?”

As I type this and reflect back on the essay, I’m tearing up again. They’re not especially profound words, but they encapsulate so much of how I feel about feminist advocacy and male allies. We’re so often asked, “What can I do?” “How can I help?” “What is my job here?”

And it’s exhausting because, as West so wisely puts it,

“Sexism is a male invention. White supremacy is a white invention. Transphobia is a cisgender invention. So far, men have treated #MeToo like a bumbling dad in a detergent commercial: well-intentioned, but floundering, as though they are not the experts. You are the experts.”

More often than not, I believe men do know what to do. But they are not sure it’s worth the sacrifice. Being a feminist killjoy sucks. Not getting that it’s “just a joke” over and over isn’t fun. Refusing to let the little things go because all of the little things create the culture that allows the big things is a tiresome burden. It won’t win you friends, make you the life of the party, or secure your place in the patriarchal order. In fact, I promise it will threaten it.

I’m asking if you do it anyway.

“Gear Swap” is just one of West’s inspiring, gut-wrenching, and thought-provoking essays in her collection The Witches are Coming. It’s worth reading (or listening to) in its entirety as West uses her sharp wit. pointed critiques, and fearless writing to venture into these hard conversations in a way that is both refreshing and motivating. She isn’t afraid to lay out the real consequences of speaking up, from eye rolls, to losing friends, to becoming a feminist killjoy, to social ostracism, to bullying, to physical violence. She also doesn’t shy away from pointing out that,

“Coolness is a fierce disciplinarian. A result is that, for the most part, the only people weathering the consequences are the ones who don’t have the luxury of being quiet.”

And we’re exhausted, disheartened, afraid, angry, and it often feels as though our efforts don’t make an impact. But we don’t have the luxury of turning away, shutting it out, or pretending it doesn’t exist. The experts often do.

Many cis, white, LDS men do. And many of them are “good guys” who say they aren’t cool with sexism, who want things to be better for women, and who generally try their best not to be sexist.

But I guess what I’d ask many of them is this: Do you stick up for me?

And not just when it’s convenient or benefits you. I mean when it puts your reputation, relationships, authority, influence, even your perceived masculinity, at risk. When your spot in the exclusive club is threatened and you are not even sure if you’ll see the fruit of your labors in this lifetime.

Do you stick up for me in priesthood meetings when the women aren’t present, so men feel more comfortable relaxing and saying things they wouldn’t around women, criticize women, make generalizations or sexist comments about women, or exclude women from important decisions?

Do you stick up for me in groups where men share tired jokes about righteous missionaries earning pretty wives, women earning MRS degrees, and how women should be barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen?

Do you stick up for me when there are clear budgetary discrepancies for programs for men/women or boys/girls, even when some of the funds come out of the Bishop’s pocket because he is in the Young Men’s presidency?

Do you stick up for me when you go to the temple and persistently ask God for answers to questions that tear at my soul, like “Why don’t women have the priesthood?”

Do you stick up for me when people imply that I’m inactive because I want to sin or I’m lost and not because I have deep convictions and follow my conscience, despite painful, difficult consequences?

Do you stick up for me by calling out sexism and microagressions, even though it annoys people and earns you a bad reputation, and maybe even costs you opportunities?

Do you stick up for me by pushing against outdated lessons on modesty and chastity that shame women, sexualize girls, and teach boys and men to blame women for their immodest thoughts and actions?

Do you stick up for me, even when some women say they are happy with the status quo?

Do you stick up for me by advocating for the small, meaningful changes women have consistently shared over many years and that they say will have an important impact on LDS culture, perceptions of LDS women, and women’s experiences in the LDS Church?

Do you stick up for me with God by actively praying alongside me for answers about gender disparity until God can no longer doubt that we are ready for more revelation?

Do you do this even though you’re exhausted, disheartened, afraid, angry, and it often feels as though your efforts don’t make an impact?

Because this is what you can do.

Women are not keeping what they need to live in a better, safer, more respectful world (and church) a secret. But very little ever substantially changes. And it won’t change until men are willing to risk – really risk – to make the world better. Until men believe that the “good enough” in “good, better, best” is only good enough for (some) men. And that is never enough.

LDS apostle Dale Renlund even addressed gender disparity in the LDS Church at a women’s conference in Arcadia, California in March 2025, where he basically said, “We know there’s gender disparity. We don’t know why. Sorry it stinks. Don’t speculate. We will try to treat womenfolk better. Continue as before.”

(My synopsis is less than generous. You may want to read the original Salt Lake Tribune article directly.)

I read Renlund’s words with a great deal of eye rolling. Some will say – “Listen! They’re acknowledging gender disparity! They hear us!” My response: “So? What is he doing about it?”

Getting credit for doing the most basic, humane job of listening to and acknowledging the existence and needs of half of the population is not radical. And I’m tired of being told to celebrate every time the LDS patriarchy throws me a crumb.

I’ll celebrate when a prophet or apostle stands up and tells me that gender disparity keeps him up at night; that he is on his knees at every temple session begging God to relieve the LDS Church of the blight of sexist policies; that holding Priesthood keys without women fully holding them too in this life chips at his soul; that he risks reputation, relationships, authority, and influence every time he sticks up for women.

That he speaks up anyway.

Hope Springs Eternal—And So Does Disappointment

Guest post by Judy Dushku

It is April 11 as I write, and our ward Relief Society is about to celebrate the founding of the organization with a luncheon and a rerun of the Relief Society worldwide broadcast that went out last month. It’s curious to me that someone thinks this address, which has already been circulated, critiqued, and responded to all over the Church—and the internet—will still hold genuine interest or appeal for sisters now. Presumably, we’re not the only ward getting a late turn, and others may see it even later.

But my negative feelings about the broadcast aren’t just about the timing. I feel disappointed, yet again, by the content of the messages it contains. And honestly, I feel disappointed in myself for even hoping there might have been something new and inspiring this year. With all the talk in and out of the Church about empowering women—while statistics show women are continuing to leave the Church because they feel ignored—I let myself hope. I’m an example of someone for whom hope springs eternal that something might be different for women in the LDS Church, when it is not.

I read April Young-Bennett’s fine essay about this broadcast here on the Exponent II blog, and I appreciate her work so much. She writes honestly about the hypocrisy in Sister Camille Johnson’s use of the theme of our “common legacy” in the Nauvoo Relief Society. That founding story is complicated and troubling. For years, we’ve known how women tried to organize their own female association—only to have it taken out of their hands and reshaped under Joseph Smith’s direction. The phrase “I turn the key to you” was, for decades, replaced in official discourse with “I turn the key in your behalf.” Only recently has it been restored to its original form, now that many early documents are widely available. But restored or not, the interpretation remains the same: a determined effort to avoid any suggestion that the priesthood keys might be transferred to women.

I would think that such an embattled foundational story would be too hot to handle for a worldwide devotional and might have been better left alone in such a public forum.

And then there’s Sister Johnson’s suggestion that the establishment of the Relief Society restored an order of women’s organization that existed in Christ’s church during His ministry. That’s quite a statement. As one commenter named Mary pointed out, Church leaders have never used early Christian women as role models for Latter-day Saint women—at least not in General Conference talks or official doctrine. Everything I’ve learned about women in the early church has come from other religious traditions. In fact, I’ve often heard LDS leaders treat those kinds of questions with disdain or even derision. So if Sister Johnson is announcing new doctrine here, I salute her and would celebrate her, but if something this significant was being suggested, you’d think it would have been picked up in general conference by someone with more authority in the hierarchy and elaborated upon.

I’ve seen this pattern before. Over my lifetime, Church leaders have used so many different rationales to justify why the patriarchy remains firmly in place. In the 1950s, we were told women were too spiritual and sweet to lead and needed to be protected. Then we were told that motherhood and leadership couldn’t coexist. Then, that if women had real power, they’d be so good that men would disappear from the Church altogether. Later, it was all about covenant keeping. And now, we’re told God wants us to be powerful in a new pattern of women’s power—one no one has ever heard of until now. It feels like another desperate effort to justify continued male dominance.

I have to ask: what are they afraid of? Why work so hard, year after year, to keep things like they are?

I actually have some affection for “our” women leaders. I suspect each one of them, when they were called, thought they might be the one—the one who could bring more respect and useful authority to women in the Church. Maybe they think they have, or still can. But I’m afraid, for all their time and energy and sincere, prayerful effort, the men at the top are so determined to hold on to power that they will not budge an inch.

At 83, I’ve spent a lifetime in this Church. I’ve worked to support change in ways that honor and inspire women. I’ve done that through Exponent II, and one-on-one, and in my family and community. I count hundreds of Latter-day Saint women among my dearest friends. But I’ve seen too much to sincerely expect institutional change. And if the Second Coming comes before this century ends, I think the Church will have blown its chance to change for the better for women and girls.

It’s the same doctrine, dressed in a new fashion, and it is as unappealing to most of us today as it was 100 years ago and more. I have to ignore it and take comfort instead in the rational and uplifting testimonies of women in the Church who know this old way is not Jesus Christ’s way. We keep our faith alive by communicating with each other outside the official channels.

Judy Dushku is a founding mother of Exponent II, a retired professor of comparative politics, and the author of the inspiring historical fiction novel, Is This The Way Home?