Exponent II's Blog, page 65

Open Theme – Summer 2024 Call for Submissions

SUBMIT YOUR WRITING & ARTWORK FOR THE SUMMER 2024 ISSUE

For this Summer 2024 issue, we welcome all writing and visual artwork submissions. No specific theme, we look forward to reading and seeing what you have been creating and thinking about during this winter and spring to publish in our summer open theme issue.

We are seeking a balance of fiction and nonfiction through short story, personal essay, and visual artwork. Submissions are due by May 10, 2024. Please follow the guidelines. Authors and artists should identify with the mission of Exponent II.

Photo by Hannah Gullixson on Unsplash

Guest Post: Every Mother’s Day, My Mom Sends Me a Gift Even Though I Don’t Have Kids

by Rachel

Every Mother’s Day, my mom sends me a gift.

I also get her a gift, because she is my mother and it’s Mother’s Day (the day to celebrate her!). But she gives me a gift too, even though I do not have kids and am not a mother. However, on the point of motherhood, my mom and I fundamentally disagree on its definition.

My mom gives me a Mother’s Day gift because she is trying to be inclusive. She realizes that many folks my age want to be mothers but can’t create their own biological children. I get that. And I’m not upset by the gift (which is usually something sweet to eat). What does upset me is the theological rationale behind it.

My mom sees all women as mothers because in Moses 4:26, Eve is called the “mother of all living” by God, and this happens before she has physically conceived or borne any children. So, my mom argues, all women are mothers, whether or not they have children.

But there are a couple of problems with this argument. If we are all mothers, it devalues the work of motherhood. I am not a mother. I do not have to worry about toddler nap times, potty training and tantrums. I do not wake up teenagers to go to school or go to lunch with my young adult kids. I also don’t get to experience the joy and closeness that mothers can develop with their offspring.

I also don’t believe that calling someone the “mother of all living” is the same as saying that all women are inherently mothers. Being the mother or father of something can also mean that you are the first to do it. Thus, George Washington is sometimes called the father of the United States, or James Madison the father of the constitution. Eve is the mother of all living because she was literally one of the first two people on the earth (and the first woman).

Why do we not apply the same logic to fathers? If Eve was called the mother of all living before she had kids and that means she was always a mother, why was Adam not called the father of all living and always a father? Connected to this is the way that Mormon culture makes a huge deal about Mother’s Day on the appropriate Sunday in May, but barely nods at Father’s Day in June.

This gesture to be inclusive in reality further makes me feel different and isolated because I do not have children. My mom’s Mother’s Day gift to me reminds me that I am not a mom, even though my mom would like me to be. It is a reminder of what the Church perceives I lack, rather than a celebration of womanhood, as my mom sees it.

So women, as you’re getting your customary chocolate or flower pot each May, think about how Mormonism treats motherhood differently than others do. And consider that maybe we’ve got it wrong.

Rachel is a university professor and childless married woman who likes to bake and read.

“The solution to the problems that we have now is not in a perfect platform…it’s just in people.” – Melissa Wei-Tsing Inouye

Our blogging team was saddened to learn of the death of Melissa Inouye, a beloved contributor to the Exponent community whose work has been featured in Exponent magazine and blog. Here, some of our bloggers have shared some of their favorite memories of our friend, Melissa.

Melissa Inouye at Nancy Ross’s wedding

Nancy Ross: When I first met Melissa Inouye, she was a guest at our wedding, Russ’ friend from college. I then read her writing on blogs and then her scholarship. I read her stories of being a missionary and her family combining traditional cultural practices with Mormonism in her book Crossings.

During Ordain Women’s first year, Melissa tried to open a back channel to church leadership where we could have more direct conversation with them. We spent a number of hours on the phone talking through issues during that year and hoping that the church would be willing have more open conversation. When that didn’t work out, she lamented that loss with me.

Despite cancer treatment, she seemed joyful and youthful at MHA in Park City a few years ago, but much more tired at last year’s conference. She was kind and thoughtful and funny and courageous and intelligent and, as others have noted, respected by just about everyone in Mormon Studies (a very difficult thing to achieve).

My favorite piece of her writing was a blog post where she remembered receiving a difficult phone call about the return of her mother’s cancer while being in the middle of potty training one of her children.

My favorite story about Melissa is the one where she intervened at Gina Colvin’s disciplinary council with a 200 slide powerpoint and persuaded/bullied the church leader into letting Gina keep her church membership.
She was the very best of people.

April Young-Bennett: One of my most memorable experiences with Melissa was when she organized what she called an “intra-faith dialogue.” She invited several conservative and liberal Latter-day Saint academics, bloggers, activists, and LDS Church employees to spend the day together. Her invitation said:

Currently our community is divided. Given our diversity as a global body of Saints, strong differences of opinion are to be expected, but the key issue is that these differences are expressed in an atmosphere of contention. What can we do to love our neighbors, “even” our fellow Latter-day Saints? We don’t expect that we will solve all of our problems in one day, but we can start to come to terms with this challenge in a realistic and candid way.

Melissa Inouye, personal correspondence, April 8, 2015

I was excited to attend until just before the event, when Melissa shared the final guest list. I recognized the names of several vocal critics of the Ordain Women movement. I was terrified about the prospect of being outnumbered in a room full of people who had publicly ridiculed my cause—and sometimes me personally.

I’m not sure what I was afraid they would do, but my fears were unfounded. Melissa skillfully guided a day of friendly listening and sharing, and I came to know people who so vehemently disagreed with me as whole humans, whose lives encompassed so much more than any of the words they had ever posted on the internet. (I later taught Melissa’s framework for respectful dialogue to my own local Relief Society class. It worked so well I had to proselyte it!)

Melissa believed in people. She saw people as the solution, not as barriers or problems to overcome. I’m lucky because I have a recording of one of our conversations together; she appeared once on the Religious Feminism podcast I hosted. Here is something she said that day:

When people are with each other, they’re messy. People are so flawed. People are so imperfect. But I do feel like the solution to the problems that we have now is not in a perfect platform or a well-crafted manifesto or a creed or a certain kind of litmus test, but it’s just in people. And I think as we learn how to embrace each other as children of God, then we’ll be better able to deal with these problems and to cooperate and to forgive. 

Melissa Inouye, Religious Feminism Podcast, June 29, 2019

Melissa Inouye with the giraffe print blanket she received as a gift from Exponent bloggers. Exponent bloggers had a tradition over several years of banding together to purchase giraffe print blankets as gifts for Exponent contributors at pivotal times in their lives. Because giraffes have caring, matriarchal societies, we used the giraffe print blanket as a symbol of sisterly love. When Spunky gave it to her and told her about its symbolism for us, she said, “I feel so historical to be included!”

Spunky: Melissa was newly diagnosed with cancer when we moved to Auckland, only a few suburbs away from her. Between moving, finding a place to live, work, new schools for the kids, and everything she had going on with her new diagnosis, medical treatments, and keeping all her promises to everyone, I did not see her as often as I would have liked.

Shortly after we arrived, my daughter was almost 8, so our bishop approached us, expecting that we would encourage our daughter to be baptised. As we sat in the bishop’s office with her for her baptismal interview, she asked the bishop why girls could not have the priesthood. The bishop laughed. I became angry at his laughter. We left with no baptismal date on the calendar.

As I spit out my unhappiness to Melissa as she sat in her kitchen, she lowered her eyes and listened. Just listened. My daughter, in between playing with her sibling and Melissa’s children, knew what we were talking about and eventually joined us. “Did you want to get baptised?” asked Melissa. My daughter said she did. “Then you get to make your choice,” Melissa said. “Its between you and Jesus. That’s all.”

Within a week, we had a baptismal date and Melissa had an invitation to speak at the baptism. It was a very small crowd: just our family of four, Melissa, the bishop, and a missionary couple. The sister missionary giving the baptism talk asked my daughter, “Do you know why you are wearing a white dress today?”

“Because Jesus wore a white dress when He was baptised?” my daughter queried back with an openness that only children have. Melissa, my husband, and I burst into silent giggles, pressing down sound to maintain a degree of reverence.

Soon it was Melissa’s turn to speak. Melissa’s smile is something that everyone knows of her. So is her vibrant energy. I still choose to see and think of her like this, passionately engaging my daughter in the joyful talk about the Holy Ghost and Jesus Christ. Her entire being was filled with the brightness and purity of a child, her focus not on the group, but only on my daughter. Her body, spirit, and every word she spoke sparkled with joyous, contagious, confetti that I still refuse to dust off. This Christlike glimmering saturates all of Melissa’s writing, interactions, and her life.

We were lucky to have Melissa share in our daughter’s baptism. Baptism is a precious, eternal ordinance, signifying a new life. The occasion makes a permanent memory that is sweeter when shared with friends. Perhaps death is also an ordinance; a type of rebirth into a knowingness that we can only long to know in the mortal stage of life. For now, my heart is grateful for this memory, for this love and testimony of Christ that Melissa shared.

God speed, Melissa. I know that you are lighting up the heavens in ways that no human understanding can comprehend or describe.

Books by Melissa Inouye

…if i were bishop?

My 12 year old daughter was recently called as the Secretary of her Young Women’s class. I was invited to Young Women’s that day to watch her get sustained and set apart. The bishop gave a little speech to all the girls before he did the setting apart which I would title “You are special.” I had heard similar speeches before. You probably have too (especially if you were in Young Women’s). In the speech he told the girls how important they are as Daughters of God and how special they are as young women in the ward. It was a nice little speech and I sat there remembering all the times that men have told me how special I am as a woman or girl. There’s nothing inherently wrong with the message.  The issue is, however, that these speeches are needed in order to keep the patriarchy alive and well in the church. I bet readers of this blog would largely agree that if someone has to be told they’re special in an organization it’s likely because they are not being treated special. The boys know they’re special: they get the priesthood. The girls have to have regular little speeches to be told they’re special: because nothing else tells them they’re special.

I sat there imagining how I would do things differently if I were the bishop. [Note: I understand the irony that if I were Bishop this wouldn’t be a problem and that under current circumstances I will never be called to be a bishop because of my genitalia. But imagine with me for a second that I had a penis and was called as Bishop.] Here are my options:

1. Avoid having these cringey speeches because they’re sexist and gross. 



2. Continue having these speeches because girls are special and need to know that.



3. Change the speech slightly: tell the girls that they’re special even though the entire system would say otherwise and that maybe someday the system will change.

The problems with option 1: we run the risk of the girls never knowing they are special and never developing a relationship with God, because: why would they want to develop a relationship with a God who hates you?

The problems with option two: we run the risk of the patriarchy never changing because there will be no young women growing up to change it. These recurring speeches work to blind young women to the issues and many continue living their full lives in ignorant bliss.

Option three may be the best option but I’m not sure how long I would stay Bishop if I were actively trying to mess with the patriarchal system.

Aside from imagining what I would do if I were the bishop, I also sat there wondering what I will do now as a mom of three little girls. I know I could stop going to church and many readers have chosen that option. I respect your feelings and I certainly understand where you’re coming from. But I actually love some of the doctrines of the church and don’t want to leave. The doctrines bring me a lot of peace. But I don’t want my children to feel like second class citizens. So I regularly have conversations with them where I call out the issues that I see. But I also regularly have conversations with them where I share my love of the things that bring me peace about the gospel. They are being taught the gospel while also noting not all is perfect at the institution. Is it a perfect system I figured out? Definitely not. I’m constantly unsure whether I’m doing the right thing. 

What do you do? How do you teach your daughters?

Image from here: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/m.... I chose a coloring page because I’m trying to figure out how to color my relationship with the institution

Are Scriptures Redeemable?

I study my scriptures almost every day, though I’ve realized over time that my interpretation of that differs from the understanding of some other members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Some folks I know interpret daily scripture study in the church to mean daily reading of the Book of Mormon, and some of them even put a minimum time limit on the exercise or to them it doesn’t “count.” On the contrary, I take a broad view of what “studying the scriptures” means: sometimes I’m digging directly into the text, sometimes I am reading analysis or commentary or historical context that adds to my understanding of the scriptures, and sometimes I’m discussing the scriptures with someone else. Sometimes, I get more out of really focusing on a few verses instead of trying to cram in a chapter a day, which is why I’m very reluctant to use a timer. Life is busy, and I feel like God sees my efforts and doesn’t tap a Celestial Wristwatch in consternation when I haven’t hit 30 minutes or other arbitrary time each day.

As an adult convert, I did not grow up with the scriptures as part of my life. That said, there are passages of holy text in both the Bible and Book of Mormon that really resonated with me in difficult times in my life and played a role in my conversion. I also appreciate the opportunity independent study gives me to read and form my own opinions and receive my own promptings before I hear the “official” interpretation from the Come, Follow Me manual or Sunday School.

One question I keep wrestling with is: are the scriptures redeemable? I am thankful for important contributions to exegesis that don’t shy away from this question, including those through the lens of queerness, social justice, and other often-marginalized perspectives. But there are passages and what I call meta-choices that defy justification and challenge readers who believe these texts are God’s word.

Let’s start with the meta-choices. Do we believe that what God would proclaim the most important words for our spiritual and moral edification in this life would exclude women and gender minorities so severely? Do we believe in the racism we see from the Bible deriding “Philistines” (which is the same as “Palestinian” and is actually how we still say “Palestinian” in Arabic) so powerfully that it still persists in the English language as an insult today? Do we believe in the racism of the Book of Mormon describing “Lamanites” as savage and wicked and in many ways with complete double standards compared to Nephites? Do we believe that words we are supposed to take as spiritually authoritative would uncritically include slavery, indiscriminate violence against civilians, sexual assault and the taking of women as spoils of war, and more? Shouldn’t the word of an eternal and all-knowing God be more than a “product of its time”? There have always, at every moment in history, been people who stood for what is right. Why wouldn’t God choose them to write a text that avoids dehumanizing and harming entire groups of people, especially the most vulnerable?

On top of those meta-choices, I encounter a passage at least once a week in scripture study where my conscience screams to me that what I’m reading is doctrinally wrong. I find the Holy Ghost often quietly confirms that truth to me later as I struggle with the words and pray about them. My latest was Helaman 13:32-33 (emphasis mine):

“32 And in the days of your poverty ye shall cry unto the Lord; and in vain shall ye cry, for your desolation is already come upon you, and your destruction is made sure; and then shall ye weep and howl in that day, saith the Lord of Hosts. And then shall ye lament, and say:

33 O that I had repented, and had not killed the prophets, and stoned them, and cast them out. Yea, in that day ye shall say: O that we had remembered the Lord our God in the day that he gave us our riches, and then they would not have become slippery that we should lose them; for behold, our riches are gone from us.”

This smacks of prosperity gospel to me, saying that if the Nephites were obedient and accepted the prophets then they would get to keep their riches. I truly do not believe “riches” is a metaphor, as the rest of the chapter’s language discussing their “treasures” and all of the “gold…silver…and costly apparel” they have to spare makes obvious. From what I know of the Lord, the Lord is uninterested in helping rich people preserve their wealth or rewarding rich people with continued richness. On the contrary, the overwhelming evidence is that those who are wealthy have a greater obligation to give what they have to those in need. Being obedient to God is going to cause the rich to “lose” their riches any way in the sense that their “riches are gone from [them],” but those riches should be gone from them because they went to a better cause: alleviating the suffering of God’s children and building God’s kingdom. It doesn’t make sense that there’s a scenario where these rich listeners are obedient and keep all their wealth.

The places in scriptures where it’s most obvious of all to me that the text might not be redeemable is where they mention people with disabilities. The healing narratives around disabled people in Christian holy text have caused incalculable harm over the ages and continues to do so today. Although I have tried to make sense of what (if any) good can be drawn from those stories, I don’t blame anyone for saying the healing narratives are inherently ableist.

These are just a few examples of the types of passages that I end up chewing on for days or weeks or months or even years. And it makes me wonder: why would holy text that should be “plain and simple” and accessible to all of God’s children for our knowledge and wisdom have passages like this that are misleading or wrong or so painful for the most marginalized people? Why would there be so many verses that seem designed to be misinterpreted from the start? Why are there so many contradictions that make the scriptures less accessible and force more people to rely on church leaders or others to explain the “correct” interpretation, weakening individual members’ direct relationship with holy text and with God?

For now, I find the scriptures redeemable enough to keep reading every day. I think it benefits me not only to find passages that are comforting and feel true but to find sections that challenge me and anger me and help me refine what I believe through my opposition to them. At the same time, I completely understand people who have been burned by scriptures over and over again (or had scriptures weaponized against them) deciding that the scriptures are irredeemable. I sometimes wonder if they’re right. What do you think? What is your relationship with the scriptures?

Guest Post: Pieta

by Cherie Taylor Pedersen

And what of the Mother
watching as He rode into Jerusalem that day?
Did she know what lay ahead?
Had He prepared her for the grief that was coming,
a grief unique to her?
Yes, He had His followers,
devoted disciples,
But there was only the one Mother.
One woman had labored in pain to give Him life
And now she must labor in pain yet again,
These pains more searing than the last,
These white hot pains of bearing witness to suffering
He did not deserve yet had accepted,
His mission almost at an end.

She, too, paid a price for the errors of mankind
by giving up this beloved Son
to the jeers and cruelty of those He’d come to save.
But who noticed her as He stumbled to the cross?
Who noticed her as His hands and feet received the glancing blows?
Who noticed her as His life blood trickled toward her feet?
Only He.
“Woman, behold thy son.”

And what of the other Mother,
the one watching from on High?
Did she succor Him in the Garden
Or stand invisible by the Father’s side
As the terrible Plan unfolded
knowing she, too, could not remove that bitter cup,
Of which she also partook.
How could she not?
And did she, too, withdraw,
As mothers sometimes must,
To let Him take those final solitary steps
toward Home,
and Her?

Oh mothers of sorrow,
wherever you are,
They know what it is to grieve
what you cannot change.
They know the tears,
the pleas for healing,
perhaps even more than that beloved Son
who bore it all.
Across the span of time there has always been
and will always be
Pietas
Mothers encircling their children
with the arms that first held them,
Heads bowed in supplication
for the peace He promised to bestow.

Cherie writes from her home in Pennsylvania. She is the mother of four grown children and eight grandchildren who continually teach her about joy and sorrow.

Remembering Grethe Ballif Peterson

Exponent founding mother and former managing editor Grethe Ballif Peterson has passed away. The Exponent community mourns her passing. See her obituary here.

Grethe Ballif Peterson 1932 ~ 2024

Happy International Mother Earth Day!

Did you know April 22 is International Mother Earth Day? I often wish the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) was louder about the sacred nature (pun intended) of environmental stewardship and the responsibility we all share to combat climate change, build a more sustainable culture, and protect our planet and the living things on it.

I searched the General Conference archives from the 1930s to the present day for mentions of “climate” and only turned up a handful of examples and almost all were figurative (e.g., “we must establish a moral climate”) or just part of the background of a metaphorical story (i.e., “these plants can grow in even harsh climates”). I found one talk that referenced “climate changes” by L. Tom Perry in 1981 as just one of a long list of “concerns” that brought about “a spirit of gloom” among people. He goes on to say “I can understand why those who are without faith in our Lord and Savior would become prophets of gloom. Times can be difficult. However, a look at the causes of the difficulties proves that they are man-made and that solutions are within man’s ability to accomplish.” (Is this a subtle endorsement of anthropogenic climate change? In the 80s? This was before I was even born, but I was surprised to find it.)

Then, I searched the General Conference archives for “Mother Earth” and was interested to see 28 mentions in the 1850s, 14 in the 1860s, 22 in the 1870s, then single digits from the 1880s-1970s. After that, most years have had zero reference to Mother Earth except for two talks in the 2000s. Of those two talks in the 2000s, one was Shayne M. Bowen quoting 2 Nephi 9:7 referring to flesh crumbling to Mother Earth without hope after death if there were no Jesus. The other was Thomas S. Monson, also describing a specific death with a casket lowered into Mother Earth. The older talks are a mix of expressions about death and burial, confident assertions that the Earth will provide for those who work, and some yeoman farmer idealization similar to the rhetoric of Thomas Jefferson. The closest I found to praising Mother Earth was a talk by Stephen L. Richards in 1940: “What a marvelous boon is mother earth! How abundantly she yields of her hidden chemicals and nutriments to make the verdure and the vegetation that gladdens and supports the race. My brothers and sisters, — countrymen of these mountain valleys, I fear we scarcely appreciate the inestimable privilege that we have to live on the soil.”

Brigham Young had some unique things to say about Mother Earth. He spoke in 1853 about how we human beings are as ephemeral as grass: “Why will the Latter-day Saints wander off after the things of this world? But are they not good? We can not do very well without them, for we are of the world, we are in the world, we partake of the elements of which it is composed; it is our mother earth, we are composed of the same native material. It is all good, the air, the water, the gold and silver; the wheat, the fine flour, and the cattle upon a thousand hills are all good; but, why do men set their hearts upon them in their present organized state? Why not lay a sure foundation to control them hereafter? Why do we not keep it continually before us that all flesh is grass; it is to-day, and to-morrow it is not; it is like the flower of the grass when it is cut down, it withers, and is no more?” More bizarrely, he claimed that the Biblical flood was a baptism that the Earth needed for a remission of its sins: “We are of the earth, earthy, and not only will the portion of mother earth which composes these bodies get a resurrection, but the earth itself. It has already had a baptism. You who have read the Bible must know that that is Bible doctrine. What does it matter if it is not stated in the same words that I use, it is none the less true that it was baptized for the remission of sins. The Lord said, “I will deluge (or immerse) the earth in water for the remission of the sins of the people;” or if you will allow me to express myself in a familiar style, to kill all the vermin that were nitting, and breeding, and polluting its body; it was cleansed of its filthiness; and soaked in the water, as long as some of our people ought to soak. The Lord baptized the earth for the remission of sins, and it has been once cleansed from the filthiness that has gone out of it, which was in the inhabitants who dwelt upon its face.” (I don’t know of any other LDS leader who has taught this.)

In modern times, protecting Mother Earth and fighting man-made climate change and its catastrophic effects are more important than ever. It’s strange to me that we don’t talk about this sacred duty we have more. I can’t recall environmental protection ever being a major feature of a Sacrament talk, Sunday School, or Relief Society lesson in my experience. The Church does have resources online of scriptures and talks addressing environmental stewardship and conservation, but am I the only one who pretty much never heard these messages at worship services or even in social events with other members?

Part of environmental justice is understanding the ways environmental injustice disproportionately impacts women, children, poor people, people of color, and other marginalized identities. Proper stewardship of the environment centers the experiences, ideas, and knowledge of those most affected. I once read a memoir called Unbowed by Kenyan environmental, political, and women’s rights activist and Nobel Prize winner Wangari Maathai. The way her values in promoting science, lifting up women and girls, and fighting for democracy all weaved together really moved me. If you don’t know a lot about environmental justice but want to start learning, I highly recommend reading her book. Regardless of how you choose to recognize the occasion, Happy International Mother Earth Day!

Our Bloggers Recommend: “Sex, Demons, and Ruby Franke! Mormon Explains the LDS Problem”

For those following the Jodi Hildebrandt and Ruby Franke crimes, check out blogger Abby Maxwell Hansen as a guest on Therapy Today’s Youtube channel. She discusses her own views on how Mormonism intersected with Ruby’s extreme parenting and Jodi’s unethical therapeutic practices to create a perfect storm for abuse – and how this has implications for all members of our religious community, not just the Franke children. What are your thoughts? Is there a connection between certain church teachings and the terrible crimes these women committed?

The LDS Church ignores women’s suffering when it comes to garments

The recent General Conference talk emphasized that adults in the church should follow a strict interpretation of the rules around wearing garments. I was disheartened to hear this. I no longer wear garments, but ten years ago this month, Jessica Finnigan and I conducted a survey with 4500+ participants about people’s experiences with garments.

Our three most important questions from the survey were: 1) Why do you wear garments? 2) What do your garments mean to you? 3) How does wearing garments make you feel? We gave a conference paper on our data and later published a book chapter in Religion, Attire, and Adornment in North America (2023) edited by Marie W. Dallam and Benjamin E. Zeller.

On July 21, 2021, journalist Ruth Graham published an article in the New York Times about Mormon women’s challenges with garments. About a week later, I received an email from someone at the LDS Church’s Research Correlation Division asking me about my research on garments.

We met with the Research Correlation Division on Zoom later that fall and addressed their research questions, which were: 
What has been the most effective methodology for going after information regarding women’s experience with garments? 
What are the primary issues facing women regarding wearing garments? 
What proportion of these issues are related to physical issues?
How do garments affect women’s physical health, including discomfort, rashes, yeast infections, UTI’s? 
What questions best helped you evaluate these issues among garment-wearing women? 
If you were to start over again, how would you do this research differently? 

We addressed their questions with these slides that summarize our data.

Having sat with our data for a long time, we suggested the following possible solutions to address women’s challenges with garments:

1. There isn’t a design fix for women’s garments that will accommodate every LDS women’s needs. There needs to be more choice in design and style. We recommend consulting with dermatologists and OBGYNs to identify fabrics and designs that reduce overheating and increase ventilation.

2. This isn’t a problem you can solve with quantitative data alone. Understanding and improving garment wearing for women requires a deeper understanding of the embodied religious experiences of women and the ways in which garments shape those experiences in positive and negative ways.

3. In addition to design changes, consider a different behavioral framework around garments that looks more like the framework for fasting. With fasting, 1)exceptions to fasting are discussed openly and those who need to make accommodations to fasting are accepted as faithful members 2) there is no taboo on discussing fasting, so those who are navigating fasting can easily get advice on how to adapt the practice to their needs.

4. Instead of only a design change, consider a different behavioral framework around garments that looks more like the framework for fasting, including: 1) lift the taboo on talking about garments so that women can give and receive help in navigating garment-wearing with more ease and less judgement 2) in church teaching materials and in church handbooks, emphasize greater flexibility in garment-wearing than is currently understood by members. E.g. some women could wear garments with less cost to their physical health if they did not wear them at night or took regular breaks.

Our final considerations asked church leaders to think also about the following:

1. Many women have positive feelings about the meaning of their garments but their lived experiences with garments is often much more complicated.

2. Many women experience physical, emotional, and spiritual issues related to wearing garments.

3. Current church culture makes it difficult for women to express discomfort with their garments, as there are social and spiritual costs connected to complaining.

4. Women often feel like they must hold these physical, emotional, and spiritual, and costs alone, creating additional feelings of shame and isolation.

5. Women must account for their garment-wearing practices in temple recommend interviews with men who are not likely to understand or empathize. In any other environment this would be identified as grooming for abuse.

6. There is ample evidence that many women have experienced trauma in wearing garments and the LDS Church has not adequately addressed this.

7. As researchers witnessing this devastation, we have experienced secondary trauma that has been destructive to our own faith.

I know that the researchers we met with were thoughtful and receptive to this research and that they passed a summary of this work on to their superiors in the church hierarchy. I just really wish that the church cared more about the experiences of women (and men) who are trying to navigate this demanding practice.