Showing posts with label Women. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Women. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 19, 2014

A Novel Understanding Of Gender Roles in The Proclamation on the Family

I was reluctant to write this blog post but I have been encouraged to do so by certain individuals because they find my reading of the Proclamation on the Family (PoF) fascinating and original.  So, I am taking the plunge and adding this blog article to the current and ongoing discussion about equality and gender roles within the LDS Church.
My intent and hope in writing this post is not to provide a solution to issues revolving around equality and gender roles in the Church. This isn't meant to support the conservative or progressive view on these issues. It isn't intended to increase tension among men, women and Church leaders. This is only to get people to see this issue in a new light (hopefully) and to open up a new avenue of discussion on these matters. Finally, what I am about to share is NOT the official doctrine of the LDS Church nor should it ever be taken as such. It is strictly and absolutely MY opinion and reading of the Proclamation of the Family.
With that being said, here's how I read the Proclamation on the Family. In my eyes, the basic and simple point of the PoF is that men and women don't have any gender roles until they are married and have children. That's what I believe the essential message of the Proclamation on the Family to be. 
Let me walk you through how I came to that perspective on the Proclamation on the Family. 
The Proclamation on the Family starts out with a statement that gender is eternal. 
"All human beings—male and female—are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.
In the premortal realm, spirit sons and daughters knew and worshipped God as their Eternal Father and accepted His plan by which His children could obtain a physical body and gain earthly experience to progress toward perfection and ultimately realize their divine destiny as heirs of eternal life."
Not only do we learn that gender is eternal, but that we were not genderless in the preexistence. We were male and female before we came to earth. Although God created gender, creating gender is not the same as creating roles. These two concepts are separate and should not be conflated together. 
Unfortunately, LDS culture and society society have been commingled with LDS doctrine to such a degree that LDS practices are assumed to be LDS doctrine despite no doctrinal foundation or justification for such beliefs and it is now almost difficult to tease these two concepts apart because they are so embedded in LDS thinking and behavior because people have mingled these two things together as if they are LDS doctrine.
A careful reading of the PoF and other sources does not and cannot support that when God  spiritually and physically created men and women, He also created the roles that would accompany each gender. God merely created gender, humans created most of the roles. Almost all gender roles are arbitrary because they were created by society and culture with the exception that men and women don't have any gender roles until they are married and have children.
"The first commandment that God gave to Adam and Eve pertained to their potential for parenthood as husband and wife. We declare that God’s commandment for His children to multiply and replenish the earth remains in force. We further declare that God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife.
We declare the means by which mortal life is created to be divinely appointed. We affirm the sanctity of life and of its importance in God’s eternal plan."
In my reading of the PoF, we learn a few things. First, the first commandment to get married is an obligation that falls equally on both genders. The obligation must be fulfilled by men and women. It appears from the PoF (as well as other scriptural sources) that the Lord’s doctrine that men and women are to both be active players in finding a spouse.
Secondly, we also learn there is something unique about the "First Commandment" that is different from almost all the other commandments the Lord has given. In order for the commandment to get married to be satisfied, it requires a man and a woman to come together in marriage. In other words, it takes two people to obey this one commandment whereas almost all other commandments require each individual to obey them on their own. Men and women are both needed to create a marriage. A man can't be married unto himself and a woman can't do that either. Men and women need each other to satisfy that obligation. That's why if you read the entire PoF, there's no mention of gender roles when it comes to dating. It isn't a man's job to find a spouse and it isn't a woman's job to find a spouse. Its an equal obligation. 
Additionally, we learn that God actually gave two distinct and separate commandments to men and women instead of one. If you read the PoF carefully and read the scriptures carefully, you realize that men and women must satisfy the "First Commandment" (marriage) to satisfy the "Second Commandment" (be fruitful and multiply/procreate).  In other words, God intended that men and women must be husband and wife before (condition precedent) they can be fathers and mothers. This concept is affirmed in the passage below:
"Husband and wife have a solemn responsibility to love and care for each other and for their children. “Children are an heritage of the Lord” (Psalm 127:3). Parents have a sacred duty to rear their children in love and righteousness, to provide for their physical and spiritual needs, and to teach them to love and serve one another, observe the commandments of God, and be law-abiding citizens wherever they live. Husbands and wives—mothers and fathers—will be held accountable before God for the discharge of these obligations.
The family is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity."
From the paragraph above we learn that men and woman as husband and wives are both under the same obligation to have children. Again, the commandment to have children is another one of those rare instances where it takes two people (men and women) to obey a single commandment. It is an obligation that both men and women are equally required to obey although women carry the heavier burden than men do in this instance. 
It is worth pointing out that men and women can become mothers and fathers without having to be husband and wife. Thus, the PoF recognizes that " Husbands and wives—mothers and fathers"  will "be held accountable before God for the discharge of these obligations" of rearing "their children in love and righteousness, to provide for their physical and spiritual needs, and to teach them to love and serve one another, observe the commandments of God, and be law-abiding citizens wherever they live." Thus, even if you haven't satisfied the first commandment of getting married, you are still under the commandment as fathers and mothers to raise and provide for their children.
We also learned that children are "entitled" to having parents. This is the first and only time in the PoF where any "right" is mentioned.
Finally, we learn that marriage is essential to God's plan for His Children. Children can only be created within the confines or parameters of marriage so that they can relocate from the preexistence to earth and arrive in a safe and healthy environment for them to begin their life on earth.
So far, we haven't seen any gender roles described or proscribed to men and women. We have only seen that gender is eternal, that both genders must be married before they can be parents. That's what the PoF teaches so far. 
But if you read the PoF carefully, you will find that there the gender roles for both men and woman are very simple and there is only one role for men and women. 
"By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children. In these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers are obligated to help one another as equal partners. Disability, death, or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation. Extended families should lend support when needed."
In the way I read the LDS Church's Proclamation on the Family, there is on only one gender role that men and women each have. For men, "fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families." For women, "Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children." We also learn that men and women are to help each other in the one roles that each gender has. Men and women are to assist each other in these roles as equal partners.
I don't see any other assigned gender role for men and women in the PoF. That's all there is.
If you notice, there is no gender roles when it comes to house hold chores, dating, employment, church callings. Its not there. Also notice that the gender roles for men and women aren't trigged until they have been (1) married and (2) have children. Gender roles don't happen until both requirements are satisfied. That means that according to the PoF, there are no gender roles for men and women prior to marriage. It also implies that there are no gender roles for married couples either. Only when they have children do the the simple gender roles assigned to men and women kick in.
The Proclamation on the Family (PoF) doesn't mention the gender roles and the Priesthood either. (an omission I find fascinating). You would have to look else where for why women can't or shouldn't (or why they can or should) hold the Priesthood (an argument I am intentionally avoiding here). But if you are looking strictly at the PoF, it does seem to imply that the unmarried women (or women with full-grown children) could hold the priesthood. However, you are free to have that debate in the comments section of this article although I encourage (and prefer) you talk about gender roles in the Church.
That, dear readers, is how came to the idea that the only gender role men and women have according to the Proclamation. These roles are only triggered upon the event of lawful marriage and procreation of children within that marriage. Men and women simly don't have any gender roles until they are married and have children.  Society through various means get boys and girls to do certain things in preparation as husband and wives and mother and fathers. However, they should not be assumed that they are the inherent and permanent gender roles for men and women. Women and men like to do certain things but again, these things should not be conflated with actual gender roles of women. They are merely preferences.
Biology and genetics are the only natural limitations on men and women. However, again, they are not to be conflated with gender roles. They are merely to be understood as natural and normal physical limitations just as being Deaf or blind are natural physical limitations. Sometimes my Deafness will naturally limit me to doing certain things and other times it won't. Or I can get around these physical barriers through technology and/or pure determination.
I understand that for some people, they may find my interpretation of the PoF to be patriarchal. I don't think it is and it was never intended to be that way. It was simply to challenge the current understanding of gender roles and to present a novel and unique way of understanding gender roles as outlined in the PoF.
To me, I find the PoF to be traditional/conservative and progressive at the same time. LDS Doctrines can be viewed as being the most liberal theology in the world and it applies here on the issue of gender roles. 
The gender roles as I read in the PoF are realistic and simple. The only gender roles men and women have occur only in marriage and it only relates to the raising of children in the home. That's it. That means all other gender roles are not eternal, doctrinal or important or essential. Anything outside of that is rather subjective and arbitrary which are based on unsound justifications.
I think that's fairly liberating for both men and women because it escapes the inherent double standards and double binds that men and women place on one other and amongst each other (as in internal and external pressures) while having a more simpler (and less stifling) roles for both men and women.
To me it implies that God is only concerned with the eternal truths and obligations that transcend time, geography, culture, tradition and society and that at the end of the day, we find the truth to be simple in its concept and execution. Only humans can muck up a concept so simple and elegant.
It was humans who added unnecessary layers of complexity onto a simple doctrine through media, entertainment, culture, society, tradition, history and (yes) religion. Also, we have made unwarranted connections, assumptions and leaps in logic about gender roles merely because a person does "A" it necessarily follows that they do "X, Y, or Z." 
But at the same time, humans created these additional roles because of survival or because it was practical or because it saved time and energy.  There was some need for it, for some reason, in the past that was useful for men and women. Many of these roles weren't done to oppress but out of some necessity. However, some roles eventually became a tool for oppression.  Finally, we can’t assume that all past social practice is beneficial in the future. It is good for society and in the Church to reevaluate these things from time to time. 
This brings me to the current discussion on gender roles. The additional gender roles that humans have placed on top of the one, single, assigned role for men and women as outlined in the PoF, can be stifling and choking at times. There are lots of things that men and women have to do because they are culturally or societally or religiously induced rigid expectations. Women aren't the only ones who have issues with gender roles. Men do too.  Both have men and women legitimate complaints about the roles and duties the Church places on us and whether or not they are equal
But there is one scriptural passage that I gives me hope for both men and women with regards to gender roles in the future. The prophet Isaiah explained that during the millennial reign of Christ, the roles and behaviors of animals will radically change:
“The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them. 
“And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.
“And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice’ den.
“They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea.” (Isa. 11:6–9.)
If the natural behaviors and roles of animals (predator and prey) can be radically changed, there is a strong but subtle implication that the behavior of humans beings will radically change as well. I don't think that the roles that men and women have within the parameters of a lawful marriage and procreation of children within that marriage will change. I think that the behaviors of men and women will change which will affect how the genders interact with one another.
I hope this article was enlightening as well as entertaining and thought provoking. 

I look forward to hearing your insights and ideas on this subject in the comments section.

Monday, August 13, 2012

Joanna Brooks On The Daily Show

Jon Stewart gives a great interview with Joanna Brooks who is the author of the "The Book of Mormon Girl" who talks about what it is like to be a girl growing up in the Mormon faith and becoming a liberal Mormon. Watch the awesome interview below: 


Having grown up in Southern California and going to BYU, I totally understand the world she is comes from. Like her I graduated from BYU but didn't leave as a liberal/progressive. However, I appreciate that she is willing to share her subjective and personal experience about her faith from a unique perspective. Although I haven't read her book yet, I plan on picking it up soon.

Tuesday, August 2, 2011

Study Shatteres A Few More Dating Myths About Men

In a previous blog article, I wrote about a study that found that men single men are, on the whole, as likely to want to get married as single women.  Recently, another study has come out that shatters a few more myths about men: 
That old chestnut about women always wanting to cuddle? Myth, according to a Kinsey Institute study, which finds that kissing and hugging were more important to the happiness of men than of women.
The study involved 1,009 heterosexual middle-aged and older couples in long-term (average 25 years) committed relationships in five countries. Researchers asked participants to fill out questionnaires about their satisfaction with their relationships and sex lives, revealing some surprising truths: for instance, men who reported frequent kissing or cuddling with their partners were on average three times as happy with their relationships as men who reported limited snuggling. For women, such shows of tenderness didn't have much impact on relationship satisfaction.
However, both men and women who reported frequent touching, kissing and hugging, as well as higher sexual functioning and more sex, were more likely to be sexually satisfied. For women, sex got better over time: they reported significantly more sexual satisfaction after being with their partner for 15 years.
"Possibly, women become more satisfied over time because their expectations change, or life changes with the children grown," Julia Heiman, director of the Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender and Reproduction and lead author of the study, said in a statement. "On the other hand, those who weren't so happy sexually might not be married so long."
Both men and women became happier with their relationships the longer they stayed together. But, in a reversal of stereotype, men were more likely than women to report being happy in their relationships, while women were more likely to report being satisfied with sex.
These studies certainly changes they way we view the physical needs of men and women and how it contributes to their happiness.  Tearing down stereotypes and myths are a good thing since it helps us to strive to a more realistic view of how things are.

Sunday, September 5, 2010

Study: Keeping Sabbath Day Makes Women Happier

A recent study has found that women are more happier when they are keeping the Sabbath. The study, conducted by Researchers from DePaul University in Chicago and Ben-Gurion University 
followed church attendance and levels of happiness among Americans living in states that had repealed so-called blue laws, which once required most retailers to stay closed on Sundays.
The researchers found that allowing stores to open on Sundays was linked with a decline in church attendance among white women, which led to a subsequent decline in happiness. Among black women, the repeal of the blue laws had no measurable effect, although that may be because the sample size was too small to draw any statistically meaningful conclusions.
Notably, the finding was true only for women. For men, the repeal of blue laws didn’t seem to influence church attendance or levels of happiness.
Since the repeal of blue laws, women are about 17 percent less likely to report being “pretty happy,” and more likely to report being “not happy,” according to the study, which is still awaiting final publication.
“People know there is a correlation between religiosity and happiness, but there’s not conclusive evidence that there is a causal effect,’’ said William Sander, professor of economics at DePaul. “Our paper tends to provide more conclusive evidence that religiosity among women does affect happiness.’’
The study is surprising in someways and not so in other ways. Studies have shown that women tend to be more religious than men. However, what is surprising, to me at least, is that not keeping the Sabbath only affects the happiness of women and not men. I would have assumed it would have affected the happiness of both genders.
Several possible reasons for why women are more unhappier when they're not keeping the sabbath are that children are more likely to get in trouble because they're hanging out at malls, women started to work on Sundays after the repeal of Sunday Blue laws or that it allows women to shop on Sundays:
Or it may simply be that the lure of shopping is more powerful than the desire to attend church, even though it brings less happiness.
“Shopping is kind of addictive, and even though it doesn’t make people happy, they’re doing it and they don’t return to church as much because of that,’’ Dr. Sander said. “There is instant gratification from shopping compared to the benefits of church, which may occur over a longer period of time.’’
None of the explanations seem satisfactory to me. They could equally apply to men. Does anyone have a better explanation for why women are not as happy as men when they're not keeping the Sabbath? 

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Changing Our Perceptions Of LDS Housewives: The Hot Mormon Muffins Calendar


The creator of the calendar that featured 12 LDS RMs posing shirtless has just released a new calendar where 12 LDS mothers are posing in the kitschy vintage pin-up style.
A spokesman for the calendar stated that the calendar is designed to shake up stereotypes that paint Mormons as "stuffy or hyper-conservative and mothers in particular as homemakers from another era."
"For Mormons, the most holy calling next to missionary work is motherhood," the spokesman said. "But they're not all the subservient housewives that people think they are."
I think the creator's intent to dispel people's stereotypes about LDS mothers is not really necessary because LDS mothers and housewives of today are nothing the mothers of previous generations. I don't think this is strictly an LDS issue either.
The mothers and wives of today have grown up playing Nintendo or Atari), watched MTV, downloaded songs from Napster in college (when it wasn't illegal to download free music) and are now listening to their favorite songs on their ipods while taking the baby stroller down the street. Even the grandmothers of today who grew up and got married that "stuffy" or "hyper-conservative" era have seem to have shed the old stereotypes of that time.
The truth is that we don't need the calender to change our perceptions about motherhood and housewives because of the changes in the cultural, political, and economic landscape of America have already done that.
What do you think? Does people's perceptions about LDS housewives really need to be changed and improved?