Feminism
So yep, we're gonna tackle this one. I find that I get frustrated very easily when trying to discuss feminist issues in the real world using my mouth and my vocal cords. I think there are two reasons:
1. I've always been better with written communication than verbal, I'm just one that needs extra time to put my thoughts together. (Case in point: I started writing this blog post over a month ago. Two other blog posts have been written and uploaded since I started this one.) So, especially when talking about issues that I feel strongly about, I struggle to express my thoughts verbally in a coherent way. I know what I'm trying to say, but unless you've spent a few years actually living inside my head to gain context, it comes out sounding... well, not quite right.
2. For whatever reason, any kind of feminist issue, and especially the word itself, is extremely threatening to Mormons. I don't really understand why, but it is. So attempting to have any kind of dialogue about it is difficult because it immediately puts your conversation partner on the defensive. Which in turns makes me feel defensive and it turns into this vicious circle where no one is actually hearing each other.
Screw verbal communication, guys. Seriously. (I suppose "oral communication" is probably more accurate, but it just doesn't sound right. You know why.)
Before we get too much further in this conversation, please take a moment to listen to my favorite feminist anthem: Not A Pretty Girl by Ani Difranco. We will be referring back to some of the lyrics throughout this post.
Anyhoo. Since, as noted above, just the word feminism tends to get people in a tizzy, I'd like to start by sharing my definition of the word. To be fair, there are a lot of different kinds of feminists, and like any other movement, there has been a lot of evolution in approach, intent, etc throughout the years. Perhaps what would have been defining characteristics of the feminist movement 20 years ago are not so much so today. Which means your idea of a feminist and my idea of a feminist might be completely different, with neither of us being wrong exactly, and that might be where some of the miscommunication comes from. So to be clear, this is what I mean when I speak of feminism:
Feminism is a collection of movements and ideologies aimed at defining, establishing and defending equal political, economic and social rights for women.
I really cannot comprehend anyone disagreeing with the above statement and believing that women should not have any of those things. And if you think we already do, well... yikes.
 |
| Uh.... yeah |
While an army of lesbians sounds pretty freaking awesome to me, lumping anyone involved in the feminist movement together under that label in order to easily dismiss them as somehow being outside the norm and therefore not worthy of your consideration is a total douche move. So if you're doing that, knock it off. And as far as man-hating; while I'm sure there do exist some feminists and/or lesbians who do hate men (probably women who have been continually exploited or abused by them), that is not remotely a defining characteristic of either group so again, if that's your impression, knock it off.
Or, in Ani's words, "I am not an angry girl, but it seems I've got everyone fooled. Every time I say something they find hard to hear, they chalk it up to my anger, and never to their own fear."
My approach to feminism is the same as my approach to every other issue placed before me. If you ever want to know what motivates my thinking or have found yourself just driving along minding your business and then thought to yourself "I wonder what Nichole's personal creed is?", well, wonder no more because I'm about to tell you.
I believe in the freedom of every person to choose how they want to live their life. The Wiccan creed is "An it harm none, do what ye will". I'm not Wiccan, but that pretty much sums it up. Or from a Mormon perspective, I believe in the plan presented by Heavenly Father, and not in the one presented by Satan. The one where we all have agency and not the one where we are all forced to do right. I believe that every person should be able to make their own mistakes, and make choices that I wouldn't make, and ensure their own salvation (or not) as they will. I believe that the laws of the land should reflect that, and not constrain anyone to behave by the tenets of any religion.
I believe that everyone's relationship with God is their own. I believe that God didn't just create Men and Women, but individuals with unique personalities, gifts and talents that may or may not match up with those belonging to other members of their gender.
Since this blog is about how I reconcile my liberal beliefs with my Mormon ones (feminism being a liberal view, apparently), I only seek here to address women's issues in the context of the LDS church. I really can't address the whole kit and caboodle in one blog post. Just scratching the surface here has taken me several weeks. So for now I want to start with the church's teachings on gender roles.
No discussion of gender roles in the LDS church would be complete without referencing the infamous and omnipresent Proclamation on the Family. In fact, it pretty much provides the foundation for everything I will discuss, so I have linked it.
 |
| I love to serve my man! |
The Proclamation says a lot of things, and it does so in rather vague terms so as not to come out and actually say anything, but we all know what it actually means. In addition to condemning abortion and gay marriage, the rest of the Proclamation deals with gender roles. I won't get into how troubling some of the implications of the Proclamation are regarding our *trans brothers and sisters in this post, we'll save that for another time.
The part that concerns me right now is this:
"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."
What this means is that the man should work and support the family, and the woman should stay home and raise the children.
This is something that is reiterated frequently in Mormon culture and in Mormon churches. Sure, they'll qualify it by saying "if she can", like that's supposed to make it better. (The proclamation says "Disability, death or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation.")
But the ideal for a woman is to be a stay at home mom. That is the ultimate goal for every woman, set out for us from birth and reinforced almost weekly, or even daily. "This is your destiny and this is what you should be working toward and keeping in your mind at all times. If circumstances don't allow it, then that's okay, I guess, but intentionally choosing anything else is wrong."
What is troublesome about this to me is that it flies in the face of my personal creed. The one where everyone gets to choose how they live their life. The one where a man and a woman could sit down together and decide what's best for their family. Maybe in most cases, they would come to the conclusion that their ideal is for the man to work while the woman stays home with the children. If so, then fantastic. But if they choose something different, they should be free to do so without stigma. Without being made to feel guilty or abnormal or somehow "less than" every time this other "ideal" is held aloft.
And what about the rest of us? Those of us who wish we could meet that ideal but can't. Unmarried people. Divorced people. Families who can't subsist on a single income. You know. The majority of us. We've all been set up to feel like failures. When you're taught your whole life to expect one thing and then grow up to discover that it doesn't happen for everyone, it is devastating.
Something I've learned after 31 years of life, something that I was not at all prepared for, is that life isn't a formula. It's not a "do this, and then this will happen" kind of thing. Everyone's path is individual. It is unique. This is truth, but it is not something that is taught by the LDS church, and I think that is a weakness. Mormon kids are taught black and white principles, and are caught completely unawares when they find themselves in a gray world.
And it's not just about whether or not women work. It's about who we are. Individual personalities, strengths, and talents are discarded and instead we are told what qualities we ought to possess based on our reproductive anatomy.
Just this past Sunday, a woman gave a talk in Sacrament meeting where she presented the following quote that disturbed me to my core:
"Women of God can never be like women of the world. The world has enough women who are tough; we need women who are tender. There are enough women who are coarse; we need women who are kind. There are enough women who are rude; we need women who are refined. We have enough women of fame and fortune; we need more women of faith. We have enough greed; we need more goodness. We have enough vanity; we need more virtue. We have enough popularity; we need more purity" ("The Joy of Womanhood," Ensign, Nov. 2000, 15).
The part that concerns me right now is this:
"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."
What this means is that the man should work and support the family, and the woman should stay home and raise the children.
This is something that is reiterated frequently in Mormon culture and in Mormon churches. Sure, they'll qualify it by saying "if she can", like that's supposed to make it better. (The proclamation says "Disability, death or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation.")
But the ideal for a woman is to be a stay at home mom. That is the ultimate goal for every woman, set out for us from birth and reinforced almost weekly, or even daily. "This is your destiny and this is what you should be working toward and keeping in your mind at all times. If circumstances don't allow it, then that's okay, I guess, but intentionally choosing anything else is wrong."
What is troublesome about this to me is that it flies in the face of my personal creed. The one where everyone gets to choose how they live their life. The one where a man and a woman could sit down together and decide what's best for their family. Maybe in most cases, they would come to the conclusion that their ideal is for the man to work while the woman stays home with the children. If so, then fantastic. But if they choose something different, they should be free to do so without stigma. Without being made to feel guilty or abnormal or somehow "less than" every time this other "ideal" is held aloft.
And what about the rest of us? Those of us who wish we could meet that ideal but can't. Unmarried people. Divorced people. Families who can't subsist on a single income. You know. The majority of us. We've all been set up to feel like failures. When you're taught your whole life to expect one thing and then grow up to discover that it doesn't happen for everyone, it is devastating.
Something I've learned after 31 years of life, something that I was not at all prepared for, is that life isn't a formula. It's not a "do this, and then this will happen" kind of thing. Everyone's path is individual. It is unique. This is truth, but it is not something that is taught by the LDS church, and I think that is a weakness. Mormon kids are taught black and white principles, and are caught completely unawares when they find themselves in a gray world.
And it's not just about whether or not women work. It's about who we are. Individual personalities, strengths, and talents are discarded and instead we are told what qualities we ought to possess based on our reproductive anatomy.
Just this past Sunday, a woman gave a talk in Sacrament meeting where she presented the following quote that disturbed me to my core:
"Women of God can never be like women of the world. The world has enough women who are tough; we need women who are tender. There are enough women who are coarse; we need women who are kind. There are enough women who are rude; we need women who are refined. We have enough women of fame and fortune; we need more women of faith. We have enough greed; we need more goodness. We have enough vanity; we need more virtue. We have enough popularity; we need more purity" ("The Joy of Womanhood," Ensign, Nov. 2000, 15).
What bothers me about this quote is that while all of those qualities are good, they are being reduced as uniquely feminine. The implicit message here is that it is okay for men to be tough. It is okay for men to be coarse, or rude. Women are to be tender, kind, virtuous, pure, nurturing.
Why is it so stressed that women must cultivate these qualities but not men? Shouldn't men be tender? Kind? Virtuous? Why can't men be nurturers?
I don't understand the need to constantly reinforce these ideas that women must be so soft. Is it so that men get to feel strong? As Ani said, "I ain't no a damsel in distress, and I don't need to be rescued. So put me down, punk. Wouldn't you prefer a maiden fair? Isn't there a kitten stuck up a tree somewhere?" I resent the idea that I have to be anything in order to make men feel more comfortable.
I'm not saying that I think it's wrong to encourage women to cultivate these qualities. And I am not saying that I think women who have them, and exhibit them, are weak. Not at all. What frustrates me is the implication in a statement like that that it is against God's will for a woman to stand up for herself, to challenge the status quo, to voice her opinions, to blaze trails.
I can hear you now. Or maybe it's my mother I hear, saying "Nichole, that is not what that quote means at all! You're just hearing what you want to hear!"
Okay, maybe. But I'm just saying... we hear talks like the above a lot in church. I don't hear a lot of talks about women cultivating leadership qualities. We don't talk about women being independent. We don't talk (as much) about women being educated, being leaders, being outspoken. Having thoughts. We hear a lot about virtue.
I have a lot more to say about this subject but I think I'll save further discourse for future posts. This one is long enough. Please leave comments! Start a discussion. Link my post and help my blog get more traffic. I would love to have a mature and respectful conversation about this.
To anyone who has been bothered by anything I've said here, if it got your hackles up and you're frustrated with me because I just don't "get it", I close with my final Ani Difranco lyric:
"Imagine you're a girl just trying to finally come clean, knowing full well they'd prefer you were dirty and smiling."
No comments:
Post a Comment