Today I'm going to talk about women. Mormon women in particular, but also women in general. I'll begin by saying that most Mormons don't really think sexism is a problem. This is not unique to them. There are a great deal of men and women in the United States who think that equality has more or less been achieved, and there isn't a reason to disrupt the system. I used to be one of these people. I didn’t understand how people think Mormons are sexist. Men and women are equal but serve different roles, I was told. It took me a long time, even after leaving the church to become a feminist. As I've learned more about feminism, I've learned that it's a lot more simple but also a lot more complicated than people think.
Google defines feminism as "the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men." It is as simple as that. Feminists want women to have the same respect as men. Most of you probably think that women and men should have the same rights, liberties, and opportunity as men. If you don't, you should stop reading this post and go live in Afghanistan where you can beat your wife without batting an eyelash.
Feminists pose a threat to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, because the practices and teachings of the church are inherently sexist. Elder Packer has even said that the feminist movement is destructive. The two most prominent forms of sexism are found in the priesthood and The Family: A Proclamation to the World.
The Family contributes to rape culture. For many of you Mormons this statement is offensive, and many of you probably don’t know what that is, or don’t believe it is an actual problem. Rape culture is a very complex thing, and is very hard to define, but I’m going to pull one idea from it. The concept of rape culture says that we objectify women. This is not a novel idea to most of you. Most of you know that as a culture we objectify women on a daily basis. You see it in advertising all the time. The objectification of women subtly promotes the idea that women are objects to be used at a man’s discretion. It’s dehumanizing, and wrong.
Now many of you are probably wondering how this ties into The Family. Mormons don’t usually think of women as objects of sexual gratification. However, it objectifies women in a different sort of way. Instead of being objectified sexually, they are objectified procreative-ly. The Family says:
“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.”
This sort of thinking - that men are to preside, and women are to have babies - feeds into the idea that women are only good for their bodily capabilities. Granted, there are mormon women who work and put their child in daycare or whatever, but these people are not technically following “god’s commandments” because The Family explicitly states that women should be taking care of kids. In mormon culture and doctrine, being a mother is seen as the best a woman can be. Women are continually denied the priesthood on the grounds that they have a different sort of calling and power: motherhood. Women who choose to have successful careers instead of children are pitied; members say in their minds “How sad that she will never know the joys of being a mother.”
When women are assigned a value based on their body we have rape culture. I can give a few examples of this. Someone once said to me that if my friend didn’t get skinny she would have a hard time finding a husband at a church school. This person was probably not wrong. It is probably more difficult for larger women to get married at a BYU school (and outside of mormonism as well). But this issue illustrates that men are looking for appearances, not actual merit. The fact that this isn't turned around into “fat men will have a hard time getting married at BYU” suggests that men are valued for other attributes as well: likely their ability to be bread-winners.
This can also be seen in the fact that many women go (or are even sent) to BYU just to get married. There is literally a major that teaches you how to be a good home-maker. There is a joke amongst mormons that some people go to get their M.R.S degree.
Don’t get me wrong. There is nothing wrong with wanting to raise children, and it is an admirable feat to accomplish. My dream is to one day be a house-husband (I just made up that term). I really want to adopt some kids, and cook and clean all day. But when women are taught and told that this is their only option, it becomes a problem.
Many mormons say, “Men and women are different. They compliment each other. That’s why one gets motherhood and one gets the priesthood.” Men and women are indeed different. But not so different as you might imagine. (If you want to read more about this, I wrote a post about it a while back and you can read it.) More importantly though, people are different. People compliment all sorts of people, and often times women compliment other women and men compliment other men. Furthermore, this doctrine sounds an awful lot like “Separate, but equal” which as we all know is bull shit. If women are equal to men, they should be able to serve in the same capacities as men, and men should be able to serve in the same capacities as women.
This is a nice segway into the priesthood, so I’m going to talk about that now. As all Mormons know, women cannot hold the priesthood, and so cannot hold offices in the church other than as a relief society member (which, coincidentally, is also under the direction of men). Most of the world sees this as inherently sexist, but people in the church don’t. As I said above, separate but equal is discriminatory, and can in no way be construed as a good thing.
According to Mormons, the priesthood is the power and authority to act for god here on earth. Why can women not have this power? Why can’t a woman pass the sacrament? If we are all created in God’s image, if we are all equal, if we all are fully capable of believing and testifying of christ, why can women not do so?
What I really want to talk about today is the excommunication of Kate Kelly, and will primarily take material from a radio interview with Ally Isom, the public representative for the church. She discussed Kate Kelly’s excommunication and excommunication in general.
First I will discuss what Kate Kelly and the movement Ordain Women wanted. They did not “demand” that the church ordain women. She believed, through scripture study and revelation (which the church says individual members can get) that women should be able to be ordained to the priesthood. She merely asked the first presidency to ask god if women could be ordained, which they refused to do. I want to emphasize this: The first presidency, whose job it is to receive revelation and ask god questions refused to ask god questions and receive revelation.
I secondly want to point out that nowhere, in church cannon, does it say that women can’t have the priesthood. It is merely a common practice of the church. In other words, Kate Kelly was not challenging doctrine or God’s word. When I was in Sunday school we were taught that one thing that made the church so special was that there was nobody between god and the individual. The church existed, but the church itself was not responsible for determining what revelation someone did or didn’t receive. If the church believes it is the only one that can be right on this issue then it pretty much means we can’t receive personal revelation. It’s like saying, “You can believe and say what you want, as long as it’s approved by us.”
Ally Isom brings up some semi-good points in her interview in which she says two things I’ll address. One is that excommunication is not exclusion. This is wrong simply because excommunication literally means to be cut off from some entity. When you’re excommunicated, you can’t pray publicly. You can’t take the sacrament. You can’t do most of the things regular members do. This is humiliating for many people. Most people don’t return from excommunication which says a lot about what it actually does to people. If it is so helpful, why do most people stay gone? It is punishment. It is not loving. This sort of public humiliation is reminiscent of The Scarlet Letter and has no place in modern society. Mormons call church courts “courts of love”, which is exactly what they are not.
Secondly, Ally Isom says that excommunication is a choice. Members are warned that that they will be punished and can “correct their course”. To me this sounds like an abusive relationship. If a man told a woman to be quiet or he would hit her, is he justified when he hits her for continuing to speak? It is a choice to continue talking, but that doesn’t mean that the punishment is warranted. Also, if members are making a “choice” to do so, then there is absolutely no need for a “church court” because the decision has already been made. The ecclesiastical leaders have said (In the case of Kate Kelly who could not appear in her Court), “I speak for god. I speak for you, and I know both of your hearts”. As a side note, the court was made up entirely of men, which can hardly be expected to fully represent a woman.
A number of years ago President Hinckley said the presidency didn’t ask god about ordaining women because there was no “agitation”, that the women "are happy". But now there is a clear agitation, so why can the church no consider her plea? Some say she is “asking in the wrong way” but how then are we supposed to ask? Her movement wasn’t terribly disruptive or driven by anger. She wanted to be heard, and did what she believed to be right. Indeed, Kate Kelly is showing her faith by appealing to church leaders whose purpose is to speak for God. She believes that their responsibility is to get revelation, and is supporting them in that role.
All of this doesn’t mean that the church shouldn’t have excommunicates her. They have the right to do so; they don’t want her proclaiming to be mormon while advocating for non-mormon beliefs. However, I think it is wrong for them to pretend it is some kind of loving gesture. They knew that this would be devastating for Kate Kelly. Excommunication leads to all sorts of problems, a great deal of stress, and humiliation. It is no more than a bullying tool and a means of enforcing uniformity.
I think the saddest thing is that so many women in the church are okay with the current power structure. It's disheartening to see how they are disillusioned and misled into believing that they don't need to be equal with men. I really hope that ordain women will be successful, and bring people to understand their oppression.
Obviously, I don’t think there is any point in trying to fix the broken church at this point. I left because I didn't want to stay in such a corrupt church. In my opinion, everyone should just jump ship and swim to shore. But I admire Kate Kelly for standing up for her beliefs, speaking out, and being persistent. If there were more people like her within the church it might be worth keeping around.
