Benevolent Sexism

[Moliere]

I read this article on my way into work this morning:

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/psysociety/2013/04/02/benevolent-sexism/

It's obvious that benevolent sexism is rampant in the LDS church. Everyone knows it and oftentimes MJ, who is quite orthodox, gets offended by the amount of benevolent sexism that continues to exist. I'm not talking about the blatantly misogynistic church policies, but more of the rampant belief that women are inherently this or that (insert your favorite benevolent adjective).

My opinion on this is two fold: 1) The church does way too much in the way of benevolent sexism. I hope it stops and honestly I think it's not as bad today as it was 10-20 years ago. 2) I think many of the comments used to show sexism in the article above are reaches and that the women are somewhat overly sensitive in this regard. There's no question that male/female have different roles in pretty much every species on earth. Sometimes the male is the main caregiver and sometimes it's the female. I see no reason to think that humans are any different and I therefore have no issues with broad gender roles as long as they aren't absolute and those broad gender roles lead, IMO, to a lot of what is being considered benevolent sexism.

In short, I'm a feminist but I'm also someone that believes in evolution and therefore I believe in broad gender roles.....although since I believe in evolution I hold open the pathway that leads to the eventual changing of gender roles.

[wuapinmon]

My wife is so awesome that if she were a dude, I might consider being gay.

[Eddie]

So...let me first admit that I didn't read the whole thing.

But I can't help but wonder what role women's own reactions play in all of this. Things have calmed down some, but it seems like it wasn't long ago that folks were fighting about how a woman can succeed in working world while also being a perfect Mom - who is a great cook, keeps the house and laundry clean, plans and executes birthday parties that embarrass most of us, and get their kids to all of the extracurricular they may be involved in.

So using the obituary as an example - for some reason I have the impression that many women want to be known for cooking a mean stroganoff and being a rocket scientist at the same time.

And where do you draw the line between benevolent sexism and just being courteous? Is it sexist if I open the door for a woman? I would never imply that she is incapable, but it just seems courteous. What about sharing an umbrella or jacket if it is raining or cold? Would that make me sexist?

I have a hard time with this stuff. Not because I don't recognize that women are capable.

In the end - if this means that the YW and RS sisters can start to share the duties of shoveling the snow, setting up and taking down chairs while the men take turns dropping off dinner to the new parents - I'm good with that.

[Eddie]

My wife is so awesome that if she were a dude, I might consider being gay.

And mine is so awesome that if I was a chick I would certainly be a lesbian.

[DU Ute]

And mine is so awesome that if I was a chick I would certainly be a lesbian.

Yours is a much more palatable scenario.

[Two Utes]

Interesting quote from the article:

"If a woman’s accomplishments must be accompanied by a reassurance that she really was “a good Mom,” but a man’s accomplishments are allowed to stand on their own, that’s a problem."

What accomplishments of men "stand on their own?" "he was a good Lawyer?", "he was a good Dad?" "he was a good little league coach?" "he was a good provider?"

What is the difference?

[Two Utes]

Interesting quote from the article:

"If a woman’s accomplishments must be accompanied by a reassurance that she really was “a good Mom,” but a man’s accomplishments are allowed to stand on their own, that’s a problem."

What accomplishments of men "stand on their own?" "he was a good Lawyer?", "he was a good Dad?" "he was a good little league coach?" "he was a good provider?"

What is the difference?


I guess the author tries to explain this, but extrapolating these thoughts from an obituary is weak. I can't count how many obituaries of men include paragraphs of what a great and loving dad someone was.

Benevolent sexism. Perhaps the author is simply attempting to brand herself as a "specialist" in this new area, grab fame and use it to further her career. Really, that's not a bad idea. Kudos to her.

[wuapinmon]

Yours is a much more palatable scenario.

I said "might consider."

[Slim]

And mine is so awesome that if I was a chick I would certainly be a lesbian.


Yours is a much more palatable scenario.


I have a buddy tell me all the time that he's a lesbian trapped in a man's body.

[Jarid in Cedar]

I have a buddy tell me all the time that he's a lesbian trapped in a man's body.


I had a friend who said that as well. He eventually decided he was a straight woman trapped in a man's body.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I have a buddy tell me all the time that he's a lesbian trapped in a man's body.

You should tell him to get some new material.

[wuapinmon]

Talk about a threadjack.

[tooblue]

A bunch of men on a sports message board talking about sexism. Classic!

[Mrs. Funk]

I grew up in a very traditional household. My dad works and tends to all the finances, Mom stays home and cooks and handles all the household stuff. Giving this context, it's been surprising to me how progressive my dad has become over the years and how entrenched in traditional church-prescribed gender roles my mom has become.

This became evident at a family dinner last night wherein my aunt pulled up the Ordain Women Facebook page on her phone and passed it around with great sighs and eyerolls from my mom, aunt, and uncle. My dad and I sat there very quietly, having had a long conversation just the day before about how we both support women giving blessings and anointings outside of the temple (and more, but at very least that). My uncle declared that if women want the priesthood, they should just "defect and join the FLDS [sic] church and go apostatize there." Since it's obviously impossible to want to improve things from within, right? My mom began an onslaught of criticism and disdain of those "unrighteous women" who "just can't listen to the prophet." When my mom finally cornered me, saying, "Is this just a stupid Utah thing? Because I haven't heard anything about this in Washington," I said that people from all over supported ordaining women, and that it was both men and women. At that point, all heaven and hell broke loose and we had the family argument of the decade. I'd really been trying to avoid a confrontation because it was completely pointless and now we're all just mad.

I'm not really sure why I'm sharing this with you, perhaps other than to demonstrate that not only men engage in benevolent sexism and that people can change (or not) in those attitudes. Last night was extremely discouraging. If my family is representative of general church membership, then I have even less of a place in the church than I hoped.

[tooblue]

I grew up in a very traditional household. My dad works and tends to all the finances, Mom stays home and cooks and handles all the household stuff. Giving this context, it's been surprising to me how progressive my dad has become over the years and how entrenched in traditional church-prescribed gender roles my mom has become.

This became evident at a family dinner last night wherein my aunt pulled up the Ordain Women Facebook page on her phone and passed it around with great sighs and eyerolls from my mom, aunt, and uncle. My dad and I sat there very quietly, having had a long conversation just the day before about how we both support women giving blessings and anointings outside of the temple (and more, but at very least that). My uncle declared that if women want the priesthood, they should just "defect and join the FLDS [sic] church and go apostatize there." Since it's obviously impossible to want to improve things from within, right? My mom began an onslaught of criticism and disdain of those "unrighteous women" who "just can't listen to the prophet." When my mom finally cornered me, saying, "Is this just a stupid Utah thing? Because I haven't heard anything about this in Washington," I said that people from all over supported ordaining women, and that it was both men and women. At that point, all heaven and hell broke loose and we had the family argument of the decade. I'd really been trying to avoid a confrontation because it was completely pointless and now we're all just mad.

I'm not really sure why I'm sharing this with you, perhaps other than to demonstrate that not only men engage in benevolent sexism and that people can change (or not) in those attitudes. Last night was extremely discouraging. If my family is representative of general church membership, then I have even less of a place in the church than I hoped.

I am sad you feel you don't have a place, or even less of one. But, maybe you are over-reacting. Your family is representative of your family first and foremost. Those dynamics are not the same when applied to a larger body on the whole. This past weekend we had similar discussions with my wife's family. You won't find a more devout or well-connected LDS family. However, they would be considered very progressive. Ultimately, church service is what we make it, regardless of some of the frustrations we must contend with. There is great work to be done in the church locally. I love getting lost in it. There is nothing else that quite compares with it. But, in order to embrace it, we also have to suffer it.

[Moliere]

I grew up in a very traditional household. My dad works and tends to all the finances, Mom stays home and cooks and handles all the household stuff. Giving this context, it's been surprising to me how progressive my dad has become over the years and how entrenched in traditional church-prescribed gender roles my mom has become.

This became evident at a family dinner last night wherein my aunt pulled up the Ordain Women Facebook page on her phone and passed it around with great sighs and eyerolls from my mom, aunt, and uncle. My dad and I sat there very quietly, having had a long conversation just the day before about how we both support women giving blessings and anointings outside of the temple (and more, but at very least that). My uncle declared that if women want the priesthood, they should just "defect and join the FLDS [sic] church and go apostatize there." Since it's obviously impossible to want to improve things from within, right? My mom began an onslaught of criticism and disdain of those "unrighteous women" who "just can't listen to the prophet." When my mom finally cornered me, saying, "Is this just a stupid Utah thing? Because I haven't heard anything about this in Washington," I said that people from all over supported ordaining women, and that it was both men and women. At that point, all heaven and hell broke loose and we had the family argument of the decade. I'd really been trying to avoid a confrontation because it was completely pointless and now we're all just mad.

I'm not really sure why I'm sharing this with you, perhaps other than to demonstrate that not only men engage in benevolent sexism and that people can change (or not) in those attitudes. Last night was extremely discouraging. If my family is representative of general church membership, then I have even less of a place in the church than I hoped.

Good post but it more highlights just outright sexism, which is institutional within the church. I do like your thought that women are just as bad at benevolent sexism as are men.

In all honestly, one of my biggest issues is with the way success is defined in the US. I'd actually go so far as to say that the church defines success much better than "the world". The world ties success to a person's income or social status, when, at the end of the day most of the work performed by working moms and dads is simply pushing paper around. Our jobs can be done by anyone. We are all replaceable.

Ultimately success should be defined by a person's happiness. I hope someday my obituary simply states "Moliere was a great husband, father and grandfather. He lived his life in happiness and spent every waking hour trying to make people smile."

[tooblue]

Good post but it more highlights just outright sexism, which is institutional within the church. I do like your thought that women are just as bad at benevolent sexism as are men.

In all honestly, one of my biggest issues is with the way success is defined in the US. I'd actually go so far as to say that the church defines success much better than "the world". The world ties success to a person's income or social status, when, at the end of the day most of the work performed by working moms and dads is simply pushing paper around. Our jobs can be done by anyone. We are all replaceable.

Ultimately success should be defined by a person's happiness. I hope someday my obituary simply states "Moliere was a great husband, father and grandfather. He lived his life in happiness and spent every waking hour trying to make people smile."

I agree. And that would be a nice obituary.

[Mrs. Funk]

I am sad you feel you don't have a place, or even less of one. But, maybe you are over-reacting. Your family is representative of your family first and foremost. Those dynamics are not the same when applied to a larger body on the whole. This past weekend we had similar discussions with my wife's family. You won't find a more devout or well-connected LDS family. However, they would be considered very progressive. Ultimately, church service is what we make it, regardless of some of the frustrations we must contend with. There is great work to be done in the church locally. I love getting lost in it. There is nothing else that quite compares with it. But, in order to embrace it, we also have to suffer it.

I tried to caveat my "over-reaching" with my "If they are representative . . ." blahblahblah. I realize they may not be. It so happens that my self-selected online communities and IRL friends happen to be much more along the progressive spectrum than my family, so interactions with them tend to be somewhat shocking. The whole Pants Day nastiness seemed to come almost exclusively from the ultra-orthodox. Eh.

[tooblue]

I tried to caveat my "over-reaching" with my "If they are representative . . ." blahblahblah. I realize they may not be. It so happens that my self-selected online communities and IRL friends happen to be much more along the progressive spectrum than my family, so interactions with them tend to be somewhat shocking. The whole Pants Day nastiness seemed to come almost exclusively from the ultra-orthodox. Eh.

To be sure, there is a segment of ultra orthodox. It's an important part of LDS culture for a variety of good and bad reasons. That culture will be replaced. I think the biggest issue is helping all people, myself included, come to the conclusion that it's better to worry less about what other people are doing and more about ourselves and what we are accountable for.

[Ma'ake]

Sometimes looking at things through the eyes of a different culture is revealing.

I have a good friend who is Navajo, who was in the Indian Placement Program, has done well educationally, is now a single parent looking for that right guy, in SLC.

Her mother and step-dad are still down on the Rez, are very much Navajo traditionalists. The Navajo culture is historically matriarchal, in fact gay men hold a special status, seen as above men, but below women. The word they use for gay is "becoming".

Anyway, my friend asked her mom one day if she ever wanted her step dad to marry her, since they've lived together for 25+ years. You know, back up the love by making that sacrifice, putting it in writing.

"Why would I want to do that? If we got married and he screwed up, it would be much harder to kick him out of the house".

Striking.

[mUUser]

Google is having none of it....


https://www.ksl.com/?sid=45320967&nid=157&title=google-ceo-slams-memo-on-gender-as-employee-reportedly-fired

[LA Ute]

Google is having none of it....


https://www.ksl.com/?sid=45320967&nid=157&title=google-ceo-slams-memo-on-gender-as-employee-reportedly-fired

Stupid ideas, even more stupid to publish them. I'm not sure his career should be ruined for it but that's life.

[LA Ute]

I am not a fan of what the guy did, but this is an interesting take from a female software engineer who works in Silicon Valley.

Google Can’t Seem to Tolerate Diversity

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-08-08/google-can-t-seem-to-tolerate-diversity

[Two Utes]

I am not a fan of what the guy did, but this is an interesting take from a female software engineer who works in Silicon Valley.

Google Can’t Seem to Tolerate Diversity

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-08-08/google-can-t-seem-to-tolerate-diversity

Great game of thrones reference in the comments:

When you tear out a man's tongue you are not proving that he is a liar, you are only proving that you fear what he says. - Tyrion Lannister.

edit : first set of comments to an article I've ever enjoyed:

"It reminds me of a line from a Saturday Night Live skit about the bubble: Here in the bubble, we don't recognize color, but we celebrate it."

[Two Utes]

Great game of thrones reference in the comments:

When you tear out a man's tongue you are not proving that he is a liar, you are only proving that you fear what he says. - Tyrion Lannister.

edit : first set of comments to an article I've ever enjoyed:

"It reminds me of a line from a Saturday Night Live skit about the bubble: Here in the bubble, we don't recognize color, but we celebrate it."


Here is the actual email from the guy. Whether you agree or not, it is very well written with a LOT of thought put into it. And the dude is a Harvard grad

https://diversitymemo.com/

Unbelievably, I had to get it through the BBC reporting the story, not from US outlets. This county is fucking train wreck right now.

[Solon]

Here is the actual email from the guy. Whether you agree or not, it is very well written with a LOT of thought put into it. And the dude is a Harvard grad

https://diversitymemo.com/

Unbelievably, I had to get it through the BBC reporting the story, not from US outlets. This county is fucking train wreck right now.

The #fakenews NYT had a link to the entire memo in its reporting:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/08/technology/google-engineer-fired-gender-memo.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

Here's the original memo: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.pdf

I read through it last night. Dude did put a lot of though into it, but it does read like an above-average undergraduate research paper with lots of sweeping generalizations, over-simplification, and a lack of engagement with relevant social-studies/psychological/etc. research. To be fair, though, it was an internal memo - probably not a finished product.

On the other hand, I'm not sure if he should have been fired. People like Assange are framing this as free speech / censorship, which it is not, and google was justified in firing him out of fear of a "hostile work-environment" allegation (as the NYT speculated).

I'm just not sure it's in google's interest to fire the guy instead of saying, "while we disagree with some of the ideas in this memo, we are working with this person to understand his point-of-view and to foster an environment of collaborative mutual respect in our workplace blah blah blah".

Firing the guy out-of-hand sends the message that people who disagree need to keep quiet.

[Mormon Red Death]

The new York Times... all the news that's fit to make up

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

[tooblue]

The #fakenews NYT had a link to the entire memo in its reporting:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/08/technology/google-engineer-fired-gender-memo.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

Here's the original memo: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.pdf

I read through it last night. Dude did put a lot of though into it, but it does read like an above-average undergraduate research paper with lots of sweeping generalizations, over-simplification, and a lack of engagement with relevant social-studies/psychological/etc. research. To be fair, though, it was an internal memo - probably not a finished product.

On the other hand, I'm not sure if he should have been fired. People like Assange are framing this as free speech / censorship, which it is not, and google was justified in firing him out of fear of a "hostile work-environment" allegation (as the NYT speculated).

I'm just not sure it's in google's interest to fire the guy instead of saying, "while we disagree with some of the ideas in this memo, we are working with this person to understand his point-of-view and to foster an environment of collaborative mutual respect in our workplace blah blah blah".

Firing the guy out-of-hand sends the message that people who disagree need to keep quiet.

GOOGLE MANIFESTO AUTHOR JUST MIGHT HAVE A LEGAL CASE:

https://www.wired.com/story/google-manifesto-author-just-might-have-a-legal-case/


California is an "at-will" state, meaning Google can dismiss an employee for almost any reason. However, Damore says that before he was fired, he filed a complaint, formally known as a charge, with the National Labor Relations Board, which administers some aspects of federal labor law. Under the National Labor Relations Act, it's against federal law to fire someone in retaliation for filing a complaint to the board, lawyers say.

[LA Ute]

GOOGLE MANIFESTO AUTHOR JUST MIGHT HAVE A LEGAL CASE:

https://www.wired.com/story/google-manifesto-author-just-might-have-a-legal-case/

They'll pay him off.

[Rocker Ute]

While America is being outraged by this memo, in reading an article about Taylor Swift's countersuit of a man she claims groped him, this little tidbit was interjected into the article:

"Swift wore a black-and-white checked dress with a collar and black tights and carried a beige handbag. She wore bright red lipstick and had her light brown hair pulled back in a bun with full bangs."

No mention of what any of the men involved with this were wearing or had done with their hair.

Is it just me or was that a weird thing to include in the article?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/08/us/taylor-swift-trial/index.html


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

While America is being outraged by this memo, in reading an article about Taylor Swift's countersuit of a man she claims groped him, this little tidbit was interjected into the article:

"Swift wore a black-and-white checked dress with a collar and black tights and carried a beige handbag. She wore bright red lipstick and had her light brown hair pulled back in a bun with full bangs."

No mention of what any of the men involved with this were wearing or had done with their hair.

Is it just me or was that a weird thing to include in the article?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/08/us/taylor-swift-trial/index.html


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's not just you. It is weird.

[LA Ute]

A surprisingly strongly worded column from David Brooks:

Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/08/11/opinion/sundar-pichai-google-memo-diversity.html?referer=https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/


The mob that hounded Damore was like the mobs we’ve seen on a lot of college campuses. We all have our theories about why these moral crazes are suddenly so common. I’d say that radical uncertainty about morality, meaning and life in general is producing intense anxiety. Some people embrace moral absolutism in a desperate effort to find solid ground. They feel a rare and comforting sense of moral certainty when they are purging an evil person who has violated one of their sacred taboos.

Which brings us to Pichai, the supposed grown-up in the room. He could have wrestled with the tension between population-level research and individual experience. He could have stood up for the free flow of information. Instead he joined the mob. He fired Damore and wrote, “To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not O.K.”

That is a blatantly dishonest characterization of the memo. Damore wrote nothing like that about his Google colleagues. Either Pichai is unprepared to understand the research (unlikely), is not capable of handling complex data flows (a bad trait in a C.E.O.) or was simply too afraid to stand up to a mob.

Regardless which weakness applies, this episode suggests he should seek a nonleadership position. We are at a moment when mobs on the left and the right ignore evidence and destroy scapegoats. That’s when we need good leaders most.

[Two Utes]

A surprisingly strongly worded column from David Brooks:

Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/08/11/opinion/sundar-pichai-google-memo-diversity.html?referer=https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/



Good stuff. Don't know the background of the author.


Law firms have some of the same issues as the tech business when it comes to gender issues. For years now, I've been of the opinion that women leave the private practice of law for a number of reasons, but a significant reason is they don't wrap themselves up in the "status" of the job, have more balance in their life and decide fuck this, I'm not going to deal with this shit for the rest of my life. Men do that too. It seems more women do it.

I'm saying some of the same things Damore is saying. It's frightening to me that my opinions about this topic (which actually IMO have a lot of merit) would subject me to being fired.

The author's right. The mobs on both sides are getting out of hand. The US is becoming a place that I no longer understand.

[LA Ute]

Where political correctness can lead.


https://youtu.be/gHZJsMfukQY

[Ma'ake]

My wife follows the "Sistas in Zion", a couple of fun - and devout - African American Mormon women. She forwarded this post from this morning, on FB, after yesterday's Charlottesville "uprising":

"It's Sunday morning and I've been up all night. I'm having a dilemma. A struggle! For the first time in my life I fear taking my child to a LDS church. My church! Her church! The only church she's ever belonged to tho not my ward. It is/would be my daughters ward while she's at school. Nonetheless it's an LDS church. It's our church! I've always taught my children that the LDS church is their home base and It's a safe place for them. However yesterday as I watched what was ha...ppening in Charlottesville VA it hit me that one of my RS sisters played a role in the planning of and helped promote such a hateful event. The realization that some of the men who attended the most recent Mormon "alt-right/alt-white" conference whose faces were covered by Pepe the Frog stickers could possibly be in leadership positions (bishops/stake president's throughout the church) has left me feeling a different type of fear as a parent. The fear of placing my child in physical and spiritual danger is now a reality. I can not suffer my child "Mormonism" over Christianity. I can not suffer my child (children) religion over personal relationship with God. I've always taught my children we are Christians that read & believe in the Book of Mormon. However today the fear and reality of the racism that still exist in Mormon wards has me contemplating my options. Do I take my daughter into a space where she is one or very few in numbers (color, her race/color is the first thing people will hear, not with their ears but their eyes.) and hope the deafening silence coming from Salt Lake and even her own home ward regarding the alt-white movement is limited to SLC/Provo/ or Utah communities? Or do I take her to the local black church and show her where to go for self-care when her church family can't speak to her pain and (or) refuse to stand with her against racism? The thought of me placing my daughter in spiritual danger amongst people I've always taught her were safe is paralyzing and for the first time in my life I fear my church community outside of my church (ward) and familiar church family. Because where I come from if you see something (wrong) you say something (right) or do something to correct the wrong. It's said that silence is agreement, and from where I'm sitting, the silence from the podium/pulpit is frightening and I can only hope it doesn't mean silent agreement. https://static.xx.fbcdn.net/images/emoji.php/v9/f68/1/16/1f495.png��Tamu

PS: I find myself asking the same question that Mama Jane (Jane Elizabeth Manning James) asked: "Is there no blessings for me?" I know I'm not alone in my search for peace & blessings. Please pray for me/us as we'll pray for you & yours."




I have no idea how solid her worry is that LDS men were part of the Alt-Right demonstration - maybe she's having a bad morning, maybe some of her research into the past ("Mama Jane") is on her mind, sounds like maybe her daughter goes to UVa... but I'm glad she's speaking up and prompting the many reactions from current LDS folks on FB, which are uniformly supportive.

Way back in the past century, I used to wonder "What would it be like to be in their shoes? What exactly did they *DO* to not deserve the priesthood or temple blessings?" We had exactly zero black members in Bountiful where I grew up, so there was no outpouring of support, etc. Today the greater diversity in the church prompts better, more inclusive thinking (it seems to me).

[LA Ute]

An updated response:

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/church-statement-charlottesville-virginia?__prclt=tNTTIVsb

That's impressively direct and specific.

[tooblue]

The documentary is fascinating:


https://vimeo.com/19707588

Here's an article talking about it:

http://nationalpost.com/opinion/barbara-kay-4/wcm/2e410abb-7754-4e4d-89cb-a16d271223db


But in Norway, something happened in 2011 that removed the mental blinkers. It may have contributed to the Nordic Council of Ministers’ (a regional inter-governmental co-operation consisting of Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, and Iceland) decision to defund the NIKK Nordic Gender Institute, the allegedly scientific greenhouse where social and educational gender policies were seeded and nurtured, making the Nordic countries the most “gender sensitive” societies in the world ... The “something” that shook their world? A 2011 television documentary broadcast by Norwegian State Television. Made by popular satirical comedian Harald Elia (who also holds a degree in social sciences), “Hjernevask—Norwegian for “Brainwashing” exposed the unscientific character of the NIKK and its research.

[Rocker Ute]

The documentary is fascinating:


https://vimeo.com/19707588

Here's an article talking about it:

http://nationalpost.com/opinion/barbara-kay-4/wcm/2e410abb-7754-4e4d-89cb-a16d271223db

So a very close friend of mine and I like to debate. It is particularly fun because we know each other well, can push buttons of each other and play the devil advocate while not starting WWIII.

She has long been a proponent that boys and girls are a product of nurture. She has had three boys and has presented them with various opportunities across the traditional gender spectrum including for them trucks and dolls, etc. Her boys have gravitated towards traditional gender activities which I like to tease her about. To her credit they are very well rounded and have been exposed to a great deal of cultural things.

A common friend of ours recently came out as trans and she desperately wanted to know my thoughts. Her husband and her had a very heated debate on this with lots of hurt feelings. I told her the bottom line for me is my understanding of gender dysphoria was limited but that the science was still out on that particular subject and so it was hard to have a conclusion other than I feel strongly that the great commandments to love thy neighbor was what I had to do. She religiously is agnostic, but grew up LDS.

So this we discussed some more and I teasingly said, "Well you know what I think when it comes to children: Boys should play with trucks, girls should play with dolls. Boys should like to hunt, girls should like to do pretty things. Boys wear pants and girls wear dresses and have long hair and wear makeup. Boys like blue and red and girls like pink." This of course made her upset (or as upset when we are jokingly debating).

So then I teased again, "Okay, so I am admittedly ignorant on the subject, but why when a person feels they are another gender it is manifested in those 'antiquated' gender norms I just said. Does femininity really have to do with hair and makeup and wearing dresses? Conversely why short hair for men etc. Just a couple of centuries ago pink was a masculine color."

This was intended to make her mad and it did. She didn't like that line of questions but also didn't have answers.

I don't understand gender issues well I know and admit that. However it seems that gender dysphoria is manifest in social constructs rather than what is actual gender? I dunno.

I'm sure many of you better educated on the subject can enlighten me. I haven't found anything yet on the internet that addresses that but hope to learn more.

In the meantime I'll continue to tease my friend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[UTEopia]

My daughter lives in Newbury Park, Ca, a suburb of Thousand Oaks. She is a young mother of 3 and recently attended a training for some type of exercise class. She has a friend in another Stake in Southern California who is certified and holds free classes several times a week at the local LDS Ward building. My daughter submitted a request to use the cultural hall in her building several mornings a week to conduct a class. She was contacted by a High Council member who indicated that they were discussing her request, but that the Stake President had a number of reservations about it. She has been waiting 7 weeks to hear back. This seems like blatant sexism to me. If her request is denied, where does she take her complaint.

This same Stake President is pretty new and has required that all the crusts be cut from sacrament bread so that it is pure.

[Dwight Schr-Ute]

This same Stake President is pretty new and has required that all the crusts be cut from sacrament bread so that it is pure.

I apologize for completely ignoring the meat of your post, but whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

[Sullyute]

This same Stake President is pretty new and has required that all the crusts be cut from sacrament bread so that it is pure.

Bwahahahaha. That is awesome! The dude sounds like a real peach.

[Rocker Ute]

My daughter lives in Newbury Park, Ca, a suburb of Thousand Oaks. She is a young mother of 3 and recently attended a training for some type of exercise class. She has a friend in another Stake in Southern California who is certified and holds free classes several times a week at the local LDS Ward building. My daughter submitted a request to use the cultural hall in her building several mornings a week to conduct a class. She was contacted by a High Council member who indicated that they were discussing her request, but that the Stake President had a number of reservations about it. She has been waiting 7 weeks to hear back. This seems like blatant sexism to me. If her request is denied, where does she take her complaint.

This same Stake President is pretty new and has required that all the crusts be cut from sacrament bread so that it is pure.

Next week: All water should be poured into the cups through a Brita filter.

To answer your real concern, there is a good chance that if he is a new stake president he is probably reeling a bit with the work load and this (relatively) minor request may have fallen through the cracks. (But then again, he apparently has time to worry about bread crusts, so...) I'd bug the HC or the Stake President directly about it if I were her.

Now... what may be giving them pause is that holding free classes could POTENTIALLY be in a gray area when it comes to approved uses of church facilities. Not saying this is the case with your daughter or whatever... But they aren't supposed to be used for promotional purposes, etc. HB 2 21.2.2 says among things prohibited: "Buying, selling, or promoting products, services, publications, or creative works or demonstrating wares."

So if it was one of those things like, "Hey, this class is free, but if you want more, come to my class at XYZ gym on MWF..." sort of a thing.

So that would be my question, or why something might need to be reviewed, "Is this a class for fun, or is this a class someone is using to promote their other busienss?" Now if it is like in my ward, where women just get together regularly and work out - that shouldn't be a problem.

[UTEopia]

Next week: All water should be poured into the cups through a Brita filter.

To answer your real concern, there is a good chance that if he is a new stake president he is probably reeling a bit with the work load and this (relatively) minor request may have fallen through the cracks. (But then again, he apparently has time to worry about bread crusts, so...) I'd bug the HC or the Stake President directly about it if I were her.

Now... what may be giving them pause is that holding free classes could POTENTIALLY be in a gray area when it comes to approved uses of church facilities. Not saying this is the case with your daughter or whatever... But they aren't supposed to be used for promotional purposes, etc. HB 2 21.2.2 says among things prohibited: "Buying, selling, or promoting products, services, publications, or creative works or demonstrating wares."

So if it was one of those things like, "Hey, this class is free, but if you want more, come to my class at XYZ gym on MWF..." sort of a thing.

So that would be my question, or why something might need to be reviewed, "Is this a class for fun, or is this a class someone is using to promote their other busienss?" Now if it is like in my ward, where women just get together regularly and work out - that shouldn't be a problem.

She isn't promoting anything. They have come up with all sorts of stuff. Concerned about the music used - she screens it. Worried about liability issues - what about late night pickup basketball games. Worried about improper attire.

[Rocker Ute]

She isn't promoting anything. They have come up with all sorts of stuff. Concerned about the music used - she screens it. Worried about liability issues - what about late night pickup basketball games. Worried about improper attire.

Oh, good grief.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[UtahsMrSports]

I read this and I am reminded of the story ive shared here several times where i was the stake officials coordinator and a man told me after a game that I was the "biggest @#$%^& joke" he had ever met, because I didn't allow him to fight a man in his 70's. If Church ball is sanctioned and supported, I can't fathom not allowing a group of women to get together to exercise.

[LA Ute]

She isn't promoting anything. They have come up with all sorts of stuff. Concerned about the music used - she screens it. Worried about liability issues - what about late night pickup basketball games. Worried about improper attire.

Our ward has a morning exercise class two or three days a week, mid morning. I think this is been going on in every ward I’ve ever been a member of in my adult life.

[SeattleUte]

So a very close friend of mine and I like to debate. It is particularly fun because we know each other well, can push buttons of each other and play the devil advocate while not starting WWIII.

She has long been a proponent that boys and girls are a product of nurture. She has had three boys and has presented them with various opportunities across the traditional gender spectrum including for them trucks and dolls, etc. Her boys have gravitated towards traditional gender activities which I like to tease her about. To her credit they are very well rounded and have been exposed to a great deal of cultural things.

A common friend of ours recently came out as trans and she desperately wanted to know my thoughts. Her husband and her had a very heated debate on this with lots of hurt feelings. I told her the bottom line for me is my understanding of gender dysphoria was limited but that the science was still out on that particular subject and so it was hard to have a conclusion other than I feel strongly that the great commandments to love thy neighbor was what I had to do. She religiously is agnostic, but grew up LDS.

So this we discussed some more and I teasingly said, "Well you know what I think when it comes to children: Boys should play with trucks, girls should play with dolls. Boys should like to hunt, girls should like to do pretty things. Boys wear pants and girls wear dresses and have long hair and wear makeup. Boys like blue and red and girls like pink." This of course made her upset (or as upset when we are jokingly debating).

So then I teased again, "Okay, so I am admittedly ignorant on the subject, but why when a person feels they are another gender it is manifested in those 'antiquated' gender norms I just said. Does femininity really have to do with hair and makeup and wearing dresses? Conversely why short hair for men etc. Just a couple of centuries ago pink was a masculine color."

This was intended to make her mad and it did. She didn't like that line of questions but also didn't have answers.

I don't understand gender issues well I know and admit that. However it seems that gender dysphoria is manifest in social constructs rather than what is actual gender? I dunno.

I'm sure many of you better educated on the subject can enlighten me. I haven't found anything yet on the internet that addresses that but hope to learn more.

In the meantime I'll continue to tease my friend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This doesn’t make sense. Your point can only be that gender is social construct. So I guess your friend won.

[Rocker Ute]

This doesn’t make sense. Your point can only be that gender is social construct. So I guess your friend won.

Are you really dredging up posts from a year and a half ago?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[UTEopia]

Our ward has a morning exercise class two or three days a week, mid morning. I think this is been going on in every ward I’ve ever been a member of in my adult life.

I agree - what is her recourse if her Stake President says no. The Stake RS President is even on board with the class as a Stake RS activity and the guy still won't make a decision.

[LA Ute]

I agree - what is her recourse if her Stake President says no. The Stake RS President is even on board with the class as a Stake RS activity and the guy still won't make a decision.

I’m not sure there is much recourse, if any at all. She might have to simply grin and bear it, or maybe wait a while and approach him again, or keep bugging him until he agrees. All of those would be appropriate responses, I believe. The SP might simply need more education about what is proposed.

We once had a stake president in Los Angeles who because of certain personality quirks, was a trial for many. He was a dedicated, hard-working man and did his best. I’ve known him almost my whole life, and you know his family too. In the years that have passed, I decided that he simply represented a hard time we all had to get through. Everyone seemed to get past it, even those who were quite bent out of shape at him during his time as the stake president. I hope so, anyway.

I’m not offering this information to be helpful, just making an observation. Based on what you’ve told us, I do not understand what is motivating this type of behavior — there are so many other things for priesthood leaders to worry about....

[SeattleUte]

Are you really dredging up posts from a year and a half ago?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I hope that in that time you’ve become more rational and progressive about gender.