RE Feminism: Sister Oscarson, Kate Kelly, and Small, Tired Me.

I’m sad about this Kate Kelly thing.

It is hard to be a moderate feminist in the church. Some people tell me I shouldn’t label myself. A long time ago I wrote a post about why I call myself a feminist.

I feel like moderate feminists are in a tough spot right now, because of Kate Kelly and Ordain Women and other movements that basically sideline more moderate views. I feel like I have been called a lot of things lately by these more extreme feminist elements in the church—oppressed, ignorant. Uneducated. Unaware of church history, etc. All those things are inaccurate. Up until a couple of years ago, I participated occasionally in a large, well-known forum where women from the church gathered to discuss women's issues. I liked about 30% of what I read there, struggled with 30% and got sick of the drama that was the other 40%. I left that group when someone told me how wrong it was that I had so many children and that I must not know how to use birth control. (I don’t think anybody who says that truly realizes what they’re saying. Which of my children are you saying I should wish I don’t have?)

And so it is hard to find opportunities to discuss these things that are so important to me (how to help women worldwide, help for the spouses of pornography addicts (often women), help for women who are abuse victims, help for women who struggle with eating disorders, how to prevent these sorts of things from happening to the rising generation of young women, who I love with all my heart) among the general population of the church, without being sidelined and labeled as an extremist myself.

I think it’s hard to be a moderate anything these days.

I feel badly for Kate Kelly.I feel badly for all the women who are struggling because of this, feeling small, like they can’t speak up and be heard. That frustrates me. You CAN speak up and be heard. You CAN have opinions. As Kate Kelly’s bishop said (in the private letter provided so willingly to the media) the problem is not how you feel, what you wonder about, what you wish could happen, or your own answers to prayers and personal revelation you feel you’ve had. The problem is when you start telling people that your opinions are the right ones. When you start ridiculing others for disagreeing with you. When you start to accuse people because they aren’t giving you exactly what you want, right now, and you start talking to others about why this is a bad thing and stirring up peoples' doubts, fears, and pain to gain followers for a cause you've adopted in opposition to those who are actually in charge of figuring these things out church-wide. Personal revelation: that's yours. Revelation for the church? It'd be chaos if everybody decided suddenly they could receive revelation for the church.

In the wake of all this, I feel like things have gotten disingenuous. Sorry. I know that I’m judging. But I feel like some of the actions—providing everything to the press, not going to your own disciplinary counsel and instead submitting hundreds of letters from “followers” and a legal brief detailing exactly why church discipline doesn’t stand up to some sort of contract concocted by someone who’s read some version of the church handbook and extrapolated to create “rules” nobody has agreed to—show that a person isn’t much interested in remaining. It shows that you're finding plenty of support and fellowship from followers, and that is what is important to you. I might be wildly wrong, but that is what I feel burdened by, reading all this stuff.

I guess I’m mostly frustrated with a phenomenon, not a particular person. In short: NO I don’t want the priesthood. And I am fine with how the church is structured, I believe it is inspired, and I do my level best to manage my own heartbreak and pain over very real events that have damaged my trust in priesthood holders. And that does not make me ignorant, oppressed, or uninformed. I have had too many experiences with priesthood that are significant and real to not have a testimony of it. I have had answers to prayers that are unequivocal. That is where I’m at.

I’m OK with where you’re at, wherever that is—extreme on either side, moderate, or even ambivalent or not needing an answer. And what I wish: that we could all be ok with where we’re all at, and not judge each other. From any side. When I choose friends, I don’t look for a set of beliefs that match mine. I look for genuine people who are compassionate. I do enjoy certain traits: people who work hard, people who don’t complain, people who are open-minded. But those aren’t requirements for my friendship. I enjoy people, period.

I feel like this whole thing with Kate Kelly had been very hard and painful to watch. And I hope the aftereffects don’t make life harder for people who question. Because we need questioners in our church. Questions are how you get a testimony. If you have nothing to bring to God, you can’t get any answers in return.
I also hope the aftereffects don’t make life harder for people who willingly obey. Because it is no less hard for us—those journeys of testimony. We’ve had struggles, too. We’ve had our moments of wanting to give up. We’re not ignorant or uniformed, and we’re not close-minded.

This video by Sister Oscarson, our General Young Women president,exemplifies to me how we should act toward each other, no matter what our beliefs and circumstances are, no matter what sort of testimony we have. No matter what our standing is with the church (or outside the church. This isn’t just about church members, it’s about EVERYONE.)

Repairing & Building My Faith in Men

I told you all I'm going to be posting some vulnerable stuff! Hooray, for more vulnerable stuff! Today's post centers around some crud I'm dealing with as regards my perception of male people in my life.

Thing is, I really really struggle to trust men. Especially men who are more typical men. The more manlike a man is on the manly spectrum (earning points in the direction of manliness if they're obsessed with sports, for instance, or dismissive of touchy-feely discussion, or extremely driven to some specific manlike activity such as fishing or hunting or outdoor cooking, or very logical rather than intuitive, or collecting cars or boats, or displaying the sort of leadership or "protective" qualities men are supposed to have) the less I trust them.

(I know, in listing these traits, that many women exhibit them as well. Right now I'm talking about stereotypes.)

All the men I trust are kind of... not typically male, in the sense of what society thinks are man-like traits. Jeff is not. He's not interested in sports. He loves fishing but not to the point where he loves it above all else. He really enjoys being a teacher, not a leader. A mentor. He loves talking. *loooves* talking. I might be more manly that way than he is... I can't talk for as long as he can about dreams, feelings, experiences. He's also a fantastic dancer, a musician...

these are not the traits that society designates as manly, necessarily.

And my own Dad. He's manly in the sense that he's Logical. Very answer-focused, when it comes to problem solving. Very A+B=C. Logical. BUt he's not into sports. He's kinda geeky... into books, reading, music, computer games. He loves to hike, that's pretty manly. He might be more typically male than my husband.

There's my Ida-Dad. He's manly in the sense that he's protective, he is authoritative, he's kind of a guider. He's also pretty strong & enjoys being able to work hard. But He doesn't like sports, or hunting, and he loves talking. And he loves music. And he doesn't take himself too seriously... maybe I'm wrong to think that's not a typical male quality. Maybe it's manly to not take oneself too seriously.

when I think of the men around me that are more "typical" (acc to the definition I'm using) I feel pretty threatened. Even if they're good people, if they have some of theses traits (really into sports and talk about them all the time, speak authoritatively in front of a group & have that sort of attitude of protectiveness toward stuff, not really into emotion-driven conversation, not really into books or music...) I feel like I pretty much don't want to be around them. I feel rejected by them before they've really rejected me.

The thing is, these traits are traits. Period. They don't make people good or bad, or even necessarily more manly or feminine. THey exist in people. By golly, some women are really, really authoritative (see Sheri Dew) and protective (see ME!)

But when those traits exist in a man, I feel pretty threatened by/suspicious of that man.

Why?

Dunno.


And it's lead to some thoughts about how I feel about myself, my body, especially during this pregnancy, and my interactions with various men in my life. I think the reason my body during pregnancy makes me feel so very vulnerable and self conscious has to do with the fact that I can no longer hide that I'm female. When I was a young woman, I had subtle curves. I could wear stuff that made it so nobody really got a good look at me if I didn't want them to. They likely knew I had breasts, but couldn't really see them. They weren't prominent. My hips had a bit of curve, but not an outstanding, undeniably feminine curve like they have now. I walk into a room right now and sometimes I feel extremely conscious of the fact I am a woman and it's pretty obvious.


I think I feel really self conscious about it because I've been used before, and so I walk into a room, feeling overtly and vulnerably feminine, and all these men are sitting around and I don't know what they're thinking. What if they're looking at my body and purposefully allowing it to induce sexual thoughts? I can't do anything about that. What if they're being overpowered by my feminine body & can't *help* but think sexual thoughts? I hate that. That turns me into an assault weapon.

Oh gosh. I'm kinda messed up.

I guess that's what happens when you go through what i have, sometimes, though.


I don't think it's just being married to a porn addict that helped me develop these kind of insecure feelings, though. I think it comes from my mother, too. I'm not at all sure she's comfortable with her own feminine body. I think she's pretty embarrassed by her body. I need to not pass that down any further.


Lately I've been working on feeling like i'm beautiful and endearing, as a woman who can't be anything but woman, the way I'm shaped. Maybe JEff loves me because I have breasts, because I am growing and turning into a different, wider-hipped, more curvy shape. Maybe that shape is beautiful and endearing to him. Maybe he feels tender about me. Maybe he feels protective and full of joy because of my body being undeniably feminine.

I just feel threatened, because I trust him, but I don't trust other men. I want to be that just for him. I'd like to be a secret woman, with secret breasts and secret hips. Not a woman with obvious ones for everyone in a room to see. i'd like to be able to "choose" who looks at me like that. But I can't.


I was having this kind of discussion with my IDa-Dad recently (not nearly so articulate or in depth... I can't speak as well as I can write) and he was attempting to bring across to me the message that men don't necessarily "turn on" as soon as they look at a woman. That's not how it works.

And I said, "But don't men think about sex every seven seconds?"

And his response made me laugh so hard. I had to post it. I hope he doesn't mind. He said "That's a great statistic. Lots of people have used it. But I have to think that anyone who is thinking about sex every seven seconds can't really be a productive citizen."


Ok. Take a moment and laugh.

Now think about it.

In what ways is our world distorting and destroying our faith in each other, in men, in women, in this way? Since when have we been all about sex?

Why do we paint men as hormone-driven, barely-controlled sex machines? If I walk into a room, looking obviously feminine, and some people happen to enjoy looking at me maybe, is the thought on every man's mind "sex," or is it "she's beautiful. I like looking at her." Sort of the same way a sunset is beautiful. Or a particularly graceful quaky aspen is beautiful.

I mean, you can "go there," but how many men actually "go there?" Can I trust that men aren't using me as pornography simply because i'm female?

Oh, gosh. I really hope so.

Responses welcome. Remember that this is me being vulnerable & real and I don't mean to shock at all, just trying to figure stuff out, and this is the easiest way for me to sort these thoughts, so. Thank you in advance.

Advertising the Local Resources

So, as many of you may or may not be aware, there is a set of mountains in America which are called the Tetons.

Less of you are likely aware that this name, the tetons, has some vague reference to female anatomy.

Still fewer of you know, I am sure, that Teton is a french word that refers directly to breasts, and not in a classy way. In fact, when I typed the word, "teton" into google translator, the mildest of terms that came up was "hooters."

So apparently we have unwittingly allowed one of the most beautiful landmarks in america to be labeled the "big hooter" range. In fact, it's not that hard to imagine why the French explorers named them thus. (top picture).

Which, actually, I'm somewhat OK with. I mean, as you know I'm not really all that hung up about that sort of thing. Breasts are functional anatomical organs that serve several purposes. We had a discussion about this not long ago. I'm a little bit more iffy about referring to them as "hooters" or "jugs"other somewhat crass-ish terms, but there ya are. That's the French for ya.

What I don't understand is how my new corner of the world, which could arguably be labeled "the happier valley;" whose slogan could possibly read: "If you think BYU's the bubble, why don't you come and try BYU-Idaho on for size; we don't even let you wear SHORTS"--

came to be plastered with Hooters.

Some of the signs Skywalker and I have driven by recently:

Teton Oncology

Teton Glass and Distribution

Teton Lakes Golf Course

Teton lanes and bowling (ouch)

Grand Teton Counsel--Boy Scouts of America

Teton River Village

The Teton Grill (restaurant in BYU-Idaho Cafeteria) (I'd like a chicken teton sandwich, please)

Teton cleaning and repair

Teton women's clinic

The Teton-Vu Drive-In (dead serious. Dead serious. Here's a link if you don't believe me.)


The other day we were house hunting. The north-south addresses are kind of funny here; they sort of span a whole bunch of cities. We were looking for a certain listing and drove around and ended up in a place called... yes, that's right.

Tetonia.

Skywalker threw his hands up and said, "we are NOT living here."

And I quite agree. What if my kids ever had a french pen-pal?

My one thought is, there are enough people here who've served french speaking missions...and it's a university for crying out loud. Everyone has to know what "tetons" are? So why do they keep naming things after them?

Maybe people here are kinda earthy.

Or maybe out here, they're trying something that BYU-Utah hasn't tried yet, to up the number of students who get married, and help those reluctant RM-but-I-just-want-to-hang-out types. When you think about it, it's a rather ingenious marketing plan.

you know.... when you think about it.

Jane Austen's Fight Club

I love this. For so many reasons.

One of which is that this was made by a group of girls from an LDS singles' ward, and so they can identify with--


nevermind. I think I'll try to keep my big, fat, feminist mouth shut this time. It would be gilding the lily.

My Utah Feminist Roots

The other day I was talking to a relative, who told me she thought women shouldn't vote, because we think a certain way that is unproductive in political causes. We want to give too much, is the way she explained it. Government is not for giving or taking care of people, it is for the limited amount of governing that the American People need, which shouldn't involve welfare or anything else.

I understand her political viewpoint, though I object to her assumptions (that women inherrently vote in favor of welfare and also tend to vote unwisely.) And as I was listening (respectfully) to what she had to say, a thought came to my mind.

When did women in Utah get the right to vote?

From this source:

Women's Suffrage--the right of women to vote--was won twice in Utah. It was granted first in 1870 by the territorial legislature but revoked by Congress in 1887 as part of a national effort to rid the territory of polygamy. It was restored in 1895, when the right to vote and hold office was written into the constitution of the new state.

Who was the first woman senator ever elected?

From This Source:

In a much publicized election, [Hattie Hughes]Cannon was one of five Democrats running as "at large" candidates for state senator from Salt Lake County. Suffrage activist Emmeline B. Wells and Cannon's husband Angus were among the Republicans standing for the office.
“ "Local newspapers gave play to the fact that a leading Mormon polygamist was defeated by his fourth wife. The Salt Lake Tribune, proponent of the Republican view, editorialized that Angus Munn Cannon was deserving of readers' votes. The Salt Lake Herald, a Democratic newspaper, countered: "Mrs. Mattie Hughes Cannon, his wife, is the better man of the two. Send Mrs. Cannon to the State Senate and let Mr. Cannon, as a Republican, remain at home to manage home industry" (see link, SL Tribune). ”


One of my favorite feminists, and a real hero of mine: Emmeline B. Wells, the Fifth General Relief Society President of the church. Some interesting facts:

1) She was formally educated and bright from a young age. Took her first teaching job at age 15, shortly before she married for the first time.

2) Her husband left her after their first baby died. She resumed teaching and became the third wife of Newel K. Whitney, and had two little girls by him.

3) After Whitney died, she proposed marriage (how feminist is that!) to Daniel H. Wells, becoming his seventh wife. At first they didn't really know each other well or associate, but in later years of their life they loved each other dearly and enjoyed each others' companionship.

4) Edited the Womens' Exponent, the first successful Women's magazine in Utah.

5) Joined the Suffrage movement and wrote extensively on women and the amazing things they had to offer our country. Wrote extensively about how education for women is so important.

6) Eventually became respected and quoted by such people as Susan B. Anthony and other leaders of the Suffrage movement.

7) Ran for the senate as a republican, was beaten by the first women ever to be elected a Senator in the United States, Martha Hughes Cannon.

8) Was appointed General Relief Society President at age 82, served for ten years until her death.

Go read up on her life and you'll see exactly what she was, and what the cause can add to the church and the gospel, and what a stunningly beautiful thing such a woman is.

LDS Humor: Interview with My Female Ancestors, by Haley

OK. Please go read this.

Maybe the feminist in me finds this funny, or maybe it's the comedian, I don't know. But please go read it and tell me what you think. The only problem with it, IMHO is that it's not long enough, at all.

*disclaimer* use of bible swearing. Which I don't mind, but I know there are some who do.

Pictures of Pornography: Real Life, Real Women. A Talk By Van C. Gessel

I have been waiting to finish my series with this talk. I find it a stunning, honest treatise on just why pornography can interfere with real relationships, particularly where women are concerned. Read, and enjoy. And thank you, Margaret, for getting the electronic copy.

Real Life, Real Women

Stake General Priesthood Meeting

BYU 16th Stake

February 11, 2001

President Van C. Gessel



Brethren, I appreciate you being here tonight. You have heard powerful testimonies about the restoration of the Gospel of Jesus Christ through latter-day prophets. My personal preference would have been to address the same topic, but the Lord has had another direction He has been trying to coax me toward over the past few weeks. But I cannot begin without sharing with you my personal, and powerfully internalized, testimony that two exalted beings—the Father of us all and His Beloved Son—did appear to Joseph Smith and selected him as the first prophet of our dispensation, and that the Book of Mormon was translated for the express purpose of being a second hemispheric testimony of Christ's universal mission to all the children of God to bring us salvation and everlasting joy. I have a profound personal witness that Gordon B. Hinckley is today the Lord's megaphone to a spiritually-deafened world, and that the closer we can conform our lives to the teachings of our prophet, the greater will be our happiness and the clearer our sense of direction in our daily activities.

And now, a preface to the topic the Lord wants you to hear through me. During His mortal ministry, the Savior, viewing our day and its many challenges and opportunities, declared, with what must have been a sorrowful shaking of His head and a sympathetic sigh that in our day "even the very elect will be deceived." Like King Benjamin, "I cannot tell you all the things whereby ye may commit sin; for there are divers ways and means, even so many that I cannot number them. But this much I can tell you, that if ye do not watch yourselves, and your thoughts, and your words, and your deeds, and observe the commandments of God, and continue in the faith of what ye have heard...even unto the end of your lives, ye must perish. And now, O man, remember, and perish not." (Mosiah 4:29-30) How many new "ways and means" to commit sin have been added to the adversary's repertoire just in the last fifty years?

As some of you will have detected, I feel a keen responsibility to try to expose some of Satan's techniques so that you can steel yourselves against them. Here again, I cannot be exhaustive in my listing of his pernicious plots to destroy us, but two specific approaches come to mind. Consider, for instance, the numerous ways in which the temper tries subtly to persuade us that there are limits on the efficacy of the Atonement of his arch-rival. Using a logic by which we are far too easily seduced, Lucifer not only leads us into temptation and then transmits to our minds ways to rationalize our sins, but he also is there to meet us immediately after we have transgressed to comfort and assure us and lull us away into carnal security by persuading us that what we have done is not so bad, that we can enjoy life now and repent later, that everybody is doing it, that we really can't or shouldn't control our selfish cravings, that God will beat us with a few stripes, and so on and so on ad nauseam. But then he turns truly nasty, using the quasi-scientific philosophies of men to delude us into thinking that we were "born that way," that what we have done is who we really are, and that we just aren't celestial material, no matter how hard we try. Or that repentance either works very quickly and painlessly—like arsenic—or that we can never refrain from sin long enough to merit forgiveness. In essence, he insists that we can never change, that we are doomed to repeat the mistakes engendered in our genes or inflamed by our weaknesses. Worst of all, perhaps, he has convinced far too many in our day that our sins have conclusively separated us from God and that there is no road back.

What nonsense! What vicious falsehoods! What a cruel abuse of us when we are in an imperfect, weakened state of mind and spirit! Reject such lies, brethren; if you start to be persuaded by them, Satan will ultimately succeed in having you place limits, restrictions, and malevolent misinterpretations upon the Atonement of the Savior, and before long your faith in the power of Christ to lift and heal and redeem you will be so debilitated that you will fall even further prey to temptation and despair.

Along with his attempts to dilute our comprehension and acceptance of the Atonement, the evil one does an absolutely splendid job of distorting our sense of who we are. Over the past couple of centuries, he has slowly moved us from an image of ourselves as children of our Heavenly Father to an intellectual conviction that we are merely slightly advanced animals, that our status is determined solely by biology and cultural determinism, and that we are so much lower than the angels that maybe they aren't really there, and even if they are, we'll never be able to join them on their level. Secularization has steered our society away from the highway of our God to the dead-end alleys of materialism and pleasure-seeking. I personally attribute much of the decline in our civilization today to the fact that so many of us—including members of the Church, unfortunately—have been swayed by Satan's agenda, whereby he tries to get us to think less of ourselves, less of our bodies, less of our divine origins, far less of our eternal destiny, and considerably less of others. Freedom has replaced responsibility, individuality has overtaken the value of community, the concept of "victimless crimes" has negated the need for sin and guilt, the "right to choose" has displaced the duty to replenish, and the "greatest generation" has been succeeded by the "me generation." It's ironic, isn't it--the more we focus on "me," the less we really think of "me," because "me" only means immediate gratification of "my" desires, attainment of "my" goals, and choosing what is best for "me" alone. We claim that technology has enabled us to shrink the world, to connect humankind together as never before--and how do we do that? By locking ourselves in a solitary room, turning on an inanimate object, and traveling to wherever the sensual surf washes us on shore.

But enough of my old-fashioned, outmoded philosophical ramblings. And on to my point, if I can remember what it is. Of all the things that concern me about our day and our society, I think I am most troubled by the way in which Satan has put sacred things up for sale, a phenomenon only superficially manifest a few months back when some fool put a signed temple recommend up for sale on e-Bay. Peter in his second epistle wrote: "...there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you..." (2 Peter 2:1-3)

"With feigned words make merchandise of you." Our bodies and our spirits, our very souls, were purchased by the blood of Christ and His triumphant resurrection and exaltation—we belong, in every part of our being, to the Master. But the false teachers of our day, in their damnable heresies, have sought to cancel out the Lord's proof of purchase. And because of their lust for our dollars, with lies and deceits they put us up for sale, body and soul. They are selling stolen goods as surely as that temple recommend put up for online barter belongs to the Lord and not to its brain-dead holder. The world has no claim on us—except as we allow it—and no right to put our bodies or our minds on the auction block.

Much has been said of late about the evils of pornography. In case that word gives you a sense of déjà vu, I will reassure you that I'm not going to repeat my ward conference talk and give you a list of movies and music to avoid. I have already given you that counsel; I hope you have taken it. This evening I want to try to expose the inherent spiritual and temporal lies that lurk beneath the surface of the pornography industry, an industry bound and determined to "make merchandise of you." And I hope to demonstrate for you what the long-term poisonous effects can be for you if you do not "watch yourselves, and your thoughts, and your words, and your deeds, and observe the commandments of God, and continue in the faith of what ye have heard...even unto the end of your lives."

I apologize, brethren, for using the approach I am about to use, but I can think of no way other than specific plainness to say what I feel must be said. My goal is to make clear to you how a life of erotic fantasy can hamper your every attempt to find happiness in your life now and, to a much greater degree, in the future. I want to try to contrast the foolish fantasy women of the sensual realm with women of the real world, the kind of women in your ward, the women you associate with every day, the kind of woman you will eventually marry. We will call the women of the fantasy world "Playpets." And let me emphasize, brethren, that it makes no difference where you encounter a Playpet—in magazines, on TV, in movies, on the Internet, or simply in your own mental fantasies. She is designed to destroy you and your happiness, no matter the form in which she appears.

What is so alluring about a Playpet? First and most obvious is her unclothed physical body, for sale in every conceivable size and shape, tailor-made to suit the buyer's personal preferences. The wonderful thing about this particular sales transaction is that if October's Playpet doesn't fully satisfy your lusts, there is always November. And December. And several thousands more on the Internet and video. In other words, the satanic salesman allows you to pick and choose whatever body type appeals most to you. And you can trade her in for a new model whenever and as often as you wish. Like she were your own private flesh-and-blood Barbie Doll, you can dress and undress her according to your every whim. You are in charge. You are her Master. You control her fate, her wardrobe, her poses. She submits to your every idea, every fantasy, every beat of your hedonistic heart. She never gets pregnant, never gets tired, never throws up, never catches a cold—even when she's undressed—never leaves town or goes to school or work on church or anywhere. She never ages or gets wrinkles. She is, because she cannot exist, perfect in the worldly sense. But she is made of plastic and silicone, and she can never be yours forever, because she cannot be perfected in a spiritual sense.

For the here and now, however, she is always available. Your Playpet never gets headaches, never has periods, never would rather just sit and talk, never needs to take the time to attend to her own needs and obligations. Her only role in life is to convince you that you can have her whenever you want her. She will not complain, she will not pretend to have any feelings or desires of her own; she will cater to you on demand. Best of all, perhaps, she never has a single thought. She will never disagree with you, never want you to listen to her opinions, has no rights or feelings. She only has one purpose in life, and that is to be under your control.

Do you begin to see why and how women have, through most of our mortal history, been repressed and downtrodden and treated as objects? And why, though we have in our modern enlightenment given them equal legal and political rights, we continue to repress them in our fatal fantasies because of the lustful lies peddled to us by both Hollywood and by Hell?

A real woman—the kind of woman you will eventually marry—has been taught to dress modestly. Already she is a disappointment to the man who expects his women to dress like streetcorner saleswomen. The real woman will come to you in marriage with only one bodily type, which you cannot trade in for one you'd like better. Her physical body, which she and the Lord regard as a sacred, temple-like edifice, is real and mortal and therefore subject to the processes of change and aging. It is highly unlikely that she will, at age 45, look just like she did at 23. Does that mean she will be less attractive to you later in life? Only if you haven't abandoned your fantasies of living happily ever after with a supermodel.

You neither own nor have rightful dominion over the real woman you marry. She is her own person, as important to her Father in Heaven as are you. She is, with all her imperfections, a goddess in embryo. She gets headaches. She has periods, and if she's lucky enough to have them stop, it means she's pregnant. When that happens, her body will change in shape and in function—dramatically at times. I can pretty much guarantee you that at full term she won't look much like a Playpet.

A real woman gets tired, and occasionally even grumpy. She gets sick, which may not always be the most effective turn-on for you. In some cases, she will need surgery, and she may have to stay in the hospital for days on end and will likely emerge with a scarred body. Is that the point at which she should be traded in for a woman fresh off the pages of this month's Sports Illustrated?

The real woman with whom you will eventually live has thoughts and feelings of her own; she has her agency; she is, in most cases these days, very well-educated and bright and thoughtful and more often than not gives us men a run for our intellectual money. Her will belongs to her. She may actually have the temerity to disagree with you from time to time. If you're a fool, you'll tell her to get in line and follow the priesthood. I tried that once, many years ago—it's one of the dumbest things I ever did.

Your future wife cannot, and must not, ever be required to cater to your passions unwillingly. The amazing, challenging, and joyous thing about marital intimacy is that it performs all of its uplifting functions only when it is utterly mutual. It can only degrade when it is one-sided, selfish, and not consensual. Let me caution you very plainly: if you have trained your physical body to expect sexual release on a frequent basis, you have set in motion a process that will very likely have a serious negative impact on your future marriage. No real woman ever can or ever should be expected to be available to you 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. And she will sense the disappointment in your eyes and realize that she is not meeting your so-called "needs." She will be hurt, and a real woman in emotional pain is not likely to feel like initiating romance herself. Days and months and even years of mutual frustration and inadequacy may follow.

Because she is so much unlike the Playpet, the real woman of the Church, imperfect though she is, has within her the potential to become perfect. If you will assist her by accepting and loving and caring for her amidst all her imperfections.

Now to the heart of the matter, brethren. Do you really believe that you can, in the days of your singlehood, fill your mind and soul and body with illusory images of Playpets and a carnal sense of domination and then be fully prepared to live with and care for and nurture a real woman to whom you are sealed? Do you suppose that the habits of selfishness and supremacy which you have developed through repeated exposure to lifeless media images will somehow not spill over into your marriage and hamper your ability to love your wife with all your heart, might, mind, and strength—forever? Please don't allow rationalization or self-deception to stand in the way of answering those questions truthfully.

You are currently in the process of patterning your life, of setting up consistent habits and attitudes and practices to manage your thoughts and time that will stay with you throughout your life. When we talk about the addictive nature of media-bred or mind-fed fantasizing about sexual matters, we are not simply talking about the enticing lure of the material. We are talking about the ways in which such thoughts and deeds create potentially permanent attitudes and habits and feelings toward sexuality and toward real women. Let me be very direct, brethren: no matter how you might imagine this working in the future, marriage is not a cure for addiction to pornography. Neither is marriage a remedy for obsessive thoughts or physiological patterns established earlier in life. We are striving to teach you correct principles so that you will be able to govern yourself—in all things. Most especially those things that can either make you supremely happy or atrociously miserable.

If you allow yourself to get caught up in the net of carnal fantasy, I can all but promise that there will be heartache in your future. I know of too many marriages that have broken up because of the husband's unreal expectations for his wife's looks and performance, for which he compensated by turning—or, far more often—returning to pornographic addiction. Even if he doesn't slide in that direction, the emotional wounds he has inflicted on his wife are deep and painful. At the conference on the impact of pornography held earlier this week at BYU, Dr. Wendy Ulrich pointed out how involvement with fantasy images of sexuality can damage and destroy intimate relationships. A man who lives in his fantasies cannot simultaneously establish residence in reality. How would a wife feel, offering the best of herself to her husband, to find that he prefers the naked chicks on late-night HBO? Do you think she might feel truly desired, appreciated, and attractive? Or would feelings of inferiority—inferiority to an illusion, I might note—and inadequacy and pain and resentment pour from her? Would she feel more or less like a sex object herself? Dr. Ulrich claimed that pornographic addiction produces feelings of intensity rather than intimacy, of control rather than of safety, and of obsession rather than trust. Clinging to your fantasies will make it impossible to cling to your spouse; it will always be a wall that stands between the two of you and prevents oneness of body and of spirit.

The Church News reported last week a research study which found that "people exposed to repeated presentations of hardcore, non-violent adult pornography over just a six-week period develop callousness toward women, trivialize rape, develop distorted perceptions about sexuality, develop an appetite for more deviant, bizarre or violent types of pornography, are no longer satisfied with sex in their marriage, devalue the importance of marriage and view non-monogamous relationships as normal and natural behavior." (February 3, 2001) Did you hear anything there that runs contrary to the “Proclamation on the Family”? Or to what you want in your future? The irony, brethren, is that the kinds of feelings and attitudes developed when we keep our minds focused on carnal gratification can only lead to unhappiness, frustration, contention, and ultimately separation from what you most want in your life.

I beseech you, brethren: do not procrastinate the day of your repentance; for that same spirit which does possess your bodies at the time you go into marriage, that same spirit will have power to possess your body in the eternal world and make your relationship with your wife perpetually miserable. "I would that ye should repent and forsake your sins, and go no more after the lusts of your eyes, but cross yourself in all these things; for except ye do this ye can in no wise inherit the kingdom of God [along with your wife]. Oh, remember, and take it upon you, and cross yourselves in these things." (Alma 39:9) "All men that are in a state of nature, or I would say, in a carnal state, are in the gall of bitterness and in the bonds of iniquity; they are without God in the world, and they have gone contrary to the nature of God; therefore, they are in a state contrary to the nature of happiness." (Alma 41:11)

Brethren, we are all mortal men. We are all subject to temptations. Salacious thoughts will from time to time enter all our minds unbidden. But we have a choice about what we do with them. Elder Neal A. Maxwell reminds us of the example of the Savior: “Jesus noticed the tremendous temptations that came to Him, but He did not process and reprocess them. Instead, He rejected them promptly. If we entertain temptations, soon they begin entertaining us!” (May 1987 Ensign)

I am not here tonight trying to adopt a holier-than-thou attitude. I confess before you that the struggles to control thoughts and to live in a real marriage are ongoing. There are days when I could apply Hamlet's self-evaluation to myself: “I am myself indifferent honest: but yet I could accuse me of such things, that it were better my mother had not borne me..." But I likewise testify to you that the struggles are very much worth the effort. They are, I would maintain, the only way to retain happiness and peace of conscience and self-respect and to fully enjoy the many great satisfactions of married life. I adore my wife, and my love and respect for her and my determination to help her attain her anointing to become a queen have helped me endure the many trials of health that we have shared together and the seemingly endless string of temptations that have paraded before me.

My final message, therefore, is to all of us: there is a simple solution if you are still battling the seductions of a fantasy world that is twisting and distorting your ability to fully embrace and love a real-life woman, and I can say it in four words: Stop. Get Help. Change. It is far easier to say those four words than to live them, but I promise you, brethren, that it is the only process that will prepare you for a celestializable marriage. If you are involved in anything in your life—whether in your thoughts, your words, or your deeds—that is draining from you the resolve and the ability to live with an imperfect but real woman in a sealed covenant of devotion and mutual joy, stop now. Go to your bishop, to a counselor, or both. Addictions are not easily broken, but true happiness is not easily attained. Repent and change your attitudes and your activities and your interactions that may be cementing false patterns in place in your soul, and I assure you that you will be forever grateful that you did.

I leave you tonight with a quotation from Elder L. Aldin Porter, senior president of the Quorums of the Seventy, delivered at last week's CES fireside; he said: "The message through the ages from the prophets has been to stay clean, to stay pure, and they promise you will reap unlimited happiness. Much of what is seen today on network television, videos and in movies is degrading to women and desecrates the sacredness of the powers of creation. I wish I had sufficient words or capacity in the English language to impress upon you the necessity of cleanliness of thought and action in order to build a strong foundation of righteousness in anticipation of a happy and fulfilling life." (Church News, February 10, 2001, p. 4) I add my personal testimony to that of Elder Porter. I want each one of you to be happy in every possible way, and I know from personal experience, from my past mistakes and trials and from many, many instances of direct personal revelation, that the only possible way to achieve and retain happiness in and after this mortal life is by preparing yourselves in all respects for a worthy temple marriage, and by patterning your life right now in proper channels by focusing all your thoughts and attitudes and actions on the sanctity of womanhood and the divine role of marriage in guiding you to exaltation. I bear you my solemn witness that as you endeavor to formulate within the depths of your soul a vision of celestial womanhood that respects all women as daughters of God and treats them like the queens and priestesses they are destined to become, your personal burdens will be lightened, and your heart and mind will be ready for all the blessings that the Lord has to give you. I bear testimony of that, accompanied by an unshakeable promise that the Savior can and will guide you along the specific path that will lead you from the great and spacious and totally unachievable fantasies of the telestial prison house in which we live and prepare you for the joyous reality of preparing yourself for eternal life with a beautiful, loving, supportive companion whom you can cherish freely and forever.

A Feminist Discussion

From this post.

This post was by a guest blogger, and it was on Feminist Mormon Housewives a week or so ago. It was a complaint about a BYU devotional talk by Elder Pace given recently. Here is the original post:

It was with great sadness and disappointment and, I’ll admit, more than a bit of anger that I read Elder Pace’s BYU Devotional talk regarding women’s divine purpose Wednesday morning. I read it with an eye on tonight, when I would attend New Beginnings with my headstrong, smart, articulate 13-year-old daughter. I’ll be honest: when I first saw it, I thought it was a parody, like The Onion for Mormons. But alas, I read about it in several other places, including the Church News, so now I know it was for real.

I go to church every Sunday. I’m the ward organist and the Primary chorister (the world’s greatest calling, hands down). I went to BYU and got married in the temple at age 19 (gasp—what was I thinking?). I have three kids who are so great that I know better than to take credit for anything they are or do. I’m an assistant professor of education. And I wear pants to church. Yep, that’s me in a nutshell.

I’m also a feminist. I want both my girls and my son to grow up believing that men and women can do anything and be anything they want to be. I worry about my girls getting that message because they will not be able to participate in priesthood ordinances (unless you count watching). I worry at least as much about my son understanding that message as well because he will be able to participate in those things. I worry about my daughters because they will have to defer to men while they’re at church. They’ll have to worry about finding a man to babysit a group of adult women at the church building. They’ll have to get approval for their ideas from male leaders.

So here I am, ten minutes after getting home from work, hoping my kids feed themselves dinner in time for us to get to New Beginnings, wondering why today feels more like a continuation of a cycle of uncomfortable messages I’ve received throughout my life about the “divine role of womanhood” (cringe) than like a new beginning. I remember coming home from YW one day when I was about 15 after a lesson on careers. I had volunteered that I wanted to be a concert pianist when I grew up (I was never good enough for that!). One of my friends said she wanted to be a doctor and our YW teacher smiled and said: “That’s great! You’ll be able to administer first aid to your children!” We had a little talk about that over dinner. My dad—wise, diplomatic, un-exciteable, and patient—told me to “rise above the occasion.” And so I laughed it off and carried on.

Then there was the General Conference Sunday when we heard the “Mothers Come Home” talk. I was too young to have paid attention, but I remember the family drama that ensued after one of my sisters at BYU called home in tears. Again, my dad listened patiently and reminded her to rise above the occasion.

Years later, it was my turn to make a tearful phone call home from BYU. One of my religion professors had told us in class that if women worked, they shouldn’t pay tithing on their earnings because it was like gambling proceeds. He actually called it “blood money.” Again, my dad smiled and told me to rise above foolish advice.
Another time, that same professor told us that when we died, Christ himself would personally escort working women to the gates of hell for going against their divine nature. I guess this comment was ridiculous enough that my dad forewent his previous mantras and laughed out loud. Then he told me that if that were true, we’d have to rent a 15-passenger van and the whole family would ride to hell together because all the women in my family are professional women. Another religion professor told us that we didn’t have to listen to what Chieko Okazaki said because “last time I checked, she didn’t have the priesthood.” Sigh.

I could go on. My poor dad has listened to a lot of stories like these. My husband has probably heard even more. Since I don’t see these attitudes towards women enacted in my own family, I am mostly able to rise above the occasion and blow it off as old school. But every once in a while, I see something like this devotional talk and wonder: How do I rise above this occasion? How do I shelve my hopes and dreams for my children and tell them to follow this counsel? How do I tell them that they will be broken or deficient if they don’t marry? I don’t want my daughters to wonder why Heavenly Father has such a limited vision of their potential. Surely Heavenly Father wants women to do more than complete men. I’m a wife. I like my husband. But being a wife doesn’t complete me. My husband doesn’t complete or sanctify or purify me. And I don’t do those things for him, either. It’s just the five of us—my husband, my two girls, my son, and me—and we’re just doing this life thing.

I’m also a mother. Motherhood brings me plenty of joy (and heartache). But it doesn’t complete me. I’m lots of other things, too. I’m a friend, a daughter, a sister, a teacher, a primary chorister, a pianist, a professor, a book aficionado, and I just started guitar lessons! I like to think all those things together complete me.

I want my girls to be strong and of good courage—just like we heard tonight at New Beginnings. I want them to think, like the closing song we sang tonight: “How vast is our purpose, how broad is our mission . . .” I want them to figure out what completes them and go do it—whether that includes marriage or motherhood or not. And I long for the day when the church—and that includes BYU Devotionals, the Church News, General Conference, General Relief Society meetings, General YW Meeting, the Ensign, the New Era, the Friend, and our Sunday lesson manuals and weekly activities—can get on board and join the new beginning that’s happening over here at my house.

P.S. My son is coming along for the ride, too.



Here is my response:

Men say stupid things sometimes. Even though they hold the priesthood. ;)

Having said that.. I went and read through this talk and found nothing that really blatantly made me wince. I thought it was nice. I can see how it might ruffle some feathers… I guess. There was the discussion of marriage as necessary to fulillment (though I’d argue he was talking about men AND women, though his talk was directed at women) and the discussion of women’s “roles” that seems to always stir up trouble.

The thing is… I do think women have certain roles that men don’t have, and vice versa. That might not jive with modern feminist theory, but dang. Modern feminist theory is a product of the world. There’s good and bad in it. I’d be just as worried about someone holding up modern feminist theory and theoreticians as above reproach as I’d be about them holding up a priesthood leader as such.

The author's response:

Although this may be foolish and naive, I’m too stubborn to admit that the world can so easily be divided up into two big categories–women, who have a unique divine purpose, and men–who have a different unique divine purpose. Sure, there’s plenty of research that shows that there are biological differences between men and women. But IMO, the world is so diverse–full of all different kinds of people, all of whom have unique strengths, challenges, limitations, talents, perspectives, etc. If that’s not evidence of the divine, what is? So let’s embrace those differences. Let’s say their names out loud and recognize them, rather than try to squeeze everyone into one of two possible boxes.

FWIW, I agree that modern feminist theory is not above reproach. Any feminist worth his/her salt should be able to admit that. My post didn’t suggest that I thought modern feminist theory was above reproach, did it? If I did, that was an unintended message.

My response:
I don’t necessarily want to accuse you of promoting feminist theory as above reproach. I guess what I’m saying is, I see this a lot: any discussion of the “roles” of men and women is immediately countered by some modern theoretician or piece of “scientific evidence,” etc. Oh, yes, people are so different and diverse. And each different society provides stereotypical roles for men and, and some for women, that are unique to culture and geography and perhaps socioeconomic status.

I think, though, that there are certain, spiritual roles that men and women are primarily responsible for (ie proc on the family) and it makes sense to me, and I don’t see how that’s degrading or anti-feminist. It just is. My stewardship and my husbands are different. You could argue that this mirrors the “seperate but equal” way of thinking that was debunked with the Civil Rights movement, but I don’t think the two situations are all that similar. Biologically, men and women ARE different. Biologically, our drives and processes are different, especially in the face of such things as sexuality and parenting. Why would we be biologically given different purposes and functions, and not spiritually? I think Heavenly Father has beautiful way of mirroring his spiritual creations in the physical. I feel that, as a woman, I have certain roles and stewardships that are primarily my responsibility, and so does my husband (though that doesn’t mean there’s never any crossover.)

Anyway.



So what do you think about these issues? (Gender, Roles, the church, misunderstandings/misinterpretations that can happen on both sides of the discussion.)

Inspire Me

One of my favorite songs of all time, by a little-known artist by the name of Libby Roderick. She's Alaskan, she's a folk singer, she's a bit quirky, yes... but this song is one that always makes me want to dance or run for political office or... sew my own cloth diapers or something. I love it, and I can't find the lyrics anywhere online so I'm going to write them down here from my own memory.

Inspire Me

Everybody needs someone to show them what is possible
Everybody needs someone to go as far as she can see
I need to stand upon the shoulders of giants
I need a woman who's as big as me.

When I was a little bitty baby sitting on Mama's knee
I looked around to see just what the future had in store for me
I needed to see women who were living without limits
I needed to see women making history.

So I said, give me a Woman who can climb the tallest mountain.
Give me a woman who can swim across the widest sea.
Women need women who lead lives of boldest daring.
Tell me the stories that inspire me.

Give me Amelia who went soaring 'cross the ocean
Winnie Mandella who is going to set her people free
Judy Chicago who breaks all artistic silences
These women leave a precious legacy.

When I was a young teenager reading my Seventeen,
I looked around to see just what the future had in store for me
Women in the fashion mags were too small for my dreams, I needed
to see women just as big as me.

So I said, give me a woman who can climb the tallest mountain.
Give me a woman who can swim across the widest sea.
Women need women who lead lives of boldest daring.
Tell me the stories; they inspire me.

I know of women all across the nation
leading lives of courage in the face of fear and poverty
One leaves an abusive home, one raises her five children
Women, we need a new mythology.

Now I am a grown-up woman living in society
I still look around to see just what the future holds for me
I still need women who are shooting like the comets so I can
leave my own starlight in this galaxy. And I say

Give me a woman who can climb the tallest mountain.
Give me a woman who can swim across the widest sea.
Women need women who live lives of boldest daring, why don't you
Tell me the stories, they inspire me.








(BTW I would not recommend looking up Judy Chicago's artwork online, necessarily. Though I do admire the way she's done her best to break some, ahem, silences, and I would go to see her artwork in person if I had the opportunity). :)

Blog traffic wierdness...

It is so weird when you look at your hit counter and see which posts are the most popular. It's completely nonsensical to me.

For a long time my number one hit has been my Vegan Broccoli-Cheese Soup recipe. Following closely behind, is my post on Fun and Interesting Facts about Ethiopia. Next up is search term like Funny Stories About Fear or Extremely Funny Stories, which leads everyone to the link I put on those search terms.

Another hit I get frequently comes from search terms like Pornography and LDS and Pornography, When to Go to the Bishop or pornography, What Happens When You Go to the Bishop or Spouse Pornography Problem, or what to do when kids find pornography. I'm very very glad to see these searches coming in, because it was with this very hope (gleaning traffic from those seeking guidance about their pornography problems, or their loved ones' problems) that I put that series together.

Lately there's been a new one. Who knows why, but I have gotten at least 20 hits in the last two days for the search term, SNL Making Fun of Obama, and that of course leads to the link I embedded there.

A few others that get regular hits have been my post about Whether Or Not I'm a Feminist, and my post entitled Naked Barbie Doll. I'm not exactly sure why someone would type that search term into a search engine.

Blogging is kind of a funny thing.

(BTW you see what I have shamelessly done? I direct-labeled all my most popular blog posts so as to raise the level of traffic! Hahahaha!!! [evil blogress laugh].)

Pictures of Pornography: Part II interview with Jodi Hildebrandt

NSG: The other piece I wanted to talk to you about is, the spouses and people who struggle with those who have gotten into pornography deeply, or maybe even not so deeply. Maybe their spouse or boyfriend messes up while they're dating or while they're married, and maybe feels bad enough to go talk to them and tell them what happened. I actually was married to a pornography addict, and we divorced and now I'm married to someone different. It was a pretty public thing, like it was in the news, and on the television. In the aftermath of that, because my story was so public, people kept coming to me for advice, and all I could tell them was, go see a therapist, it's not your fault. You know, that's all I could say to them. But so many different women come to me with their friends' stories, or their fiance's stories, and some of them say, you know, my boyfriend looked at pornography, and I don't know if I should marry him. I guess that's one of the things I want to ask you about is, do you think it's important for... what would you say in that situation? Would you tell somebody like that, just leave him? Or would you tell them it's probably something you're going to be able to work out, or you should try and work it out? What sort of advice would you give somebody in that situation?

JH: The question is, somebody comes to you--you find out, that your fiancee is... has just looked at pornography, what kind of advice would I give them. I would need to know a lot more information. I am not one to say, you know... leave'em. Because I believe in these people. Actually, really thing, that addicts are... can be, amazing people if they would just be able to start healing the shame that drives them. There's a couple things. I'd want to know: how often he's been looking. Is this the first time, how quickly he came to you and told you, and is he willing to go get help? because if you're looking at pornography, in my estimation, more than one time, you are developing the possibility of having an addiction. If you looked at it more than five times, you have a problem. It means you're going back to it for some reason. And if you can't stop... I mean, the histories I hear of people are, I started at 9, or I started at 11, or I started at 13, and I got over it for awhile, and I picked back up off my mission, and here they are forty sevens in my office and they've had these stints. It doesn't ever stop, they always go back to it. I mean, someone might keep it in check for a year or something, but they always go back to it. Which tells me that, this shame is constantly in their system. Who knows how else they're acting out? They might be acting out with... maybe they're masturbating or maybe they're addictively spending money, or maybe they're having a beer, or maybe they're using some other way to act out in an addictive cycle, you have to satisfy that shame because, Shame is: I want to get away from it. I want to feel different. When I go spend money, I shift my mood. And I can do it in an addictive pattern, I could go gamble that way. I could go run that way. I could go eat that way. So, when people keep going back to it, those are the little seeds of addictive behavior. and so somebody will say, I just masturbate! It's not that big of a deal! It's not what you're doing. You masturbating vs somebody going to go pick up a prostitute in my mind is exactly the same.

NSG: Depends why the behavior is there.

JH: To them though, Oh no! That's much worse!I'm not judging the behavior. I'm just saying what drives it.If you keep doing this, just like this other person keeps doing this, it's all driven by one thing, which is the shame. And that's what has to be healed. So I would tell them: How much have they been looking, how quickly did they tell you, what was their behavior when they told you, were they really remorseful? Did they keep going back to it? Are they willing to get help? Are they willing to humble themselves?

NSG: Right.

JH: If they're willing to do those things, I say, hang in there. I wouldn't say, go get married right now, I'd probably say, give it a year, really see if he's willing to do the things that are necessary. Um, but yeah! He can be healed.

NSG: What about someone who has never really gotten to the point where they've looked at it five times in a row, but they, they looked at it once when they were twelve, for instance? And, a couple years later they encountered it again, and instead of turning away they looked at a couple more, when they encountered it. And then, maybe several years later, it hits again, they do it another time. What would you tell somebody with something like that?

JH: It's still addictive behavior. Because you keep going back to it. I've got a client right now, he has an addiction, and he only acts out one time a year. And he does it and--I mean, he literally only acts out one time a year. And the rest of the time he is in what's called, the preoccupation stage. All during the year. SO he goes to Europe every year, he's been doing it for fifteen year, and when he goes there, he picks up a male prostitute, and he acts out with him. But the whole 364 days before that time, he is thinking about it, he is planning it, he is making phone calls, he's preoccupied. And he's in a ritualistic state, OK. So it doesn't matter how often you do it, it's that I keep going back to it. Keep going back to it.

NSG: And if--so then, I guess the other question would be, what about somebody who has just looked at it once? And then confesses that to their spouse, or their girlfriend, something-- one thing I have noticed is, I think a lot of women just feel a great deal of shock and outrage when a spouse or a boyfriend confesses to something like this. And I think, you know... they should, because the person needs to feel that but what about somebody who just messes up once. Does that still, something that...

JH: No, but in my head I'm kinda skeptical about that. If I heard that. You know looking at pornography to me is not a mess up, if it's one time, when they're not looking for it. If they come across it and go, "whoa!" And if they really are conscious, they will go and say, oh honey, you know, I just looked up, and I had no idea, that's--in my mind, he was assaulted. They are assaulted. But if, I go-- say it happens to me and i go and let somebody know, I don't confess it, I just tell somebody, whoa! I was on the Internet, and this--- I mean, it's happened to me. I was on the Internet, and I was just like, Whoa! I need to get out of this, I need to X this! But I start finding myself thinking about it, or fantasizing about it, how do I get back, where do I go to get this... and THEN I don't tell, that's when I'm creating this addictive behavior. Addiction isn't just about the acting out, it's about all the behavior that goes with it. It's about the lying and the deceit and the manipulation, the aggressive trying to keep people away from it... those are all addictive behaviors.

NSG: Well that makes sense. Um, Julie Beck just gave a talk in a recent CES fireside where she advised women to stay far away from men whom they even suspect might have a pornography habit, and what do you think of that.

JH: Whoa. She did?

NSG: She said stay far away. Yeah. If they even suspect.

JH: Wow.

NSG: Would you agree with a statement like that, or... or would you qualify it, or what...

JH: No. I would not agree with a statement like that. And I'm hesitating, because... she is the sister of my best friend.

NSG: I like her, I like her a lot, I love her talks, but that just made me stop and say, wow... you know.

JH: There's too many of them we'd have to say away from!

NSG: I know. Yeah.

JH: I would qualify it by saying, the things that I've already said. If a man has, looked at pornography, there's a way back. You know, he is not flawed and defective. Now, is it my responsibility as a woman to pull him back? No! But if I'm with a man and I find out that he has a pornography problem, whether I am dating him, or engaged to him, or married with ten kids, I say immediately, I will not stay with you unless you're willing to do the things to get you well.

NSG: OK.

JH: And these are the things. And this is why I appreciate you coming in and interviewing me because I'd like to get this information out. People are not educated, they don't know what help looks like. We think help looks like, "Well, OK honey, I'll do whatever you need!" And then I have just become their enabler. So I hold a firm boundary and I say, "You go to your twelve steps. You get a sponsor and you get into therapy. You go into lifestar. You do these things, and I will watch you over a period of time, I'll give you six months.

NSG: Right.

JH: And if you really are serious about changing, you will do those things and you won't complain and you won't blame me and you'll show up like a man. Now if they don't, then I would say... run away. That's when I would say it.

NSG: And it's interesting. When I was talking with the Bishop last night, he was saying that, as he was counseling couples who were getting ready to get married, and they had a pornography issue in the relationship, he found that the ones that were able to make it work were the ones where the partner was willing to do the monitoring, who asked questions like, "how have you been doing, you know, have you looked at it..." Be frank and ask, rather than skirting it and say, "that's not my domain, I shouldn't be intruding." Because if they're in a relationship with a person who has pornography as an issue, it is their business.

JH: Yes it is. But let me say just one thing. The concept I believe is true, about monitoring. But I do not think it's the spouse's responsibility.

NSG: Not their responsibility, yeah.

JH: That's why we send them to the twelve step program together, because the twelve step program has sponsors. The wife needs to be the wife, and the mother, and the lover, and all of that. Not the babysitter. But they do need to be monitored. So, and it's not even about monitored, I don't like that word, it's about being accountable; they need to be accountable to somebody.

NSG: Right.

JH: So that's why the twelve step program works as well as it does, is that... you know, back in the thirties when Bill W. created AA, he knew that. He actually felt like he was divinely inspired to create that program. And he created sponsorship so that the alcoholic or the addict could go outside the relationship and be held accountable, and then be able to come back into the relationship and not make the woman the police.

NSG: Right. That... that makes a lot of sense. What about a woman who feels that she needs to know and needs to ask those questions... what advice would you give her?

JH: Mmm hmm. I'd say... that you're codependent. That's what codependency is.

NSG: Ah! OK.

JH: So when a woman is trying to control a spouse, or whatever the addict is, the spouse is trying to control being dependent on them. See? Codependency is about, I'm not OK unless you're OK. So, if you're not OK and you've acted out, then I'm not all right. I can't have peace. The truth is, in a healthy relationship, if you're going to act out, that's your deal. I'm not going to hang around, but I don't have to control you... women get into the cycle of, if I'm more beautiful, or if I was thinner, or if I were more supportive, or made more money or had the kids... you know, whatever... then he would love me. NO.

NSG: Or not have a problem.

JH: Or not have a problem, it has nothing... NOTHING, ZERO, to do with that. Nothing.

NSG: It's an inner struggle.

JH: That's right. It is their own shame. But because we... if you have a coin and it's called shame, you have addiction on one side of this coin, and codependency on the other. So the codependent has shame, just like the addict has shame. And you see it play out, when the spouse wants to be in control. Because if they're in control, it moderates the shame. It tells them, I'm OK. I'm OK. I'm OK. So, you've got to pull them apart from each other. In therapy, you would try to separate them emotionally and say, "you deal with your stuff. Leave him alone. Don't check his phone bills, don't go through his cell stuff, don't look at his bank statements."

NSG: Right. But what if a situation, for instance, if, instead of having a spouse come and confess to a pornography problem, the wife discovers it accidentally. I'm sure... there've got to be trust issues after that. How do you deal with that. Is that same as codependency, or is that a different situation?

JH: Um, no, it's a whole different issue. When there's addiction going on, there's always a lack of trust. Whether the woman or the man even knows, it a lack of trust going on. So, oftentimes when a spouse finds their husband or wife acting out, they feel betrayed, they are furious, and it doesn't matter what they say, I don't believe you because this has been going on for years, or months, and you didn't tell me about it. So that's healthy. But if then I find out-- I ran into it-- but from that point on, I think I can control it after that, that's the codependency.

NSG: Right. OK, so is it possible, to entirely regain trust? After it's been violated in that way?

JH: Absolutely. Absolutely. It's not a um, wake up one day and I've got trust. It's an ongoing process of consistent--and I really enforce that word, consistent--honesty on the addict's part. So if, every time they open their mouth it's honesty. Because if they give ten answers and they lie about something, then all the track record goes out the window.

NSG: Right, because you would never know what they might be lying about.

JH: Yeah. Right. I mean, you could tell a hundred honest statements and then lie to me again.

NSG: And you wouldn't know which one it was.

JH: Right.

NSG: Right. OK, well... this is kind of an obvious question, but I just kind of wanted to ask it for the record... have you seen marriages fail, because of pornography habits and addictions.

JH: Yes.

NSG: Would you say, a large percentage of marriages fail? You know, are you able to mitigate a lot of marriages and help.

JH: Well, you know, by the time they get to me....

NSG: It's already, downhill.

JH: Yeah. It's in the toilet. And so... but, they have suffered for years and years, most times, before they get to somebody for help. Because they're trying to do it on their own, but what they don't understand is that this is a cycle and it will never change. I don't say that to be, you know, be desperate, it's just the truth. It doesn't change. And so, when they get to me, one or the other has had it. And so, I'll say, "Can you stay with him?"--it's usually the man--"can you stay with him? Can you stay with them if they're in recovery?" And I'll explain what recovery looks like. And they, often times they say yes. Because they wouldn't come to me if they didn't have some hope. They're looking for hope. I hope, that I give them some of that. Because you very much can, recover from this. They won't be recovered, but you can be in recovery. Just last night, I had my lifestar group, and I have this couple that's 3 years post their addictive behaviors, it was the man, and he'd been disfellowshipped from the church twice and excommunicated once, and had 30 plus years of acting out, and his wife finally got to the point where she said, "I'm done," and that's what snapped it. And then she thinks, gosh... it took thirty years.

NSG: To say that.

JH: Yes. Why didn't I say that before we had any children, because she thought that she could... she was in that codependent cycle.

NSG: She thought she could help.

JH: And she finally realized, it's not about me. It's not about me helping. And they're very happily married and I use them to talk to my other couples and show them that they can change.



--This concludes the material I have gathered so far for this series. I plan on having Skywalker post his article about computer safety and internet filtering, sometime in the near future.

I have put a link to the lifestar program in the title of this post. It's a great program, from all I've heard.

Please let me know if there's any other question or topic in this arena you feel needs to be addressed... or a topic discussed. I will do my best to address any questions asked, too. But if you really need help, a therapist is the place to go, in conjunction with your ecclesiastical leaders, and of course... your Heavenly Father. You may think He doesn't want to hear about this, but He does. He wants you to knock. His Beloved Son has already bourn all your pain and suffering, and you can find peace in your situation. I want to emphasize that I know this from experience, I have a burning testimony of this: Heavenly Father, through his Son's atonement, can turn any challenge or experience you have, into good. Into growth, into strength, into better happiness. That is the majesty and beauty of the atonement.

*OK, off my soapbox*

What is feminism?

When I hear the word, "feminist," images come to mind of bra-burning, hillary clinton, a black-and-white picture of women marching with pickets, scenes from "stepford wives", Sheri L. Dew, Carol Lynn Pearson, Emmeline Wells, and a florid radio commentator spouting blustering rhetoric. You get the picture. Very conflicted.

The other day I met with a group of friends; other homeschooling moms, and one of them asked me, "Are you really a feminist, or are you just teasing us?"

I guess I have a hard time with the idea that feminism means femi-naziism, pro-abortionism, anti-stay-at-home-momism. To me, I have developed a view of my own views as feminist, because I have a passion for womens' issues. I feel so very strongly that women are Satan's primary focus of attack in our society right now, and we need to educate our girls so that they can become strong, self-assured, whole people who don't devalue themselves by thinking of child-rearing as demeaning and limiting, who don't think that they have to be a size two to be beautiful.

I'd like my daughters to grow up to become women who think of strength and health and vitality as their goal for their physical appearance. I'd like women in the church to see themselves as the supreme force for good, for motivating things like welfare and missionary work and strong families. I'd like women all over the world to realize that educating girls and women has an astronomically further reach (statistics show that children with educated mothers are healthier, more likely to do better in life, and that the families tend to stay together more.) And that limiting education to boys and men actually has a detrimental effect on society.

Women are so powerful. They have such a potential for influence in the world. Being a mother is not limiting or demeaning, it is the ultimate creative act: you are creating a person, helping them to create their worldviews, their values, their emotional stability and perceptions. The emotional climate of a home is far more influential that the physical climate of the geographical area in which a family lives; thus, motherhood is even more powerful than nature.

And even if your lot in this life is not to be a mother, women are intrinsicly capable of that kind of creativity, of that kind of influence for good in the world, the ability to nurture and teach and help those around us. Not just children, but anyone within our sphere of influence. Heavenly Father created us with those talents and capabilities.

This is why I consider myself a feminist. Women's issues are fascinating and vital to the well-being of the entire human race.

The idea that feminism is wrong, to me is offensive and sad. Let's not limit ourselves, ladies and gentlemen. Let's not let people like Rush Limbaugh tell us what we believe.

A Welcome Rest

I was released from my primary calling eight months ago. My calling right now? Relief Society chorister. Currently, my Sundays consist of getting the kids ready, giving them the appropriate meals and naps before church, quickly choosing hymns and calling the pianist, and (heaven bless the bishopric) actually GOING to relief society. For real. Seriously. And sunday school, too.

A little context: Approximately six and a half years ago, I gave birth to a cute but nevertheless high maintenance little bundle of joy. Ever since then, Sundays have kept me hopping, whether it be the half hours during each meeting spent in the mother's room trying to figure out public nursing, or being called to the nursery because my little toddler only got to see me full-time on Saturdays and Sundays and it just seemed better that way, or having to take said rambunctions toddler to singles' ward meetings because there is no primary. After I married Skywalker, it was much better; we took it in shifts. But I was immediately given a very challenging and time consuming calling in Relief society. And then, after we moved, I was called to primary (of course).

And then a nice primary president released me from the calling, because I was having a baby. She asked me, "are you one of those supermoms that wants to do it anyway, or would you prefer we release you for six months while you get back on your feet?"

And then, my husband (wonderful skywalker) convinced the bishopric to call me as relief society chorister (he's the ward clerk, and so he's in on all the meetings) so that I couldn't be re-called to primary, and could enjoy relief society. The purpose was more social than spiritual; I had been complaining to him that I didn't know anyone in the ward, because I was always in primary, and had a few moments of "nobody liiiikes me, I don't have any frieeeeends in the ward..." so he told the bishopric, my wife would like a small relief society calling.

I hadn't anticipated the spiritual repercussions. I don't think I've sat through an entire lesson for five years. I definitely haven't had the opportunity to listen fully, and actually participate (novel concept) in that amount of time.

Loli is in primary, Jaws is in nursery, and squirt goes with Dad during the third hour. It's just me. In relief society. Listening to the lesson, and having a bit of time to socialize with the other sisters. It's amazing. I come home feeling refreshed and renewed (I had forgotten the feeling) instead of tired, cranky, and hapazardly spiritually fed.

It has convinced me of something else, too... spirituality is so important. So go ahead and ask dad to take care of the baby during one of the hours, if you've got a calling the other two. They don't do much in elder's quorum anyway. Your husband will likely be glad to be given the excuse to play with the toddler at the back of the room. If his calling is too much for this, or you are in primary, a good idea would be to watch the devotional on KBYU (if you get it) on tuesdays, maybe arranging naptimes to coincide. And going to enrichment to socialize with the other sisters. I've balked on this point many a time, but it really does make a difference.

Anyway, I realize this won't last forever... I'll go back to primary, or get called to young womens', or be made secretary of some such at some point. That's just the lot of young mothers in a ward. But right now, I'm really enjoying it. More than I thought I would be.

The word "Housekeeping" is not Anti-Feminist.

Julie Beck gave an excellent talk at the CES fireside tonight. (If you're interested in listening to it, it can be found here, scroll to 6:00 pm on March 2nd, 2008). She said a lot of things that needed to be said, that many people are afraid to say nowadays because of political correctness and the possible "Stir" certain ideas might create among churchmembers. IT seems that, any time "housekeeping" tasks, such as cooking, cleaning, taking care of children, are mentioned in conjunction with the role of Motherhood and woman's role of "nurturing" (as outlined in the Proclamation to the family) the feminist sector (a sector in which I include myself) explodes. "Shame on you, Julie Beck," they say, "for further undermining the self-confidence and autonomy of the LDS woman." Or, conversely, "Shame on you for saying that LDS people are better (or ought to be better) Homemakers, because it's disrespectful to those not of our faith."

OK. My thoughts:

Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurturing of their children. STraight from the proclamation. What does that mean? It means that, in any way she can, a Mom's focus should be mostly concentrated on things related to nurturing their children. Things such as.... what?

You fill in the blanks. But I, myself, include stuff like cleaning, feeding, bathing, taking care of sick children, grocery shopping, managing finances, preparing family home evening lessons and family activities, arranging playdates, and many other typically "Housekeeper-y" tasks in this category. Is there something wrong with that? I don't think so. Furthermore, someone in the family has to do all these things. ANd I can say from personal experience that it is nearly impossible to accomplish them while also trying to sustain a full-time job, unless you hire someone, or you have enough older kids that you can divvy up chores. So, IMO, unless a house needs two incomes, it's really most efficient for someone to stay home, whether that be the Mother or the Father. And, let me redirect you to the proclamation: Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children.

I actually feel really good about that.

Of course, that doesn't mean that mothers shouldn't pursue redeeming tasks for personal enrichment. It doesn't mean that, if it makes more sense, financially, for the mother to work, that she shouldn't be the breadwinner. It doesn't mean that putting your child in childcare is tantamount to neglecting your calling. Julie Beck said none of those things in either of her talks.

What she did was to focus the spotlight back on something that we have all been sidestepping because we're so worried about stirring up the hornets' nest: Mothers take care of kids when they can, and they do the best job usually. And this means spending most of the day as a housekeeper. And yes, you can find redemption in that; in creating an atmosphere of nurturing. That's your calling as Mom. If you can't stay home, then don't beat yourself up. But if you can... it's actually a blessing, and something you can find fullfillment in doing.

And yes, I am a Feminist.

blondism

The last comment on my race and adoption post made me think of something. Something that I have wanted to post about for a while. Something that troubles me deeply when I encounter it.

Now, I'm not trying to compare my experience with that of racial minorities. Not at all. People of color have a completely different, and perhaps more vicious set of preconceived notions to deal with. So, not to compare, just to state, for the purpose of observation and discussion:

Blonds are discriminated against. Yes, they are. You laugh, my friend, but you're not the one who was called "spacy," "airhead," etcetera whilst riding the busses of your youth. Oh, and worse. To be assumed to be "easy," "dismissible", "not serious."

Seriously. And you know what? Ok. I'm just going to make a list.

The Ten Crappiest Things That Blonds Have to Deal With.

10) A questioning as to the naturalness ofhair color, and therefore a blatant accusation of vanity, based solely on outward appearance.

9) A general attitude of dismissiveness by persons in authority who like to take themselves too seriously.

8) A lack of photographability: ie, looking undeveloped and washed out in any picture ever taken of you, particularly if you do not falsely darken certain facial features.

7) An addiction to SPF 30-or-higher and the possibility of having pieces of one's body cut off as one approaches cancerous ages.

6) The assumption by men that, just because you're Blond, you'll be willing to do for them what Marylin Monroe would do for them.

5) A lack of versatility/experimental leeway in the hair coloring department. It's much easier for a brunette to go lighter and pull it off than for a blond to go darker and not look like Morticia Adams.

4) The automatic assumption of youth; the whispers in the grocery store about 18 year olds and how they ought to do something with their lives other than popping out babies. LOOK AT MY FACE, people. See? Crows feet! And dang it, I have a bachelor's in psychology!!

3) The people that come up to you and ask if you're related to some other random blond person that they know. "Y'all look alike"... well, I know (to a very small degree, perhaps) how that feels.

2) The honking at stop lights. I know that, at 11:00 pm with the glare of headlights obscuring any clear vision of me within the confines of my poop-covered intrepid, added to the fact that I am nearly seven months pregnant, all they can really see is the blond hair. And so they honk. And so I tear off the green light and pass them. Yesssss!!!!

1) The mistrust of other women. Nuff said. Don't want to open up the vent on this one... it deserves another couple of posts, and nobody would probably want to read them ;)


And to add to all this, guys, I deserve sympathy because I'm not a blond with a cute, round, delicate swedish face.

I am a blond with LATIN features. I inherited the best of my biological grandmother's Portuguese facial bone structure: almond-shaped eyes, broad, high cheekbones, defined chin, aquiline nose. These look gorgeous and mysterious on a person with a matching complexion, but apparently strong features + blond hair = snob in most people's repertoire of first impressions. Without realizing it, I look really pissed off a lot of the time, when I'm in reality just intensely interested or perhaps bored. And apparently (I was told this by a brave guy friend during my single days)I accidentally smile evil smiles.

Add to that my tendency to act the clown and have unexpected hobbies (writing, homeschooling, vegetarianism and adopting Ethiopian children), and well, I'm doomed. When you defy enough stereotypes that nobody knows exactly which box you belong in, they tend to try to forget that you might be a nice person to get to know.

Most people don't like me until they've known me a while. Sigh. Alack and Alas.

But seriously, I don't know what I would think of myself if I weren't blond. It would be so weird. My hair color is such an integral part of my identity at this point... it has never changed. From the time of my birth. So I wouldn't want to change it.

And in a way, that could loop back to the adoption/racism conversation, too... can I teach this to my kids? You love who you are, and so, despite the fact that you get flack for your differences (and I admit, blondness is a vapid comparison to the sort of discrimination that my children my face), you love them anyway, because you love yourself, and wouldn't want to be someone else.

Oh, and just to clarify-- I love Marylin. Despite all that she has done to denigrate the cause of intelligent blond women.

Do I Have to Call Myself a Feminist?

Ok.

There have been a couple of times I have gotten frustrated with the way the term Feminist has become some kind of epithet, or even just a loaded word-- from those on both sides of the issue.

Rush Limbaugh and his coinage of the term, "Femi-Nazi" makes me laugh and hate him at the same time.

My question is this: What do I have to do to be called a feminist? Feminists often won't have me, because I actually do think that, when at all possible, a woman's place is In The Home. With her children. I actually think that kids need their own mom. This is coming from someone (me) who was a single parent and worked really really hard for a living for a while, and had to put her child in childcare-- and I think that Heavenly Father makes up the difference when you have to do this.

But why, oh why, would you do it willingly? I guess everyone is different, and there are a lot of different reasons why women need to work. Lots of them. So I don't judge any one individual-- I just take issue when people are offhanded about it, like "oh, it doesn't matter that much-- they'll learn to love their childcare givers, lots of kids have done it and it hasn't hurt them."

I think it does matter. Not just for them, but for us. Why should we miss out when we don't need to?

I think that motherhood is the ultimate act of creativity. You help someone become who they are supposed to become-- partially by molding them, and partially through sensitively helping them mold themselves.

And what is the reward at the end of the labor (which never really ends?) More possibly amazing people in the world, who also happen to be your good friends, usually.

On the other hand, there are lots of people who would call me a feminist. Lots. Which I'm OK with--- in my opinion,

feminism, the term itself should just mean an interest in the issues surrounding womanhood. A person who studies and takes an interest in women. Not a creepy interest, I guess I need to differentiate on that score. A real interest in women without an abusive agenda.

The hard thing is, I guess I do have to throw out some labels. If, for instance, someone invites me over to dinner, I do have to say, "by the way, we're vegetarian," if I don't want to offend them by not eating meat.

If someone asks me if I am a Christian, I say "yes." Because I believe in and worship Christ. But then I do have to throw out, "I am also Mormon." Because a lot of people would be misled by my saying I am a Christian, because lots of people think Mormons are not Christians. Which, by the way, is kind of silly.


If someone asks me if I'm a feminist, I have to also say "yes," because I do believe in equal rights between men and women, and I take an interest in womens' issues. I assume that's what people mean when they say feminist.

But a lot, and I mean a whole lot, of people that I know, are put off by this. Just as they are put off when I say that I'm liberal. But neither of those things is meant to infringe upon anyone else's rights at all. I simply believe what I believe, do my best to live my life that way, and I still like people who believe differently.

One long-standing friend of mine was somewhat taken-aback to hear that I was a democrat. He is a staunch republican. It's funny-- he threw the line at me about, if you're young and you're not a democrat, you don't have a heart. If you're old and you're not a republican, you don't have a brain.

Well, how about, I like you and you're my friend, so I have a heart AND a brain. Is that OK, Dr. B?

:)

Just a slight vent. Thanks for listening.