Grrrrrrrrrl Power!

I have read the Bible a few times during my life, from cover to cover. I think I was about 12 years old the first time I did it. Before then there were cartoon slides that our parents would show us on a Monday night for Family Home Evening. This was always preferable to a boring lesson; the darkened room and the light from the projector elicited movie theatre magic and the treats were pretty cool too. 


Fast forward a few years and the church brought out VHS and now the ultra modern, DVDs. Yay, so now on Sundays Mormon children all over the world can subvert the rule of 'NO TV on Sundays' by asking for a Living Scipture Animated Book of Mormon Story.  (In our house though there were a few other things that our parents approved of on a Sunday: Mickey Mouse and Roadrunner cartoons, David Attenborough documentaries and John Wayne Westerns [which began at midday so there was always a rush to get home for the gun-toting madness... a bloodthirsty childhood to be sure, and here I am referring to the Bible, not the Westerns]). 


A friend posted a link on fb the other day to the 'Living Scriptures' website and also posted this comment about it.     


  "love that the first line from a woman in the entire Book of Mormon series is Lehi's wife saying "What does the Lord want NOW?" LOL!!!"


And by god she is right! Check out the titles just on the main page of this website:

>  Nephi and the Brass Plates	>  Alma and the Zoramites
>  Journey to the Promised Land	>  The Savior in America	>  The Tree of Life
>  Abinadi and King Noah	>  Samuel the Lamanite	>  Mormon and Moroni
>  The Conversion of Alma the Younger	>  Helaman’s Stripling Warriors	>  The Joseph Smith Story
>  Ammon, Missionary to the Lamanites

>  The Brother of Jared 

Just check out all of those rad hero's and heroines for the kiddies to emulate. Wait a minute, no heroine's you say? goddamit you are right!


And THAT is yet another reason why I am so glad that I am not raising my kids in this patriarchal mess of a religion. Even when we were still IN I used to scour the scriptures for heroine's and stories to bolster my little girls' confidence in herself. Now I don't have to bend the subject matter to my feminist ideals, the whole world and all of it's history and experience is now at my hands and ready for me to share with my daughter and my son.

Feminist Mormons: An Oxymoron or the Best of Both Worlds?

When I started to look deeper into the history of the LDS Church one of the first places this search took me was a blog called Feminist Mormon Housewives (fMh). It was here that I began to feel that it was ok to look at the ‘facts’ no matter how confronting they might be. The other source of comfort during this time of questioning was an article written by Hugh Nibley called Beyond Politics (BYU Studies 1974) where he wrote “God did not hold it against these men that they questioned him, but loved them for it…the Lord was not above discussing matters with the brother of Jared…” (p3). Ah, sweet words to a newly questioning soul.

I soon began to visit this online world for more than just information and ‘permission’ but also for friendship, discussion and above all a new and much needed feeling of belonging. The issues discussed there are varied and bold. Accompanying every thread is an almost tangible feeling of sisterhood. Wait! There is more than that. The feminist men who comment on the blog are such an integral part of the place that really the feeling is one of humanity? It is a forum where respect for each sex is the ideal.

Recently some feminist Mormons have put together a new blog called HOPE.  It is linked to the WAVE website (Women Advocating for voice and equality). At HOPE women (and men), LDS or not, can write about their experiences in relation to equality for women in the Church.

Why do I, as an ex-Mormon and known by other labels such as anti-Mormon and apostate, choose to support such movements?

As much as I dislike organised religion I also dislike the idea that I would turn my back on my friends at fMh simply because we have different beliefs. There are plenty of ex-mo’, atheist, agnostic etc supporters of fMh. There was a short time when I did not visit fMh as my feelings of betrayal and anger towards the LDS Church were quite high and I did not want to blow off steam in a place that still felt like home.

Considering the pain that I experienced leaving the LDS church I feel strongly that LDS members should be allowed to look into the truth about their church’s history and I think that fMh and HOPE are good places for active members to do that. If a person then chooses to remain a Mormon then at least it will have been their choice, a conscious informed choice. The other option of course is that they choose to leave. Either way LDS members will then have been given the chance to choose what is right for them.

IMO many of the people at fMh actually comprise what I consider to be a breakaway branch of Mormonism. I am all for it. They believe in God, Jesus, love, service… they just also happen to believe that God always intended for women to have a more significant role to play in the Priesthood, an equal role even. They look to the past to inform this dream for the future. They also believe that there is room in heaven for the LGBT community. Again, not a secondary role but an equal role. They look at each person on this planet as truly equal. That is something that I can admire.

If the girls and guys at fMh can enlighten the minds of the LDS youth and provide options in an otherwise strict and unbending institution (unbending towards its members vs very flexible in its changes to ‘doctrine’ over the years!!) then I am all for it. Consider for a moment the youth suicide rate in Utah. I think that fMh and HOPE along with other such blogs are very well positioned to alleviate a lot of suffering.

The Mormon conundrum is a complicated one. I hope to lend a hand in transitioning people out of it or at least into a safer part of it. 

Women as Property

About 8 months ago Rockstar and I attended a Sealing ceremony (marriage ceremony) at our local Mormon temple. It was done ‘by proxy’ meaning that we were participating on behalf of people who have died. Their living relatives having submitted their names to the temple to have them baptised, married and endowed.

At the time I was already beginning to question my faith in the religion but I was happy enough to be there that day. I felt quite peaceful all dressed in white, spending some time with my partner in a quiet and sacred place. As there is quite a bit of repetition in the ceremony I began to try and memorise the words (a little habit of mine). It didn’t take long for me to realise that the vows were different for the husband and wife. I listened more closely and confirmed that there was a significant and shocking difference. The man agrees to “receive her unto yourself”. The woman agrees to “give yourself to him”. (Full text can be found online in a basic search). There was no mention of the husband ‘giving himself’ or of the wife ‘receiving her husband’.

Disturbed by this I later asked the temple worker why there was a difference in the vows. He was surprised by my question and said that no-one had ever asked him that before. Then, thinking on the spot, he said (from memory) “well isn’t that what a woman does, give herself to her husband?”…… What! like a nicely wrapped present with a big fuckin’ puffy, satin bow!? #@%# ….. Well, I began to say how I really didn’t see how that explained anything when a higher-ranking member intervened and began to expound to me about how men and women are equal in the church. The other family members who were with us for this ceremony were visibly uncomfortable by this point. Feeling very unsatisfied I let it be.

When I later had the ear of my Bishop, and on another occasion a representative from the Stake Presidency, neither could give me any decent explanation. They asked me why such a thing should matter and insinuated that my feminist leanings were not exactly welcome.

Now, what turned this irk of mine into a full-blown grievance was a little diddy I discovered at feministmormonhousewives.org. Apparently (now, I have not been back to the temple to verify this for myself - although I did think about doing so, as up until last Thursday, I still had a current temple recommend) … apparently the leadership has in the last few months changed the wording of these vows. Now the woman agrees to “receive him unto herself” but still no mention of the man “giving himself”.

Well I’m sorry but instead of fixing the inequality, as far as I can see ‘they’ just created a big fucking obvious mole that says there is a really significant reason why the man cannot say that he ‘gives himself to his wife’. Hmmm, does this reason have something to do with the other 6 young doe-eyed, big-breasted virgins that the man gets to unwrap, I mean marry, in the next life???