Is there a place for the modern woman in the church?

[MikeWaters]

I first started thinking about this when I had a female friend investigate the church. She attended a couple of times with me, and she said that she could not handle Relief Society and really hated it. I gather she felt like she was transported into 1950.

We hear of single LDS professional women feeling like their dating options are limited because LDS men are either disinterested or intimidated by such women. Many professional women may feel that the concerns of the typical LDS homemaker are different than their concerns. Some feel judged and scorned for their choices.

When I was at BYU, in the list of 300 or so students who had been accepted by medical schools for admission, only ~5 were women.

So my question deals not as much with the choices of women raised in the church, but the environment in the church for the convert professional woman (rare as she might be).

I think all evidence points to LDS young women being discouraged from pursuing professional careers. Is this how you all feel as well? That you will subtly discourage this for your daughters?

Is this view changing in the church? (i.e. is the church very slowly becoming slightly more liberal in its view on women's roles in society?) or is this apostasy creeping into the church, "the philosophies of men"?

[BYU71]

From personal observation I believe it works the same as any cultural group. There are guidelines for the masses and then exceptions for the upper class.

The guidelines for the masses I think is to still pursue an education, but if the opportunity comes along to get married, have kids and stay at home, that is what you should do.

For the upper class they are more concerned about making sure the gal has an education and the ability to support herself should she marry a bum.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by BYU71

From personal observation I believe it works the same as any cultural group. There are guidelines for the masses and then exceptions for the upper class.

The guidelines for the masses I think is to still pursue an education, but if the opportunity comes along to get married, have kids and stay at home, that is what you should do.

For the upper class they are more concerned about making sure the gal has an education and the ability to support herself should she marry a bum.

maybe for your generation. but for my generation, staying at home is not necessarily considered the most ideal situation for upper educated classes.

Staying at home doesn't make you pariah, but it's hardly the cultural norm.

[Archaea]

Are we able to judge the predominant culture within the Church any longer?

Is the culture the same in DC, as it is in Utah?

Even in uncultured Nevada, we see many educated, professional women in the Church.

In one respect, it almost seems that for the upper middle class and the upper class within the Church, those members must fight, whether male or female, to remain interested in the Church and its culture.

The Church culture really attends mostly to the lower economic echelon and the low end of middle class. In this sector, the professional woman doesn't exist and Church culture of women having meaningless, dreary daytime jobs is no different than those outside the Church.

The predominant Church culture is egalitarian and ignores the upper middle class and upper class.

[MikeWaters]

I'm not aware of a single professional woman in my ward who is married with children.

[BYU71]

There are generalities that I believe to be true. I think more often than not it is better for the Mom to stay at home and not work. However, there are many valid cases where the exception to that would be better for the family.

The problem as I see it for religion is when they offer such a guideline, many take it as a form of a commandment, not a guideline. Structurally leaders can't say there are valid exceptions to the guideline. That gives everyone the opportunity to claim an out for not following the guideline and not have to give weight to the peer pressure that comes from the fundamentalists in the culture.

The wieght and severity of the pressure to follow guidelines come and go and also can be emphasized or not depending on where you live geographically.

I guarantee you guidelines are empasized more at Ricks college than say a ward in Massachusetts.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I'm not aware of a single professional woman in my ward who is married with children.

Haven't you also informed us how impoverished most of the members of your ward are?

IIRC, your ward either includes young marrieds, poor members and locals who never moved. Is your ward likely to include married, professional women?

Some how the Church culture will need to make provision for these women, or the men that are attracted to them.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Good question, Mike. From my perspective, I think attitudes are slowly changing. I do everything I can to encourage young women to go into engineering or some other professional track. I tell them that if they choose to have a career (or if a career is forced upon them) they should have a rewarding and well-paying career.

I think Leonard J. Arrington was correct when he said that the church follows the general direction as society at large on issues like this (and birth control, family size, etc.), but it just lags behind a decade or two.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

I think Leonard J. Arrington was correct when he said that the church follows the general direction as society at large on issues like this (and birth control, family size, etc.), but it just lags behind a decade or two.

That's a good and bad thing.

[marsupial]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Haven't you also informed us how impoverished most of the members of your ward are?

Well that would be the half that aren't married to lawyers.