"Mothers Who Know": the Modern Offense Translation

[NorCal Cat]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

No...I've grown up in it. And I do hear my share of goofy things at Church. It's just that they're generally not specifically directed at someone in a one-on-one setting. Behind the back, I'll give you. But not to their face.

Or sometimes it's a case where someone is misreading the message or applying something to them that's not intended. (Not saying that's the case with Mrs Funk or BYU 71). But to directly call someone out? I haven't seen that very much.

Well, the cases I am talking about..it's not like people are calling people out in the middle of Gospel Doctrine class. I am talking about comments made during Visiting Teaching, such as the example given, or conversations between small groups of people, etc.

[Mrs. Funk]

Originally Posted by NorCal Cat

Oh man, reminds me of the discussion we had in EQ last week. We talked about the leadership meeting a couple weeks ago, and one of the topics from the meeting was "put family first." We talked about what this means. Of course the topic of personal hobbies came up. I honestly think some people believe that once you are married, that you are being "selfish" if you do ANYTHING for yourself.

For example, sometimes when people find out that I actually go surfing with a buddy, people seem to be perplexed at the idea of this, and why in the world my wife "lets" me do such a thing.

Pretty much. I think that a person who spends 100% of the day devoted to "their duties" is missing the point. I think it's some of the reason that Mormon women sometimes let themselves go so much (I hate to point this out, but it's a rampant disorder among women of the church.) Raising a family and being a good spouse doesn't mean never going surfing... or never reading a book... or whatever personal enrichment that you enjoy.

[NorCal Cat]

Originally Posted by Spaz

Actually, you're going on what you THINK she meant. You're certainly NOT going from what she actually said, or you'd realize that her statements were NOT exclusionary, and therefore don't logically lead directly to "if you DON'T do this, then you're NOT a good mother."

At NO POINT in her talk did she say that what she was describing was the only way to be a good mother.

NO, my whole point is that it is easy to see why someone would have an issue with certain parts of her talk, based strictly upon what she SAID.

[Spaz]

Originally Posted by SoCalCoug

Good thing her fellow ward members can identify her as a mother who doesn't know, now.

Again, you're ascribing to her talk something that's simply not there. If you can show me in her talk where she says "If any of you don't do any of these things, you don't know anything about being a mother", then I'll stop saying those who take the talk that way are incorrectly interpreting it.

BTW, it has nothing to do with 'calling out'. On the contrary, I hope that my words here (and, now that I know this is going on, anyone I meet in person) will help them better understand that they SHOULD NOT feel bad in any way if they don't perfectly fit the mold.

[Mrs. Funk]

All right, guys. It's been fun. But I've got to go work on shaping my womanly identity in the church and get my studying done.

[NorCal Cat]

Originally Posted by Spaz

Again, you're ascribing to her talk something that's simply not there. If you can show me in her talk where she says "If any of you don't do any of these things, you don't know anything about being a mother", then I'll stop saying those who take the talk that way are incorrectly interpreting it.

BTW, it has nothing to do with 'calling out'. On the contrary, I hope that my words here (and, now that I know this is going on, anyone I meet in person) will help them better understand that they SHOULD NOT feel bad in any way if they don't perfectly fit the mold.

Let me help you here. Did you miss this the first time?

SoCal says: "After months of discussions, I've come to the conclusion that if you can't see the potential misinterpretation of Sister Beck's talk, you're either stupid or hopelessly self-centered.

I think the message that I believe was intended is well-meaning and appropriate. I think the delivery was unfortunate."

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

Are people ACTUALLY saying these things? Or are you reading into it a little?

Seriously, I wish people would say these things at our ward. It would be much more fun to go to church.

You are probably living a good life within the normal range in the church. Live outside that normal range and you can get shocked often. Single and not looking to get married is out of the normal range. I have on occasion felt some of the ladies in the ward really wanted me married so there husbands didn't see how much fun I was having with my life.

My brother told me once he was in class, gospel doctrine I think. He is married to a Philipino and a couple also in the class was male black feemale white.

Somehow the teacher got going and went off on how we shouldn't be marrying interculturally or interracially. I actually told my brother I didn't believe him. I asked his wife who doesn't tell stories and she confirmed it. I wonder if anyone else in the class thought a thing of it.

[Spaz]

Originally Posted by Mrs. Funk

I think the topic of a woman's role in the church is a "powder keg," as some people call it, because that role is still being defined and redefined.

I mean, let's be honest. I think men get bludgeoned with exact details about what they are supposed to do. Like Mike says, don't look at pornography. You bastards have 60% on your home teaching. Be the primary financial provider... ad nauseum.

I feel that I do get conflicting messages about what I am supposed to do as a woman in the church. Get as much education as you can, but don't put off children. Go on a mission, but don't put off getting married. Be financially stable, but have a honeymoon baby.

The expansion of women's rights have brought a lot of important changes, but they are changes that I think the church was and is still ill equipped to handle in any effective way. It's difficult to teach a generation of "empowered" women that they should still have families without sounding anti-feminist and outdated. The church, on the other hand, of course can't fully come out and say, "YES, please women! Leave your families and go to work!" And let's be honest: the church is run by old men, who aren't really in a position to be rolling with the punches and adapting to the changes of modern times. In many ways, our church is still lodged solidly in the 19th century.

The state of flux regarding the personal identities, rights, and roles of women in and out of the house and the church is a touchy subject and of course highly controversial. Sister Beck taking a stance and the ensuing tsunami of outrage illustrates that.

I don't disagree with the fundamental message behind Sister Beck's talk so much as I disliked the delivery. I think it could have been quite inspirational if some of the rhetoric was changed. "Mothers Who Know." Ouch. I mean, by the wording alone, you're a mother who DOES NOT KNOW if you aren't doing what the talk outlined.

Of course, what do you title your talk?
"Mothers Who are Working On It"
"Mothers Who Know a FEW Things"
"Imperfect Women in an Imperfect Church Run by Imperfect Men"

The possibilities are endless.

I enjoyed this post. The only thing I'll say...as I've said countless other times in these threads, is that I don't see her talk as being exclusionary, as many people are taking it.

I'm certainly not arguing that the language & delivery of the talk could not have been clearer. Obviously, many people seem to have read the exclusionist theory into her talk. If she had it to do over again, I would hope that she would make it clearer that her talk was directed towards a specific group, and not meant as the only path to 'good motherhood'.

Still, I will argue this point as long as it's brought up - her talk was NOT EXCLUSIONARY.

[Spaz]

Originally Posted by Mrs. Funk

I think it's great that feminism is on the front burner, but it's unfortunate that it was ignited by a talk that facially seems to anti-feminist and old-fashioned.

I'm the only wife in my family ward here in Utah that is in school right now. I'm the only one who hasn't had kids. I get Sister Beck stuff crammed down my throat all the time. The women in my ward seemed universally delighted by it. It's hard to not feel awkward when my visiting teachers condescend to remind me of the importance of bearing children and having a family.

FWIW, I will argue with these people just as vigorously as I have with the anti-Beckites.

[ERCougar]

Ok...let me suggest one set of "disenfranchised" people that Sister Beck's talk did help.

My wife had a bachelor's degree and a job when we met. We got married, had a surprise child early on and she decided to quit her job and be a mother full-time. Wasn't the original plan, but that's how it worked out.

We now have three kids and are fortunate enough to survive on my income. I now find myself defending her decision to my colleagues (male and female) who often automatically assume that since my wife is at home, she's a "gold-digger" with no talents of her own, or that I'm a sexist who likes his woman barefoot and pregnant. Why should I have to defend her commitment to a pursuit that we both believe is the highest either one of us could participate in?

Maybe that's why I'm not offended at Sister Beck's talk. I took it as a reaffirmation that raising children is the highest calling either I or my wife can have. How we do it is up to us.