Report

[All-American]

During the discussion on how much education a stay at home mother needs, the charge was made that the church (and particularly BYU) discourages women from obtaining education and pursuing a career to such an extent that in engaged in institutional repression.

The accusation surprised me. It's obvious that the church places the highest importance on the family and encourages as the ideal that mothers stay at home with their children. Having just graduated from BYU, however, I hadn't seen anything that suggests that as an institution, either BYU or the church did anything to discourage women whose goals varied from this ideal from pursuing their dreams. I decided I would look into it a little more by asking various women whom I know what their feelings were on this matter.

I tried to cast a fairly wide net so as to include a broader range of experiences. Some of the experiences they described were quite personal, and so I am posting this in this private forum with their names and most identification whereby they could be identified removed, but what they contributed in this little examination was of great interest. All of them have bachelor's degrees, most of them from BYU. Some are single, some are married with children. Some have just graduated, a few have been out of school for some time now. Among them are holders of master’s degrees, JDs, MDs, and PhDs. They've obtained every level of education, and as such, can be considered reasonably qualified to speak to the issue at hand.

When I posed the question to these women of whether LDS women face gender bias and discrimination, they gave me responses that were COMPLETELY contradictory. About half of them said they had NEVER-- and they used the word "Never"-- experienced anything of the sort. Some were frankly surprised that anybody would make such a claim. The other half said they had absolutely experienced gender bias and discrimination, and were wearied, troubled, and disgusted by it.

So why the discrepancy in the responses? One answer is that card carrying LDS members are hesitant to say something that might cast a negative light on the church, perhaps even to the point that they may overlook faults and flaws. Others may find this a reasonable explanation, but I for one do not. I'm not nearly bold enough to tell somebody who says that they have not faced repression that they are wrong, and that they actually had, and that they didn't recognize it because they are wearing Mormon blinders. On the other hand, I'm not going to accuse anybody who says they experienced rampant oppression that they are exaggerating. Lacking any reason to question the credibility of my respondents, my rule here is to accept what they have told me and compare it to what others have said, and treat variant testimony as an anomaly and not a fabrication.

A second reason, superior to the first, is that women who ultimately conformed to the cultural norm, got married, and stayed at home to raise children are obviously less likely to experience cultural pressure than those who do not. Most of the women with whom I spoke already had the well-ingrained desire to stay at home with their children. Any who strayed from that ideal reported having done so only after a good deal of soul-searching (though, to be fair, everybody who had anything to say on this one, whether they ultimately became stay-at-home mothers or not, tells me they put a good deal of thought into what was right for them). It comes as little surprise that those whose hopes and expectations for themselves do not oppose the cultural norm should have experienced less cultural resistance.

(I should note, however, that there are exceptions to this rule, too. There are those who pursued the highest levels of education and enjoyed a long and busy career, but say they never felt held back, and in fact were encouraged by friends, family, and priesthood leaders to pursue her education and degree.)

The main reason for the discrepancy in responses seems to be a different definition of terms. Everybody who responded noted that church teachings encourage women and men alike to obtain the highest level of education possible. Most pointed out that a higher degree of education made for a better mother. I was especially grateful to see how many recognized that education was not, as one respondent puts it, "just be used in case someone never gets married or has to get a job when a husband can't provide for the family." It was generally understood that the decision for a mother to work was not necessarily contrary to church teachings, but was a decision each family was to make for themselves, and that those who judged others for making that decision were clearly in the wrong. Those who claimed that they had never experienced gender discrimination tended to focus on those doctrinal teachings as the basis of their response. Even those who reported that they HAD experienced gender discrimination noted these church teachings. Most agreed that the church has stressed the importance of family and the home without necessarily dictating gender roles, even if it prefers a certain ideal.

It seems that gender bias is taking place not so much over the pulpit as in the foyer, the intersection of ecclesiastical and cultural institution. Those who reported that they had experienced gender discriminations based their response not so much upon the teachings of the leaders of the church, but upon the interactions they have had with other members. Respondents in pursuit of careers and higher education did not feel that the brethren disapproved of their actions, but have felt that mainstream church members, particularly in Utah, judged them for wanting a career. Those who reported feeling pressured usually absolved the church as an institution from charges of discrimination.

But even if the pressure was not "institutional", per se, it was still very much present. Some of what they told me was frankly disheartening. One woman with whom I spoke said that she could expect a lecture without fail whenever she expressed interest in pursuing her field, and that it got bad enough that she simply stopped telling people about her interests. At times, when they did receive “acceptance,” it was less in the form of genuine support as intrigued interest in the novelty. It was readily apparent that in our culture, too many women are too often made to feel that, as one person put it, “I can have goals in my life as long as I know they are actually a pipe dream.”

[All-American]

Now, as disheartening as these statements are, I should note two things.

First, the problem of social and cultural pressure on women to assume certain roles is not unique to the LDS culture. Some respondents, for example, said that they felt enormous pressure NOT to stay at home, as though a mother stays at home because she's not good for anything else. Mormonism has its own unique brand of culture and society, and pressure to stay at home was strongest where that culture was most prevalent. The most blatant examples of pressure to stay at home all came from Utah; those reporting from the eastern states claim they never felt working women (including themselves) were ostracized or looked down-upon. So if LDS women are made to feel that they must stay at home, it is altogether possible that this is not so much an example of an oppressive institution as a unique iteration of the same universal cultural phenomenon. Women across the country are still being made to feel that they must conform to expected societal norms.

Second, and probably most importantly, most of the pressure women feel to stay at home is entirely internal. If it comes from other people, it usually comes from other women. Note, for example, that the most well-known general conference address encouraging women to stay at home came not from the men, but from Julie Beck, the Relief Society President. In her final general conference address, Sherri Dew, the patron saint of LDS singles, gave an address encouraging marriage entitled, "It is Not Good for Man or Woman to Be Alone."

But pressure from other LDS women pales in comparison to pressure from within the individual. None of those who responded said they let societal or cultural expectations affect their decision. Every woman said they did as they were doing because they felt that it was the right thing to do, not because they thought it was what others wanted them to do. Most of the mothers who worked quickly abandoned their careers to stay at home, even under pressure from others to stay at work, and most singles who have pursued careers still express the hope that they will be able to stay at home with their children, if and when they come. These women genuinely want to stay at home.

You can argue that societal or cultural expectations affected what they thought was the right thing to do, but again, I would prefer to take them at their word rather than try to refute their testimony. But this internal desire also seems to come with its negative consequences. One quote, for example:

“I don't think the key problem is that women are dissuaded from getting an education. I think the problem is they don't think they can. When I began telling people I was going to graduate school, I heard a disturbing amount of comments that indicated my female friends, family members, and associates didn't feel they were smart enough to accomplish something similar. Those comments haven't stopped. I see mothers who don't feel they have an intellect at all. I see single ladies of great potential take low paying, dead end jobs. I see older women who believe their opportunities to grow are past. They dismiss their own talents as basic, simple, and below what I am trying to build as a professional. That is wildly, outrageously false.”

One of the most tragic results of these lowered expectations are those who put off professional goals for the “what if” of marriage. They gambled their lives on the hopes of finding a husband and starting a family, and would now give anything to turn back the clock.

So yes, the problem exists. As I see it, two things can be done to correct the problem:

1. Decision-making must be entrusted to the individuals.

Most of the external pressure LDS women have experienced can be characterized as nosey neighbors, who perhaps mean well but ought to butt out. This is simple stuff, really. People should not stick their noses in the business of others. But we're often unaware of the extent to which we do this. As observed, this is not a phenomenon limited to the church, or to women. SU made a sage observation when he asked what one would think if he heard that a man was staying at home with his children. Clearly, we have societal expectations of both women and men which ought not be imposed upon those who are trying to do what they feel is right.

This cuts in both directions. We tend to prefer that women graduate from college before settling down, or, if they DO get married before graduation, to at least finish the degree. If, however, a woman passes on an opportunity to gain more education to start a family, it is entirely appropriate for those who express their love and concern for another to give advice and encouragement, but they must also be willing to leave the decision making to them.

2. Women should be encouraged to cultivate a life with interests outside the home.

If women have interests outside the home, whether they be full-time or part-time employment, civic participation, or just a hobby, they will be all the better for it as individuals, as spouses, and as mothers. This is not just because it allows them to “fill their tanks,” though that reason is probably good enough on its own. My grandmother, for example, to whom our family often looks as a near ideal mother, gave up a potential career as a world-class singer when her first daughter was born. She may have given up life as a singer, but she never gave up singing. Among the other singing groups in which she participated, she was a member of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir. Cultivating this talent had a direct impact upon the lives of her children and grandchildren. My aunts treasure each opportunity they get together to sing with each other for whatever purpose, or sometimes none at all. One of my earliest memories is of listening to a tape of my grandmother singing nursery songs for her grandchildren who lived far away. Because she did not give up her interests outside of the home to be a mother, the lives of her posterity were immeasurably enriched.

Others whose mothers took on jobs likewise stated that it had a net benefit on their family. One friend said that it changed the way they looked at their mother. They were more willing to set the table, help with the dishes, and perform other "homemaking" chores typically assigned to the mother, knowing that she had just spent a number of hours fulfilling other responsibilities. Children need to be able to see their mothers as more than a maid and a chauffer.

The importance of positive role models in all of this would be hard to understate. Each of those whom I contacted who had gone on to get a higher education degree or a career they enjoyed had a positive role model whom their actions closely followed. Nothing can so effectively combat the constraints of a cultural expectation quite like somebody who successfully defies and exceeds expectations. If too many think they just can't do it, we need more trailblazers that show that they can. Conversely, we ought to identify and celebrate those who accomplish and succeed, overcoming not only the requirements of the task at hand, but the societal and cultural pressure to be normal in becoming truly extraordinary.

I don't believe the church represses women from over the pulpit, but social and cultural pressure, whether from others or from within, is still a force women who would aspire for greater things must combat. With all the good an individual, man or woman, can achieve, it would be a true shame if they were made to settle for less because of nonexistent boundaries. In an age where the amount of good one can do is no longer bound by constraints of time, space, and, to a large extent, resources, for a woman to think that her sphere of influence is limited to the home would be a tragic waste.