I sent this email to my Bishop.. Is there something I am missing?

[Requiem]

Originally Posted by creekster

One of the main reasons men are lazy and never do their share is becaseu no one expects them to. This is not ocnsistent, IMO, with the mantle of the priesthood and the expectations of God.

It is a serious cultural problem and not limited to singles' wards. Throughout my life I have observed women doing the majority of the heavy lifting in terms of getting men to complete their HT, follow through on assignments, etc. Doesn't paint a rosy picture for the future.

Since you understand the problem, why don't you submit an article to the Ensign? It would only be published if written by a man.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by Requiem

It is a serious cultural problem and not limited to singles' wards. Throughout my life I have observed women doing the majority of the heavy lifting in terms of getting men to complete their HT, follow through on assignments, etc. Doesn't paint a rosy picture for the future.

Since you understand the problem, why don't you submit an article to the Ensign? It would only be published if written by a man.

I would but my wife is too busy right now to help.



Just a joke. I have never, in my entire life, even considered writing something for the Ensign, although I was going to enter the song contest once, years ago. It's not a bad idea for someone to try. Maybe some of our more scholarly folks could give it a whirl (Pelagius, is that you raising your hand?)

[Solon]

Originally Posted by creekster

One of my pet peeves about church culture (and not doctrine) is how men are expected and even enoucraged to be slack-jawed spiritual and cultural idiots and women are expected to take up the slack (I realize I'm mixing slacks here, but you get the point). In our ward whenever there is any social event the men always jokingly say how the women have to be in charrge for ti to be any good and the women in the RS actually ENOUCRAEG this thinking. It drives me wild. This goes beyond cereal and doughnuts, but that example is certainly symptomatic. One of the main reasons men are lazy and never do their share is becaseu no one expects them to. This is not ocnsistent, IMO, with the mantle of the priesthood and the expectations of God.

I agree. I cook. I clean. I plan. I'm not feminine. Men need to get off their asses and all (male and female) need to de-stigmatize the sterotypes

[BigFatMeanie]

Originally Posted by creekster

One of my pet peeves about church culture (and not doctrine) is how men are expected and even enoucraged to be slack-jawed spiritual and cultural idiots and women are expected to take up the slack (I realize I'm mixing slacks here, but you get the point). In our ward whenever there is any social event the men always jokingly say how the women have to be in charrge for ti to be any good and the women in the RS actually ENOUCRAEG this thinking. It drives me wild. This goes beyond cereal and doughnuts, but that example is certainly symptomatic. One of the main reasons men are lazy and never do their share is becaseu no one expects them to. This is not ocnsistent, IMO, with the mantle of the priesthood and the expectations of God.

It's because men have the "Unnecessary Work Detection" gene and women don't. If true work needs to be done then I'm the first one in line. If it's stupid useless work then I'm never going to show up and help. Women just aren't born with the Unnecessary Work Detection gene and thus spin their wheels on all sorts of useless stuff like tablecloths and centerpieces for activities and tablecloths and flowers for their RS lessons. Of course, everyone has a different definition of what unnecessary work is. My personal defintition breaks down as follows:

Necessary Work
-----------------
- Welfare assignments (with the exception of Deseret Transportion truck washes - hire some homeless people to do that one)
- Responding to requests to give blessings or calls for help when people truly need it. Helping people move when they haven't planned, packed, or otherwise taken any effort beyond calling the EQP at the last minute does NOT fall into this category
- Maybe some other stuff every once in a while but I can't really think of anything else right now.

Unnecessary Work
--------------------
- Staffing a nursery while the RS entertain themselves.
- Helping out in any activity where the main purpose is for people to entertain themselves. This primarily includes stupid social crap like Linger Longer and Break the Fast and the ward pancake breakfast and all that stuff.

I expect to do my share when the work involves more than simply entertaining ourselves. I have zero interest in the social activities that the church puts on and I certainly don't think that lame cultural bullcrap such as "Linger Longer" has anything to do with the mantle of the priesthood or the expectations of God.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by BigFatMeanie

It's because men have the "Unnecessary Work Detection" gene and women don't. If true work needs to be done then I'm the first one in line. If it's stupid useless work then I'm never going to show up and help. Women just aren't born with the Unnecessary Work Detection gene and thus spin their wheels on all sorts of useless stuff like tablecloths and centerpieces for activities and tablecloths and flowers for their RS lessons. Of course, everyone has a different definition of what unnecessary work is. My personal defintition breaks down as follows:

Necessary Work
-----------------
- Welfare assignments (with the exception of Deseret Transportion truck washes - hire some homeless people to do that one)
- Responding to requests to give blessings or calls for help when people truly need it. Helping people move when they haven't planned, packed, or otherwise taken any effort beyond calling the EQP at the last minute does NOT fall into this category
- Maybe some other stuff every once in a while but I can't really think of anything else right now.

Unnecessary Work
--------------------
- Staffing a nursery while the RS entertain themselves.
- Helping out in any activity where the main purpose is for people to entertain themselves. This primarily includes stupid social crap like Linger Longer and Break the Fast and the ward pancake breakfast and all that stuff.

I expect to do my share when the work involves more than simply entertaining ourselves. I have zero interest in the social activities that the church puts on and I certainly don't think that lame cultural bullcrap such as "Linger Longer" has anything to do with the mantle of the priesthood or the expectations of God.

The problem goes far beyond babysitting during linger longer (which I hate but which serves a purpose for htose lingeriong longer, or so my wife says). It goes to the way a ward is run and how assignments are given. Have you never heard osmeone say women are more spiritual than men? Many men abdicate their role as spiritual leaders becasue they are not expected by others or by themselves, and maybe not even by their own wife, ot be a spiritual leader. This goes directly to how households are run, the examnples that are given to children, how marriages work, etc. Men fail to step up where they should and fail to be the rock they are supposed to be, even though they usually expect to receive the same respect and other benefits of their male status. If this were limited to Linger Longer issues I might agree that it is not that big of a deal, but I find that the Linger Longer situations you are talkking about are simply the easiest to spot symptoms of a much deeper and serious problem.

I would also quibble with your assignment of social events and decoration to the unecessary category in all instances, but I think that detracts from my larger point here.

[Requiem]

Originally Posted by creekster

I would also quibble with your assignment of social events and decoration to the unecessary category in all instances, but I think that detracts from my larger point here.

Agreed - there is a larger point. Have you ever been in a ward where the VT% was less than the HT%? Not to mention the quality. Or is that another "unnecessary" category?

[BigFatMeanie]

Originally Posted by Requiem

Agreed - there is a larger point. Have you ever been in a ward where the VT% was less than the HT%? Not to mention the quality. Or is that another "unnecessary" category?

The quality of visiting teaching? Hah! A VT only needs to make "contact" with their assigned person in order to count it. How much of those great VT numbers are composed of simple phone calls or simple "hi, how are you doing" in church? An HT is supposed to actually go to the home and deliver a message in order to count it. Granted, many HT count the phone call or the "hi" but they're technically not supposed to.

When I home teach we are in the door, brief chat, message, find out if there are concerns, and out the door in a half hour or less. Multi-hour bull sessions among the sisters do not, in my opinion, equate to quality.

Also, I would venture to guess that in most wards the HP HT numbers are very near to the RS VT numbers. It's the EQ numbers that are horrible. Of course, the EQ gets the crappiest inactives in the ward to HT - you know, the 40 year old deacons. The 30 year old unbaptised members of record, etc. The HPs generally get assigned other HPs which are relatively easy to visit. How many inactive HPs do you know?

Are there lazy-ass brothers in the church? Of course there are. There are also lazy-ass sisters that don't do jack crap and are selfish, irresponsible, stupid, and frigid to their husbands. Individuals of both genders come with a wide variety of both talent and weakness. I have no problem calling a spade a spade when referring to various individuals but the talk about a ""larger point" is nonsense in my book.

The larger point is that the RS sisters have the largest or sometimes the second largest budget in the ward and it is mainly spent on entertaining themselves. The larger point is that sisters are continually built up and told how wonderful they are and that they are treasured daughters of Heavenly Father, etc. while the men are continually chastized and called to repentence. The larger point is that sisters don't have to make the tough decisions like, say, whether whether or not to excommunicate brother Jones. They don't get the calls in the middle of the night to bail brother Smith out of jail. They don't have brother Anderson coming in and confessing to them how he is watching porn and can't stop and it is destroying his life. They don't get called to hospital to bless a dying child and hoping they're living their life worthy enough to feel the Spirit and be able to determine which words to impart.

The sisters don't have these duties and yet a certain segment of the population clamors for women to hold the priesthood? Heck, let the women have it. If one thinks that half the population of the church has a subtle undertone of laziness or tendency to shirk duties and that the other half works their collective asses off then let the halves switch roles for a while. They'll soon find out that the grass is NOT always greener.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by BigFatMeanie

The quality of visiting teaching? Hah! A VT only needs to make "contact" with their assigned person in order to count it. How much of those great VT numbers are composed of simple phone calls or simple "hi, how are you doing" in church? An HT is supposed to actually go to the home and deliver a message in order to count it. Granted, many HT count the phone call or the "hi" but they're technically not supposed to.

When I home teach we are in the door, brief chat, message, find out if there are concerns, and out the door in a half hour or less. Multi-hour bull sessions among the sisters do not, in my opinion, equate to quality.

Also, I would venture to guess that in most wards the HP HT numbers are very near to the RS VT numbers. It's the EQ numbers that are horrible. Of course, the EQ gets the crappiest inactives in the ward to HT - you know, the 40 year old deacons. The 30 year old unbaptised members of record, etc. The HPs generally get assigned other HPs which are relatively easy to visit. How many inactive HPs do you know?

Are there lazy-ass brothers in the church? Of course there are. There are also lazy-ass sisters that don't do jack crap and are selfish, irresponsible, stupid, and frigid to their husbands. Individuals of both genders come with a wide variety of both talent and weakness. I have no problem calling a spade a spade when referring to various individuals but the talk about a ""larger point" is nonsense in my book.

The larger point is that the RS sisters have the largest or sometimes the second largest budget in the ward and it is mainly spent on entertaining themselves. The larger point is that sisters are continually built up and told how wonderful they are and that they are treasured daughters of Heavenly Father, etc. while the men are continually chastized and called to repentence. The larger point is that sisters don't have to make the tough decisions like, say, whether whether or not to excommunicate brother Jones. They don't get the calls in the middle of the night to bail brother Smith out of jail. They don't have brother Anderson coming in and confessing to them how he is watching porn and can't stop and it is destroying his life. They don't get called to hospital to bless a dying child and hoping they're living their life worthy enough to feel the Spirit and be able to determine which words to impart.

The sisters don't have these duties and yet a certain segment of the population clamors for women to hold the priesthood? Heck, let the women have it. If one thinks that half the population of the church has a subtle undertone of laziness or tendency to shirk duties and that the other half works their collective asses off then let the halves switch roles for a while. They'll soon find out that the grass is NOT always greener.

You're killing me. This isn't about 1. you; 2. budget size; 3. priesthood blessings given by worthy males; or, 4. claiming women work too hard. Btw, how many men have to decide whether to excommunicate someone? In general, I find Bishops shoulder their share and are capable of being the spiritual leader they should be.

I am talking about the cultural tendency to exalt the social and spiritual competence of women as an excuse to avoid cultivating those same traits in men. If you haven't' seen this, then either you have never been in leadership or you have a very different ward than mine. I have never said women work too hard or are too spiritual. to the contrary, they are doing fine. I find fault with men (and women that encourage this view) who lay off their role to women because women are better at it or more prepared or more spiritual etc. This is a lame excuse and should not be encouraged or allowed. I see this happen ALL THE TIME at the ward and stake level when planning activities, firesides, lessons, etc. It is embedded in our culture and almost presents a barrier to the progress of many men, IMO.

Finally, I want to make clear that, contrary to the premise of several of your arguments, I am not talking about ALL men or ALL women as to do so on this or any topic would be folly.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Requiem

It is a serious cultural problem and not limited to singles' wards. Throughout my life I have observed women doing the majority of the heavy lifting in terms of getting men to complete their HT, follow through on assignments, etc. Doesn't paint a rosy picture for the future.

Since you understand the problem, why don't you submit an article to the Ensign? It would only be published if written by a man.

I believe there were two talks in Priesthood Session of Oct '06 that addressed just this concern.

http://lds.org/conference/talk/displ...646-18,00.html

http://lds.org/conference/talk/displ...646-23,00.html

[Requiem]

Originally Posted by Tex

I believe there were two talks in Priesthood Session of Oct '06 that addressed just this concern.

http://lds.org/conference/talk/displ...646-18,00.html

http://lds.org/conference/talk/displ...646-23,00.html

Thanks - each talk is excellent.