my calling is to serve on the relief society activities committee, which i can say i have done faithfully, even with not being very active myself and even though i dislike the girl who used to be the head.
last winter we had a dinner/socialize activity. i had miraculously struck up conversation with this girl who self-identified as a feminist (it was a really great conversation and she started going on about the media, but looked a little lost when i started talking about gender roles, so i think we were disconnecting on what kind of feminists we are haha) and we talked for a while. in the kitchen afterward the head of the committee and i were cleaning up and she said, as though she was talking to a child, 'see, even you found someone to talk to!'
yeah, that happened.
she also wanted to have an activity every couple of weeks, even though the handbook and bishop say we only need to have them once a semester. for a three person committee in a VERY social and active ward, i felt like this was super overkill, especially when she wanted to have a dinner or some kind of food every time. she also was insistent that we have our planning meetings on sunday even though when she asked my opinion i was honest and open and said that i dislike piling meetings on sundays and prefer to have them during the week so i can better observe the sabbath. she insisted she had literally no time during the week for a half hour meeting and asked me again if i would mind having them on sunday even though i just told her i did. she also planned two separate temple trips with two different breakfasts provided (again, three person committe and the other lady didn't come) because one sister said she couldn't come. she then coordinated for the sisters who went on one trip to watch the kids of the women who went on the other, because apparently there is a mistrust of some of the brethren in the ward. i asked why the women couldn't ask their husbands to stay home with the kids, and she kind of looked at me like i was an alien. she said she wanted to guarantee that every woman could go, and i suggested that in the rare chance that their husbands couldn't 'watch' the kids, that they arrange for their own babysitters, and she continued to get reeeeally awkward.
when is too much too much?
ps
i really hate that byu is about numbers in the same way missions are. goals are important but people are more important than numbers. rather than having stimulating, spiritual lessons on visiting/home teaching to improve the testimony of it in the ward and to spur people on naturally, i feel like wards often default to pressuring individuals with stupid play-dumb questions (thus forcing people who just don't care to make up ridiculous excuses) and incessant reminders, which is too bad.
fellowship
apparently you have to be careful what you blog, even if it's a secret blog. we have definitely gotten on our ward's radar somehow. this mostly shows up through well meaning men who mainly know my husband, as i've mentioned before, but yesterday after church a sister flagged me down. (made the mistake of lingering too long.) she asked if i got the visiting teaching slip on my door (i kind of played dumb to demonstrate that i don't really care, which maybe was not the best) and told me my partner got switched and it would be out next week and blah blah something.
i was surprised when she asked me how i was and said she hadn't seen me around much. i recognized her but had talked to her maybe once. she was nice and asked where i work, what we have been up to, etc.
i know these are the interactions i've been wondering about, wondering why no one cared. one guy in particular has always checked up on us since we moved in, and we feel genuinely trusting of him. this woman, too, seemed genuinely interested in my answers, but i just can't help feel that she's in the rs presidency or somehow otherwise got a disproportionate amount of info about us (again, i had talked to her maybe once or twice). i'm torn. they obviously are realizing we're not around (even though it's been a while), but i know i am about as socially particular as you can get. i want them to care, but i don't really want to be friends with them (again, why do you have to be bfffffs with everyone in your ward at byu? seriously, it's ok if we don't hang out all the time, and we can still be polite and caring without having to have movie nights), and they need to be genuine but if i don't know them and they ask then it seems in-genuine. i know i'm self deconstructing and i don't really know what to think.
the bishop is coming to meet with us on thursday (during zumba, but whatevs). i've been thinking a lot about how it will go. did someone tell him when he became bishop recently that we are MIA? did he crack down on taking roll and finding people and is that why everyone is realizing all of the sudden? is he going to be straight up with us? if he straight up asks us what's up, will i tell him about how fake it feels and how big of a problem polygamy is and that i'm looking to revitalize my testimony but not interested in being 'fellow-shipped' because it won't work on me? is talking with my priesthood leaders about my doubts the right thing to do, or is it a personal journey i need to take alone?
i don't really know. it will be interesting to see what he says.
also that is the night before we leave on our big anniversary trip, so if he tells us we're getting kicked out of byu or something, it's going to be a real killjoy.
also, someone mentioned that our home teachers have tried to get in touch with us by 'coming by' the apartment in the evening (another huge byu pet peeve--why can you seriously not call our phones or email? it doesn't make you less righteous) but we are home most evenings and they haven't. that was a little ridiculous.
the bishop is coming to meet with us on thursday (during zumba, but whatevs). i've been thinking a lot about how it will go. did someone tell him when he became bishop recently that we are MIA? did he crack down on taking roll and finding people and is that why everyone is realizing all of the sudden? is he going to be straight up with us? if he straight up asks us what's up, will i tell him about how fake it feels and how big of a problem polygamy is and that i'm looking to revitalize my testimony but not interested in being 'fellow-shipped' because it won't work on me? is talking with my priesthood leaders about my doubts the right thing to do, or is it a personal journey i need to take alone?
i don't really know. it will be interesting to see what he says.
also that is the night before we leave on our big anniversary trip, so if he tells us we're getting kicked out of byu or something, it's going to be a real killjoy.
also, someone mentioned that our home teachers have tried to get in touch with us by 'coming by' the apartment in the evening (another huge byu pet peeve--why can you seriously not call our phones or email? it doesn't make you less righteous) but we are home most evenings and they haven't. that was a little ridiculous.
heart, don't fail me now
i am terrified i am going to have a heart attack. sometimes i think about it night and day.
so why is it so. damn. hard. to get off my butt and exercise?
so why is it so. damn. hard. to get off my butt and exercise?
riding in cars with boys
upon my promotion my supervisor, a 60 year old man with a wife and kids, advised me to attend devotional, a once a week meeting put on by the university. he said he would offer to give me a ride, but he felt uncomfortable doing so. i was fine with it (i'd rather go alone anyway) and admired him not for his opinion but for being so upfront and not awkward about it.
today we were going to visit another department on campus. he drove us there. he was very uncomfortable, and did his best to make what he saw as an extremely awkward situation seem less awkward. it reminded me of the stories of byu grads acting so weird about going on work lunches with female coworkers or supervisors, or even refusing to go. maybe his wife has insecurities, or maybe it's a personal standard for him to not be alone with women, but it made me sad. i feel like as long as i'm in working in such an intensely lds community, and relationships are hyper sexualized, associating with me will be "unsafe" or inappropriate for some of my coworkers.
i am young(er) and a woman, but i am, mind you, a full time, well established, married, well praised employee with great professionalism.
(also, mind you, i have had some normal and really wonderful interactions with married men at work.)
there are other awkward moments. i don't know if it's the feminist hammer in me looking to hit nails, or if it's really there--either way, it's real to me. if i need to reexplain something to a business partner or technician, the older men i work with will often cut in to speak for me (every time). if we're working with people we don't usually work with, they sometimes speak for me entirely and reference me (standing right there). i have to cut to the front of the line if we're having a lunch meeting (all guys except me) and am always being told that if i need help lifting or moving something, just to call. maybe i have chub but i still have arms. when asked about my personal life, i am usually asked about my husband's hobbies/plans for school/future and not my own.
i can live with it. but it's always creeping around.
today we were going to visit another department on campus. he drove us there. he was very uncomfortable, and did his best to make what he saw as an extremely awkward situation seem less awkward. it reminded me of the stories of byu grads acting so weird about going on work lunches with female coworkers or supervisors, or even refusing to go. maybe his wife has insecurities, or maybe it's a personal standard for him to not be alone with women, but it made me sad. i feel like as long as i'm in working in such an intensely lds community, and relationships are hyper sexualized, associating with me will be "unsafe" or inappropriate for some of my coworkers.
i am young(er) and a woman, but i am, mind you, a full time, well established, married, well praised employee with great professionalism.
(also, mind you, i have had some normal and really wonderful interactions with married men at work.)
there are other awkward moments. i don't know if it's the feminist hammer in me looking to hit nails, or if it's really there--either way, it's real to me. if i need to reexplain something to a business partner or technician, the older men i work with will often cut in to speak for me (every time). if we're working with people we don't usually work with, they sometimes speak for me entirely and reference me (standing right there). i have to cut to the front of the line if we're having a lunch meeting (all guys except me) and am always being told that if i need help lifting or moving something, just to call. maybe i have chub but i still have arms. when asked about my personal life, i am usually asked about my husband's hobbies/plans for school/future and not my own.
i can live with it. but it's always creeping around.
doubts 3
- how the church approaches gay issues. out of my college group of friends, all of the guys i knew have came out over time as gay. i have seen church leaders and members, on a large and small scale level, treat this issue with tenderness and compassion; however, i have heard some members imply that being gay is a fad and 'the rise' in the number of gay people has come from that fad. it seems to me that discussion on a national level has made it ok to talk about, and i suspect there has always been a strain of self-silencing gay lds members. one of those friends who has come out as being gay is the most upstanding, worthy priesthood holder i know, and he has worked to have more of a relationship with his heavenly father and savior than most people i know.
i respect the church's right to make statements on moral issues. however, the US constitution is clear that discrimination based on gender, of which sexuality is an integral part, is clearly unconstitutional and inappropriate. i believe very firmly in the separation of church and state. i don't believe the U.S. is a mormon or even a christian nation, despite their claims to founding or even being the reason for why the country was founded. (i think what really happened is that more people were looking for economic freedom than religious freedom... not to mention the founding fathers were deists, not christian.) it makes me feel very concerned as an lds member, historian, and critical thinker that any U.S. congregation would fail to see this in the constitution it holds dear, even the constitution that grants them religious freedom, and sometimes i think they are the ones who are trampling on it.
i respect the church's right to make statements on moral issues. however, the US constitution is clear that discrimination based on gender, of which sexuality is an integral part, is clearly unconstitutional and inappropriate. i believe very firmly in the separation of church and state. i don't believe the U.S. is a mormon or even a christian nation, despite their claims to founding or even being the reason for why the country was founded. (i think what really happened is that more people were looking for economic freedom than religious freedom... not to mention the founding fathers were deists, not christian.) it makes me feel very concerned as an lds member, historian, and critical thinker that any U.S. congregation would fail to see this in the constitution it holds dear, even the constitution that grants them religious freedom, and sometimes i think they are the ones who are trampling on it.
the white stuff
i tried to be good and wear my garments from the get go today. then we started moving around tons of shiz to send to DI and i just couldn't do it. 95+ degrees outside, and i don't glisten, i practically bleed sweat, from everywhere. i changed out of them in order to help my husband happily and with a little less feeling that i was going to die.
i have seen it mentioned online before that the garments are impractical for saints who live in hot climates. this had me thinking africa, but even here in utah it has been 100+ degree weather, and we have no a/c so there is no relief.
i don't mean to make excuses for myself. but i do feel less than happy about garments this summer. sometimes i feel i can respect my garments more by not wearing them when i'm exercising or even when walking outside can cause me to be drenched in sweat, by not ruining them and resenting them.
i tried, and it didn't pan out.
i have seen it mentioned online before that the garments are impractical for saints who live in hot climates. this had me thinking africa, but even here in utah it has been 100+ degree weather, and we have no a/c so there is no relief.
i don't mean to make excuses for myself. but i do feel less than happy about garments this summer. sometimes i feel i can respect my garments more by not wearing them when i'm exercising or even when walking outside can cause me to be drenched in sweat, by not ruining them and resenting them.
i tried, and it didn't pan out.
daycare
i recently got an excellent job in a place i vowed i would leave as soon as i could. my husband is still in school and will someday soon start looking for teaching jobs.
all i can think, on the tailend of my promotion high, is that i want to keep the job as long as i can. the benefits are sensational. but kids are on the horizon. i have heard women in my family (even my mom) and in my husband's family speak poorly of my aunt and aunt-in-law for choosing to work (even if it is part time) while they have young kids. it is unfair to the kids, it is unfair to the husbands and prevents them from fulfilling their role to provide, it is not necessary--these are the things they say.
all i can think, though, is how doable it is. i find myself thinking things like, 'we can plan the baby so i have it in june or july, and my husband will be able to stay home in the school year off season and care for our child in the first few months before they can go into daycare.' i never thought i'd be a daycare mom, and it is definitely not what i was raised to do.
i am amazed by and grateful for my husband's support but more importantly for his respect toward me to make the decision i feel is best for me, and his willingness to trade off staying at home.
still, we are both increasingly terrified of having children. so maybe i don't need to stress about it just yet.
all i can think, on the tailend of my promotion high, is that i want to keep the job as long as i can. the benefits are sensational. but kids are on the horizon. i have heard women in my family (even my mom) and in my husband's family speak poorly of my aunt and aunt-in-law for choosing to work (even if it is part time) while they have young kids. it is unfair to the kids, it is unfair to the husbands and prevents them from fulfilling their role to provide, it is not necessary--these are the things they say.
all i can think, though, is how doable it is. i find myself thinking things like, 'we can plan the baby so i have it in june or july, and my husband will be able to stay home in the school year off season and care for our child in the first few months before they can go into daycare.' i never thought i'd be a daycare mom, and it is definitely not what i was raised to do.
i am amazed by and grateful for my husband's support but more importantly for his respect toward me to make the decision i feel is best for me, and his willingness to trade off staying at home.
still, we are both increasingly terrified of having children. so maybe i don't need to stress about it just yet.
changing the face of lds doubt
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/21/us/some-mormons-search-the-web-and-find-doubt.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&
this nyt article went live today and spread like wildfire.
i am humbled by how timely it is, and how much an answer to my worries it is.
it has become evident to me as i have struggled that feminists are targeted as a doubting group in the church, specifically women in their 20s and 30s. i feel that members of all ages and both sexes have dismissed this anguished, communal expression of doubts as "simply" feminist or gay issues and easily dismissed.
when an area authority is coming forward stronger than most, it changes the game. and it is not only a young mormon feminist issue.
i fear that the mainstream lds response to this will be to quote the scripture that says that in the last days even many of the elite will be lead away. followed by a tidy dismissal of those who doubt as doomed in holy writ and in god's eyes.
the last few days my biggest question has been, WHY will no one TALK about this?
will the church really send doubters away, even when many are expressing honest concern and an honest desire to find healing within the gospel? will they really send no one for us?
this nyt article went live today and spread like wildfire.
i am humbled by how timely it is, and how much an answer to my worries it is.
it has become evident to me as i have struggled that feminists are targeted as a doubting group in the church, specifically women in their 20s and 30s. i feel that members of all ages and both sexes have dismissed this anguished, communal expression of doubts as "simply" feminist or gay issues and easily dismissed.
when an area authority is coming forward stronger than most, it changes the game. and it is not only a young mormon feminist issue.
i fear that the mainstream lds response to this will be to quote the scripture that says that in the last days even many of the elite will be lead away. followed by a tidy dismissal of those who doubt as doomed in holy writ and in god's eyes.
the last few days my biggest question has been, WHY will no one TALK about this?
will the church really send doubters away, even when many are expressing honest concern and an honest desire to find healing within the gospel? will they really send no one for us?
lds yw survey
the employees i supervise are all girls, have all worked there a long time (therefore they are all good friends, or frenemies), and all very traditionally lds young women (college aged). on friday one girl started talking about the survey at http://ldsywsurvey.wordpress.com/ because it appeared in her facebook feed after another woman posted it with the simple endorsement, 'yep.'
because we are very close in age, i used to be friends with these girls even though i was their supervisor. i made the mistake of giving them a lot of access to me through social media, and through that i'm sure they learned that i support obama (facebook), am a feminist but am not outspoken about it (blog), and a number of other things i know they would find "stupid" and "dumb". (they have all since been carefully cut out of that inclusion.) anyway, this is all to say that i have no doubt that these things, along with that i expect them to be on time and be proactive at work, among other things, lead them to stop asking me about my opinions, or including me in conversations. so i only overhear the things they say.
to my surprise (and relief?) at first i thought this girl was expressing serious concern about some of the issues raised by the survey. her coworker and another of my employees even recommended to her the two trees theory (with a very poor explanation) and said it was a great read. however, they then both began going on about how the survey manipulates readers into picking a certain answer, how "stupid" mormon feminism is, how "stupid" it is that women feel unequal, and that people who feel this way are just "too hard to please." on the question about feeling unworthy to attend the temple while on your period there was about five minutes of "oh my goooooooooooooooooooooooosh who even thiiiiiinks of these things. seeeeeeriously?"
this is nothing new for me to hear from them. while there are definitely problems with the survey, it acknowledges a number of women in the church who have a very real struggle with these doubts (and even suggests problems are planted in yw). i don't often expect to agree with these girls anymore, though, because they are, after all, the girls who believe being gay is a choice made out of sexual boredom and also that all democrats are on welfare and are leeches (i am somewhat a democrat and neither, and i know more young republican married couples with children on welfare than anyone else.)
i hurt for this girl. she married last year to a pre med student, got pregnant while on birth control, lost the baby due to a number of his health issues. while pregnant she talked incessantly of how grateful she was to know there was a baby in her and that she wasn't just "getting fat," how "fat" she felt, and that she "can't wait for this baby thing to be done so i can lose the weight." her husband treats her like a toddler--while she was pregnant and in her post-pregnancy sickness, he has often come to the desk where we work, given her food, and refused to leave until he saw that she began eating it. he has confronted me and yelled at me while at work, in front of my employees and superiors, because i attempted to discipline her for severe attendance problems. she talks extensively about what life will be like while he goes through med school and residency and what her responsibilities will be keeping the house running--singlehandedly.
and she doesn't feel under thumb?
many lds women will pass/have passed through life completely content with traditional lds values and gender roles. sometimes i envy them--so easy, and they seem genuinely happy to do it. but the minute they say a different woman's struggle is "stupid" is the minute i go stiff in my office chair.
it makes me wonder if they know how i feel and don't care, or if they really think everyone around them agrees with them.
because we are very close in age, i used to be friends with these girls even though i was their supervisor. i made the mistake of giving them a lot of access to me through social media, and through that i'm sure they learned that i support obama (facebook), am a feminist but am not outspoken about it (blog), and a number of other things i know they would find "stupid" and "dumb". (they have all since been carefully cut out of that inclusion.) anyway, this is all to say that i have no doubt that these things, along with that i expect them to be on time and be proactive at work, among other things, lead them to stop asking me about my opinions, or including me in conversations. so i only overhear the things they say.
to my surprise (and relief?) at first i thought this girl was expressing serious concern about some of the issues raised by the survey. her coworker and another of my employees even recommended to her the two trees theory (with a very poor explanation) and said it was a great read. however, they then both began going on about how the survey manipulates readers into picking a certain answer, how "stupid" mormon feminism is, how "stupid" it is that women feel unequal, and that people who feel this way are just "too hard to please." on the question about feeling unworthy to attend the temple while on your period there was about five minutes of "oh my goooooooooooooooooooooooosh who even thiiiiiinks of these things. seeeeeeriously?"
this is nothing new for me to hear from them. while there are definitely problems with the survey, it acknowledges a number of women in the church who have a very real struggle with these doubts (and even suggests problems are planted in yw). i don't often expect to agree with these girls anymore, though, because they are, after all, the girls who believe being gay is a choice made out of sexual boredom and also that all democrats are on welfare and are leeches (i am somewhat a democrat and neither, and i know more young republican married couples with children on welfare than anyone else.)
i hurt for this girl. she married last year to a pre med student, got pregnant while on birth control, lost the baby due to a number of his health issues. while pregnant she talked incessantly of how grateful she was to know there was a baby in her and that she wasn't just "getting fat," how "fat" she felt, and that she "can't wait for this baby thing to be done so i can lose the weight." her husband treats her like a toddler--while she was pregnant and in her post-pregnancy sickness, he has often come to the desk where we work, given her food, and refused to leave until he saw that she began eating it. he has confronted me and yelled at me while at work, in front of my employees and superiors, because i attempted to discipline her for severe attendance problems. she talks extensively about what life will be like while he goes through med school and residency and what her responsibilities will be keeping the house running--singlehandedly.
and she doesn't feel under thumb?
many lds women will pass/have passed through life completely content with traditional lds values and gender roles. sometimes i envy them--so easy, and they seem genuinely happy to do it. but the minute they say a different woman's struggle is "stupid" is the minute i go stiff in my office chair.
it makes me wonder if they know how i feel and don't care, or if they really think everyone around them agrees with them.
pressure
my uncle took his own life about a month before i was married in the lds temple. sometimes i feel responsible, wondering if the looming wedding contributed to or catalyzed his decision. it would be a huge family event, maybe hard for him to attend and face everyone as he seriously considered what he would do. he would also be seeing me as his niece, the first grandchild someone he loved, marry into a covenant he may have been doubting. i know he loved me, as he loved all of us, and i wonder what he felt like as we made choices to move forward with religious rites of passage. my mom was reluctant to tell me that tyler expressed doubts, especially in the early teachings of joseph smith and brigham young, teachings which my husband and i find even ourselves disturbed by, by text message right before he passed.
for me to think this is of course ultimately, supremely selfish, to feel guilty or think i may have been indirectly responsible. i have felt this way before, to a lesser degree, when my high school boyfriend told me casually, as we stood at his locker, that his parents were getting divorced. i felt responsible. i worried that i was the straw that tipped the balance. i had changed their son, taken a little away from him, maybe from them. his time and attention. he told me feeling this way was ridiculous, of course.
still, i wonder about my uncle tyler and which doubts spurred him on.
for me to think this is of course ultimately, supremely selfish, to feel guilty or think i may have been indirectly responsible. i have felt this way before, to a lesser degree, when my high school boyfriend told me casually, as we stood at his locker, that his parents were getting divorced. i felt responsible. i worried that i was the straw that tipped the balance. i had changed their son, taken a little away from him, maybe from them. his time and attention. he told me feeling this way was ridiculous, of course.
still, i wonder about my uncle tyler and which doubts spurred him on.
sister missionaries
i have an employee who is now on her mission in korea. she is a great girl and i always connected well with her.
when word was starting to get out around the office that she was going, my supervisor pulled her aside, but i could hear them talking. he told her what a wonderful choice it was, and that serving a mission would make her such a better mother and wife.
i resent this idea so much.
her faith and dedication may make her a better mother and wife (also, why can't she just be a person? not someone's mother or someone's wife, but just herself? women never can), but her mission will not. and it definitely won't inherently make her a better wife or mother than a woman who chose not to go.
when word was starting to get out around the office that she was going, my supervisor pulled her aside, but i could hear them talking. he told her what a wonderful choice it was, and that serving a mission would make her such a better mother and wife.
i resent this idea so much.
her faith and dedication may make her a better mother and wife (also, why can't she just be a person? not someone's mother or someone's wife, but just herself? women never can), but her mission will not. and it definitely won't inherently make her a better wife or mother than a woman who chose not to go.
byu secrets
i hate the byu secrets page. i have read most of not all of the posts on there. it seems that a holistic look at all these posts reveal the admin poster very clearly. this person is clearly:
- a guy.
- gay, or having strong ties to the gay community.
- struggling with his testimony of the gospel.
- had problems with masturbation, or others similar.
- feeling very trapped at byu.
i have no problem with any of these things. i know several guys like this who i care very much for, and who i've known for several years. freak, I relate to most of those things. but it secretly makes me so furious that he is not posting secrets, other than those in a very specific topic range, for people to read. like anything specific to women's struggles. someone asked him why he didn't post more secrets. his reply was that he's at work when he reads them, and also that a lot of them are 'stupid.'
i bet they aren't.
- a guy.
- gay, or having strong ties to the gay community.
- struggling with his testimony of the gospel.
- had problems with masturbation, or others similar.
- feeling very trapped at byu.
i have no problem with any of these things. i know several guys like this who i care very much for, and who i've known for several years. freak, I relate to most of those things. but it secretly makes me so furious that he is not posting secrets, other than those in a very specific topic range, for people to read. like anything specific to women's struggles. someone asked him why he didn't post more secrets. his reply was that he's at work when he reads them, and also that a lot of them are 'stupid.'
i bet they aren't.
doubts 2
- i have absolutely no problem believing god is who he says he is, or that the plan of salvation is true. i know of a surety that if i follow the plan he has prepared, i can become a god like him. the doubt is, what if i don't want to be a god like him?
- when people slam members who commit suicide, it makes me not want to be a part of the church.
- i know god hears me. i know he knows me. i have had very spiritual experiences. so why isn't there more guidance? help sent? why is he so hard to access? how do christians of other denominations say they have such a developed relationship with jesus? they focus on attitude rather than rules but that is the opposite of mormons, and yet they claim better relationships with him. lds people like to say that people who feel the spirit don't know it because they've been feeling it all along. how do you know if you are just not feeling the spirit?
- i think the reason we don't talk about heavenly mother is because there are more than one heavenly mother. people who feel the need to access her, connect with her, see her presence--it makes me sad for these people.
- the church dismisses some of its history as opinions of different brethren. but i also feel in modern they that they present opinions as righteous choices. which one is it?
- when people slam members who commit suicide, it makes me not want to be a part of the church.
- i know god hears me. i know he knows me. i have had very spiritual experiences. so why isn't there more guidance? help sent? why is he so hard to access? how do christians of other denominations say they have such a developed relationship with jesus? they focus on attitude rather than rules but that is the opposite of mormons, and yet they claim better relationships with him. lds people like to say that people who feel the spirit don't know it because they've been feeling it all along. how do you know if you are just not feeling the spirit?
- i think the reason we don't talk about heavenly mother is because there are more than one heavenly mother. people who feel the need to access her, connect with her, see her presence--it makes me sad for these people.
- the church dismisses some of its history as opinions of different brethren. but i also feel in modern they that they present opinions as righteous choices. which one is it?
wandering
i have been a lost sheep for seven months. i think i have been to church three or four times this year 2013. i have never been to all three meetings in 2013. for four months before that it was not as bad but still very spotty. and the summer before that, i was slowly sliding by.
no one, to my knowledge, has come looking for me. the ward sometimes accesses me, but only through my husband. his priesthood leader wants to know if the bishop can come visit our family, for example. (i am never asked.)
but no one is looking for me. it is nice and sad at the same time. no one knows i am inactive except my husband.
no one, to my knowledge, has come looking for me. the ward sometimes accesses me, but only through my husband. his priesthood leader wants to know if the bishop can come visit our family, for example. (i am never asked.)
but no one is looking for me. it is nice and sad at the same time. no one knows i am inactive except my husband.
bald
my dad used to say that god made a few perfect heads, and on the rest he put hair. he has been bald since he was in his 30s.
one day i realized he really only has a receding hairline, he is not bald. so i asked him if his head is only half perfect and we all laughed so hard.
then he got brain cancer and it is just not funny. it's not funny at all. i wish i had never said it.
one day i realized he really only has a receding hairline, he is not bald. so i asked him if his head is only half perfect and we all laughed so hard.
then he got brain cancer and it is just not funny. it's not funny at all. i wish i had never said it.
doubts
i stumbled across this article which talks about different members of the church. i think i am in the true but not real camp. def inite ly. i am surprised by this because most of the people i saw commenting online say they are in the real but not true camp--they love the lds atmosphere but have problems with doctrine or other theological points.
for me, there are spiritual experiences and a testimony i have that i cannot deny are true. i have felt the spirit and had very special experiences, and i know the gospel is true. however, there is little 'real' about the church to me. i see it as a troubled body of people who i really do not enjoy associating with. this is a very broad statement, and you have to keep in mind that i've spend the last five years in provo, utah, which is the hottest pressure cooker of all mormonland.
i have been spending a lot of time wondering what it really is that is throwing my testimony, and want to make a list of points all in one place that help me gather my thoughts.
- political affiliation. i realize where i am (pressure cooker) but republicans here are very outspoken about how evil obama is, that democrats are not only stupid but unfathomable and everything wrong with this country, that socialism is taking over (seriously, why is capitalism so fucking great?), etc. it is oppressive. i'm not even necessarily a democrat but i disagree with the way lds member associate politics with righteousness, and it makes me dislike members of the church.
-vising teaching. i really, really believe in visiting teaching. i've seen miracles come of it. i would have no problem at all calling up my visiting teacher for help, even if i didn't know her very well. but when they come to my apartment and sit on my couch, i have nothing to say to them. i have a really hard time opening up or connecting. i feel like visiting teaching where i live is more about socializing and girl talk than service and respecting the teachee's time. it's really offputting.
-polygamy. i don't think i really need to explain. my husband and i were just talking about this last night. it seems that the most 'righteous' opinion that can be had toward polygamy is that we will all understand something in the next life and be fine with it. i just don't believe it, and it really complicates my idea of heaven. (actually, it obliterates it.)
-social aspects of church. i really believe church meetings should be about edifying each other. but i don't care what anyone says, those meetings are social events. the saints do need each other and i have no problem with it, except that i have been treated like an outcast when i don't feel up to participating, going to an activity, or chatting it up with someone. i have had many friends at church, and have no problem treating another member i don't know well as a friend in need, but even my closest friends will tell you i'm quiet and keep to myself. i'm tired of being ostracized and even being called selfish for it.
-equality in marriage. the trophy lds marriage is not equal. i NEVER thought this until i was married. i always bought into the 'priesthood is equal to motherhood, they are equal' camp, but i just don't think it's true. fatherhood is equal to motherhood, and the priesthood is its own ballpark. the church was founded around the height of victorian home, which championed this type of marraige, and i fear the church will never grow out of it.
-marriage, again. the lds ideal marriage is one where the wife is a demure and untarnished mother, and where the husband and wife never fight. this is just not real. most lds couples i know say there have been times when it would have been easier to walk away, but they stayed together very deliberately. i think this implies fighting and turmoil. i'm not saying fighting is good for relationships, and healthy conflict resolution is something every couple needs to learn, but i think a relationship in which no fights are had is a relationship in which one partner is submitting to the other, and this is not cool.
-attitudes toward sex. there is so much i could write here. what is taught about sex is not healthy toward men or women, and an astounding number of social, mental, emotional problems ensue.
-a binary approach to morality. 'god cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance'--well, sin is often relative and god also makes it clear that people will not be held accountable for morals they don't understand, and we don't know how that understanding is judged. binary thinking proves really harmful to the human psyche. i can see how sticking to the 100% pure, 100% good all the time mormonism will probably leave you faultless, but those people often hurt other people, and the world is just not 100% pure. it is a very unreal way of thinking.
-parenthood. see above to marriage.
-extreme-ness. this is nonspecific, but i think mormons often vilify things that are not evil. and they take redirection very poorly because their entire moral landscape depends on it. this leads to a misunderstand of sin and of morality, and causes them to hurt people brazenly.
-tradition. i think traditions are good and can bring richness to life. but institutional tradition is very dangerous and i just don't believe in it. i think tradition makes people unable to think for themselves, unable to sympathize or understand others, and, again, causes them to hurt people who don't conform.
-mental health of the lds people. if you look at the statistics, lds people are usually the happiest in the world or the most depressed. the religious code is rigorous, personal, and very strict. furthermore, mental health is poorly addressed by many lds people.
-stop and go soft 'doctrine'. i believe the true points of the gospel are very true and very immovable, but there is sure a boatload of stuff that surrounds/comes out of/overshadows it. ten years ago we were hearing over the pulpit that technology is harmful and should be very limited. now we are giving ipads to all missionaries all over the world. i believe in multiple opinions and that church opinion changes, as it should, but there is not enough mediation and moderation in the messages given, which people then take and try to live with all exactness.
-attitudes toward womanhood. i won't even put motherhood, because that's exactly the problem. women are mothers, but we are other things, too. women are expecting to have children and take joy in all things homemaking. there is a very distinct subculture of homemaking that revolves around pinterest, birthday parties, and 'finding joy in the journey'. there are tons of women who do not relate to this, are not interested in it, are struggling over whether or not they even want kids, and hesitant because of the trap lds motherhood can feel like.
-double standard of morality. i feel let down by both my bishop and stake president and am pretty tired of the double standard toward morality in the church, especially concerning sexuality and morality.
-the idea that we should choose 'purity' even if it comes with ignorance and an inability to relate to people who aren't lds (which is most of the world........ if no one noticed).
-eternal suffering. the lds view of the life of a spirit is called 'the plan of happiness.' i understand that this life is a test and i have no problem with that. but all i really understand of the afterlife is that we will be parents forever. hence, the intense emphasis on marriage and the family. but any parent will tell you that parenting sucks, with a few 'mothering paydays' or 'rewarding moments'. maybe we will not be so human, or suffering won't affect us as much, but i struggle with the idea that the entire point of religion is to ensure more righteous reproduction. shouldn't there be a point to reproduction? what is the point of creating individuals whose only righteous choice is to give up everything individual and create more individuals who will also give themselves up? when does the individual get to enjoy itself? be itself? besides the eternities, i feel pressure right now to start having kids, even though i don't feel ready and feel i need to establish myself first. i feel taught that this is a selfish, erroneous, and unrighteous desire, but it is the only one that feels right and moral to me.
for me, there are spiritual experiences and a testimony i have that i cannot deny are true. i have felt the spirit and had very special experiences, and i know the gospel is true. however, there is little 'real' about the church to me. i see it as a troubled body of people who i really do not enjoy associating with. this is a very broad statement, and you have to keep in mind that i've spend the last five years in provo, utah, which is the hottest pressure cooker of all mormonland.
i have been spending a lot of time wondering what it really is that is throwing my testimony, and want to make a list of points all in one place that help me gather my thoughts.
- political affiliation. i realize where i am (pressure cooker) but republicans here are very outspoken about how evil obama is, that democrats are not only stupid but unfathomable and everything wrong with this country, that socialism is taking over (seriously, why is capitalism so fucking great?), etc. it is oppressive. i'm not even necessarily a democrat but i disagree with the way lds member associate politics with righteousness, and it makes me dislike members of the church.
-vising teaching. i really, really believe in visiting teaching. i've seen miracles come of it. i would have no problem at all calling up my visiting teacher for help, even if i didn't know her very well. but when they come to my apartment and sit on my couch, i have nothing to say to them. i have a really hard time opening up or connecting. i feel like visiting teaching where i live is more about socializing and girl talk than service and respecting the teachee's time. it's really offputting.
-polygamy. i don't think i really need to explain. my husband and i were just talking about this last night. it seems that the most 'righteous' opinion that can be had toward polygamy is that we will all understand something in the next life and be fine with it. i just don't believe it, and it really complicates my idea of heaven. (actually, it obliterates it.)
-social aspects of church. i really believe church meetings should be about edifying each other. but i don't care what anyone says, those meetings are social events. the saints do need each other and i have no problem with it, except that i have been treated like an outcast when i don't feel up to participating, going to an activity, or chatting it up with someone. i have had many friends at church, and have no problem treating another member i don't know well as a friend in need, but even my closest friends will tell you i'm quiet and keep to myself. i'm tired of being ostracized and even being called selfish for it.
-equality in marriage. the trophy lds marriage is not equal. i NEVER thought this until i was married. i always bought into the 'priesthood is equal to motherhood, they are equal' camp, but i just don't think it's true. fatherhood is equal to motherhood, and the priesthood is its own ballpark. the church was founded around the height of victorian home, which championed this type of marraige, and i fear the church will never grow out of it.
-marriage, again. the lds ideal marriage is one where the wife is a demure and untarnished mother, and where the husband and wife never fight. this is just not real. most lds couples i know say there have been times when it would have been easier to walk away, but they stayed together very deliberately. i think this implies fighting and turmoil. i'm not saying fighting is good for relationships, and healthy conflict resolution is something every couple needs to learn, but i think a relationship in which no fights are had is a relationship in which one partner is submitting to the other, and this is not cool.
-attitudes toward sex. there is so much i could write here. what is taught about sex is not healthy toward men or women, and an astounding number of social, mental, emotional problems ensue.
-a binary approach to morality. 'god cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance'--well, sin is often relative and god also makes it clear that people will not be held accountable for morals they don't understand, and we don't know how that understanding is judged. binary thinking proves really harmful to the human psyche. i can see how sticking to the 100% pure, 100% good all the time mormonism will probably leave you faultless, but those people often hurt other people, and the world is just not 100% pure. it is a very unreal way of thinking.
-parenthood. see above to marriage.
-extreme-ness. this is nonspecific, but i think mormons often vilify things that are not evil. and they take redirection very poorly because their entire moral landscape depends on it. this leads to a misunderstand of sin and of morality, and causes them to hurt people brazenly.
-tradition. i think traditions are good and can bring richness to life. but institutional tradition is very dangerous and i just don't believe in it. i think tradition makes people unable to think for themselves, unable to sympathize or understand others, and, again, causes them to hurt people who don't conform.
-mental health of the lds people. if you look at the statistics, lds people are usually the happiest in the world or the most depressed. the religious code is rigorous, personal, and very strict. furthermore, mental health is poorly addressed by many lds people.
-stop and go soft 'doctrine'. i believe the true points of the gospel are very true and very immovable, but there is sure a boatload of stuff that surrounds/comes out of/overshadows it. ten years ago we were hearing over the pulpit that technology is harmful and should be very limited. now we are giving ipads to all missionaries all over the world. i believe in multiple opinions and that church opinion changes, as it should, but there is not enough mediation and moderation in the messages given, which people then take and try to live with all exactness.
-attitudes toward womanhood. i won't even put motherhood, because that's exactly the problem. women are mothers, but we are other things, too. women are expecting to have children and take joy in all things homemaking. there is a very distinct subculture of homemaking that revolves around pinterest, birthday parties, and 'finding joy in the journey'. there are tons of women who do not relate to this, are not interested in it, are struggling over whether or not they even want kids, and hesitant because of the trap lds motherhood can feel like.
-double standard of morality. i feel let down by both my bishop and stake president and am pretty tired of the double standard toward morality in the church, especially concerning sexuality and morality.
-the idea that we should choose 'purity' even if it comes with ignorance and an inability to relate to people who aren't lds (which is most of the world........ if no one noticed).
-eternal suffering. the lds view of the life of a spirit is called 'the plan of happiness.' i understand that this life is a test and i have no problem with that. but all i really understand of the afterlife is that we will be parents forever. hence, the intense emphasis on marriage and the family. but any parent will tell you that parenting sucks, with a few 'mothering paydays' or 'rewarding moments'. maybe we will not be so human, or suffering won't affect us as much, but i struggle with the idea that the entire point of religion is to ensure more righteous reproduction. shouldn't there be a point to reproduction? what is the point of creating individuals whose only righteous choice is to give up everything individual and create more individuals who will also give themselves up? when does the individual get to enjoy itself? be itself? besides the eternities, i feel pressure right now to start having kids, even though i don't feel ready and feel i need to establish myself first. i feel taught that this is a selfish, erroneous, and unrighteous desire, but it is the only one that feels right and moral to me.
go your own way
i wonder if one reason i'm struggling so much with my faith right now is that any time in my life that i've prayed about a major decision, heavenly father has told me to choose for myself, and whatever i picked would work out. i especially had this experience in trying to choose my major. i would always get so annoyed when people in sunday school or relief society would talk about how they were struggling to 'get' an answer to a prayer. it would often even bother them enough to ruin their days and keep them up at night. to me the answer seemed obvious: maybe it doesn't matter. i think heavenly father wants us to become like him, and that we often only need a simple understanding of gospel principles and a pure heart to move forward. otherwise, he will let us know.
i've never had an overwhelming spiritual confirmation about any major decision in my life. always just a quiet peace. i wonder if i would be a different member if i had had that experience. it's not that i haven't had profound spiritual experiences, i have. but i'm feeling lost in my life and pretty vacant, and maybe i would be more sure about things if it felt directed.
i'm worried that i'm deconstructing the agency heavenly father trusted me with.
i've never had an overwhelming spiritual confirmation about any major decision in my life. always just a quiet peace. i wonder if i would be a different member if i had had that experience. it's not that i haven't had profound spiritual experiences, i have. but i'm feeling lost in my life and pretty vacant, and maybe i would be more sure about things if it felt directed.
i'm worried that i'm deconstructing the agency heavenly father trusted me with.
mistrust, food and babies
i've done a lot of research lately in two areas: food, and giving birth. i am trying to improve my diet and exercise, but am not (even if no one believes me) interested in becoming pregnant anytime soon.
it was a few months ago that i thought i was pregnant. the possibility of a baby was, to be quite honest, making me worry about my relationship with my husband and the type of partner he'd be to myself and my baby. this is complicated and deep seated. it was a rough time and i felt there was no one i could talk to who would understand. i remember asking heavenly father to please give me more time to improve my marriage, to get my body healthy, to get my mind healthy. i read so much online about conceiving and of miscarriages, of which i have always been especially afraid. i was convinced i was pregnant. my husband was convinced i was not. i spent time alone in my apartment, devastated, knowing it was not the right time and mourning for my body, which is currently overweight and out of shape. i imagined myself going for my doctor's appointments and asking, 'how will my weight affect my baby? will eating clean during my pregnancy protect my baby or will it suffer by the muck already in my body?' it was my central concern. it saddened me so much that it would be the most important thing i'd ask the doctor, trusting for an honest answer and for help, and i think that imagining this and feeling the things i did brought me one step closer to being ready for motherhood. since getting married, my desire to have children has decreased and even evaporated completely, for many reasons.
after watching one night the scene in "the help" where celia has a miscarriage, i read online for hours. i read that many women conceive but miscarry close to when they'd have their periods anyway, so they don't even know it. i did get my period, not especially late either, but remain convinced that i was pregnant, if only for a few days. the way my body felt when my period came, the physical sadness and sense of loss--i will never know if i really was or wasn't, if it was purely psychological instead of physical, but it was 100% real to me. i felt i was given another chance to prepare emotionally and physically for a baby, and it has spurred me to research these two topics.
in all the reading and watching and learning i've done, though, i am sad to find that i have a serious, profound mistrust of the medical industry and the food industry. i researched hoping to find guidance and answers, but i have only been repulsed by the politics and business mindedness of each of them.
hospitals chemically induce pretty much all women who go in to give birth. they have them give birth on their backs (the worst position for giving birth) and do not allow them to move around or take their time. even if women escape being put on induction medication right away, if they don't give birth naturally within a certain amount of time, they are invariably induced without choice or even notification. these chemicals cause the baby distress and make labor contractions much more painful for the mother than they would be naturally (according to mothers who have done both), and induced labor results in c-sections at staggeringly higher rate than natural labor ever does. this is all considered normal in the medical community, and natural birth is considered unsafe even when accompanied by trained, professional midwives. i am terrified by this. in learning about birthing options i realized that one of the reasons i am so scared of having children is the birthing experience in a sterile and unfeeling hospital. i have never been injured or sick enough to go to the ER or hospital, and even going to the dentist terrifies me. i realized that i trust my body to do what it's supposed to, that i don't believe pregnancy is a medical condition, and that i do not, under any but emergency circumstances in which a doctor's help would be appropriate and necessary, want to entrust my pregnancy or my birth to a doctor, even a certified and experienced one. this mistrust also comes from the way the medical community is reacting to obamacare. the medical community is so up priced and so leaching (not their fault, it's really the insurance company's fault) that health care is in crisis as it tries to conform to the well meaning changes instated by obama and other constituents. i feel enraged when people say they hate obamacare or obama or say he is doing a bad job as the president. all of those people should be hating the medical community and the insurance companies, which are bitter and scrambling for their cushy and institutionalized business ways. i seriously do not understand... why can't doctors just make a living more like the rest of us make, why can't insurance companies just do their jobs, and why can't everyone demand this change and see the good it would bring? i know several byu girls who are married to med students, and their husbands are 'seriously reconsidering' being doctors because of the changes that are likely for the profession. to that i say: good. maybe if medicine becomes a field people go into for the love and humanity of it (like teaching) rather than the money, the US would be a better place. i don't trust the medical community, which is full of guys like that and a community that should be caring for and serving people but is interested primarily in money.
the same can be said for the food industry. in trying to eat healthy, i've learned how out of my way i have to go to find naturally grown, local, nutritious, raw foods. everything is processed garbage, and no one should eat any of it on a large scale. when i go to the grocery store, i feel trapped. the only thing i feel i should buy is raw produce, and even then it's ridden with pesticides and imported from somewhere in a truck, losing its nutrients. it disgusts me what the food industry in america gets away with, and when i decline meat and suggest something as simple as that i can get protein from other foods besides meat, i am ridiculed and put down.
that is how i feel about my opinions on the medical and food industries. sharing them always results in someone trying to make me feel snobby, misinformed, and ashamed. like why don't i just go along with the system like everyone else, because what is so bad about it, really? i resent that i'm made to feel ashamed for educating myself and making decisions about things that should be personal choices about what's really best for me.
it was a few months ago that i thought i was pregnant. the possibility of a baby was, to be quite honest, making me worry about my relationship with my husband and the type of partner he'd be to myself and my baby. this is complicated and deep seated. it was a rough time and i felt there was no one i could talk to who would understand. i remember asking heavenly father to please give me more time to improve my marriage, to get my body healthy, to get my mind healthy. i read so much online about conceiving and of miscarriages, of which i have always been especially afraid. i was convinced i was pregnant. my husband was convinced i was not. i spent time alone in my apartment, devastated, knowing it was not the right time and mourning for my body, which is currently overweight and out of shape. i imagined myself going for my doctor's appointments and asking, 'how will my weight affect my baby? will eating clean during my pregnancy protect my baby or will it suffer by the muck already in my body?' it was my central concern. it saddened me so much that it would be the most important thing i'd ask the doctor, trusting for an honest answer and for help, and i think that imagining this and feeling the things i did brought me one step closer to being ready for motherhood. since getting married, my desire to have children has decreased and even evaporated completely, for many reasons.
after watching one night the scene in "the help" where celia has a miscarriage, i read online for hours. i read that many women conceive but miscarry close to when they'd have their periods anyway, so they don't even know it. i did get my period, not especially late either, but remain convinced that i was pregnant, if only for a few days. the way my body felt when my period came, the physical sadness and sense of loss--i will never know if i really was or wasn't, if it was purely psychological instead of physical, but it was 100% real to me. i felt i was given another chance to prepare emotionally and physically for a baby, and it has spurred me to research these two topics.
in all the reading and watching and learning i've done, though, i am sad to find that i have a serious, profound mistrust of the medical industry and the food industry. i researched hoping to find guidance and answers, but i have only been repulsed by the politics and business mindedness of each of them.
hospitals chemically induce pretty much all women who go in to give birth. they have them give birth on their backs (the worst position for giving birth) and do not allow them to move around or take their time. even if women escape being put on induction medication right away, if they don't give birth naturally within a certain amount of time, they are invariably induced without choice or even notification. these chemicals cause the baby distress and make labor contractions much more painful for the mother than they would be naturally (according to mothers who have done both), and induced labor results in c-sections at staggeringly higher rate than natural labor ever does. this is all considered normal in the medical community, and natural birth is considered unsafe even when accompanied by trained, professional midwives. i am terrified by this. in learning about birthing options i realized that one of the reasons i am so scared of having children is the birthing experience in a sterile and unfeeling hospital. i have never been injured or sick enough to go to the ER or hospital, and even going to the dentist terrifies me. i realized that i trust my body to do what it's supposed to, that i don't believe pregnancy is a medical condition, and that i do not, under any but emergency circumstances in which a doctor's help would be appropriate and necessary, want to entrust my pregnancy or my birth to a doctor, even a certified and experienced one. this mistrust also comes from the way the medical community is reacting to obamacare. the medical community is so up priced and so leaching (not their fault, it's really the insurance company's fault) that health care is in crisis as it tries to conform to the well meaning changes instated by obama and other constituents. i feel enraged when people say they hate obamacare or obama or say he is doing a bad job as the president. all of those people should be hating the medical community and the insurance companies, which are bitter and scrambling for their cushy and institutionalized business ways. i seriously do not understand... why can't doctors just make a living more like the rest of us make, why can't insurance companies just do their jobs, and why can't everyone demand this change and see the good it would bring? i know several byu girls who are married to med students, and their husbands are 'seriously reconsidering' being doctors because of the changes that are likely for the profession. to that i say: good. maybe if medicine becomes a field people go into for the love and humanity of it (like teaching) rather than the money, the US would be a better place. i don't trust the medical community, which is full of guys like that and a community that should be caring for and serving people but is interested primarily in money.
the same can be said for the food industry. in trying to eat healthy, i've learned how out of my way i have to go to find naturally grown, local, nutritious, raw foods. everything is processed garbage, and no one should eat any of it on a large scale. when i go to the grocery store, i feel trapped. the only thing i feel i should buy is raw produce, and even then it's ridden with pesticides and imported from somewhere in a truck, losing its nutrients. it disgusts me what the food industry in america gets away with, and when i decline meat and suggest something as simple as that i can get protein from other foods besides meat, i am ridiculed and put down.
that is how i feel about my opinions on the medical and food industries. sharing them always results in someone trying to make me feel snobby, misinformed, and ashamed. like why don't i just go along with the system like everyone else, because what is so bad about it, really? i resent that i'm made to feel ashamed for educating myself and making decisions about things that should be personal choices about what's really best for me.
angelina jolie
i understand that angelina jolie is considered strange, erratic, and even psychotic. but her films were not among the kinds i was allowed to watch as a kid, so i haven't encountered her fully as a celebrity or a person or a figure until now, wandering in my 20's. when her movie "salt" came out i remember my aunt (a strong woman i admire) posting a status (maybe in indirect response to everyone who boycots jolie's movies because of her persona, beliefs, or lifestyle) saying that she would give her money any day to a hardworking kick ass woman and mother who does so much good and stays in such great shape.
i have absolutely come to agree with this. beyond that, it's more. there is something feminine, open, generous, kind, and attractive that makes an irresistible woman irresistible, not just in a sexual way but in a human, uplifting, beautiful way. whenever i am feeling lost as a woman, when i feel i have lost what makes me special, lost view of the power for good i have, lost view of how good and powerful sexuality is for giving life and wholeness and bringing balance and companionship between the sexes--when i need gumption--i watch this interview of angelina jolie with james lipton.
she is irresistible. she talks about falling in love with her brother and with her female co-workers (scandalizing everyone) and above all it is evident that she knows and develops herself through these relationships, not resisting them. she loves all people, regardless (or because of) who they are. i read in the comments for this video once that jolie is a unique actress because she makes everyone in the audience--male and female--feel like she would sleep with them. from what i know of her i think this is true, and believe it's because she would love them, see the good in them, cherish about them everything that was unique and admirable and worth connecting to--what else, really, is at the heart of good sex? she is a very sexual woman and attraction is at the heart of sex, but she is somehow above all of that, in another playing field, because she believes, most simply, in human connection. in a sexualized culture, she approaches sex in a way that it becomes uncomplicated and a powerful tool in a journey to a life about bigger things (shocker! sex is basic to human life, but not the object of human life).
one of my sisters in law recently talked about how she finally found a word that she feels describes her sexuality: pansexual. while i'm happily committed to a heterosexual marriage, on some level, i get it. (and, after all, it makes sense that an array of different relationships could make us happy and fulfilled to some measure, or else it would be needless for god to command us to marry after a specific, organized manner.) i admire the personality and quality of being able to connect with people--any person--on such an honest and profound level.
anyway. her life continues to be stunning; she is proactive and troubled by the right things and of all the people of which i've learned, she is one of the most full bodied and frank. she says she is shocked at the things the public is shocked by. i feel this same thing, and often wonder why there are such tight, often fear-based restrictions or blinders on cultural, physical, and emotional ideas that could empower, engage, and enrich the lives of many.
i admire her and want to be like her, and it is my little secret.
i have absolutely come to agree with this. beyond that, it's more. there is something feminine, open, generous, kind, and attractive that makes an irresistible woman irresistible, not just in a sexual way but in a human, uplifting, beautiful way. whenever i am feeling lost as a woman, when i feel i have lost what makes me special, lost view of the power for good i have, lost view of how good and powerful sexuality is for giving life and wholeness and bringing balance and companionship between the sexes--when i need gumption--i watch this interview of angelina jolie with james lipton.
she is irresistible. she talks about falling in love with her brother and with her female co-workers (scandalizing everyone) and above all it is evident that she knows and develops herself through these relationships, not resisting them. she loves all people, regardless (or because of) who they are. i read in the comments for this video once that jolie is a unique actress because she makes everyone in the audience--male and female--feel like she would sleep with them. from what i know of her i think this is true, and believe it's because she would love them, see the good in them, cherish about them everything that was unique and admirable and worth connecting to--what else, really, is at the heart of good sex? she is a very sexual woman and attraction is at the heart of sex, but she is somehow above all of that, in another playing field, because she believes, most simply, in human connection. in a sexualized culture, she approaches sex in a way that it becomes uncomplicated and a powerful tool in a journey to a life about bigger things (shocker! sex is basic to human life, but not the object of human life).
one of my sisters in law recently talked about how she finally found a word that she feels describes her sexuality: pansexual. while i'm happily committed to a heterosexual marriage, on some level, i get it. (and, after all, it makes sense that an array of different relationships could make us happy and fulfilled to some measure, or else it would be needless for god to command us to marry after a specific, organized manner.) i admire the personality and quality of being able to connect with people--any person--on such an honest and profound level.
anyway. her life continues to be stunning; she is proactive and troubled by the right things and of all the people of which i've learned, she is one of the most full bodied and frank. she says she is shocked at the things the public is shocked by. i feel this same thing, and often wonder why there are such tight, often fear-based restrictions or blinders on cultural, physical, and emotional ideas that could empower, engage, and enrich the lives of many.
i admire her and want to be like her, and it is my little secret.
stretchy pants
modesty is huge in lds culture. there are a lot of opinions on why it's important (garments, sexual purity, self respect) but the one liner that almost always comes up is that women need to be modest in order to help men honor their priesthood.
i detest this idea. it wasn't until i was in my 20s that i realized i had never, ever really bought it. when i dress up, it is because it empowers me and makes me feel good. it is never because i want so-and-so-boy to notice how fine and foxy i am. girls are always told, 'do you really want to attract that kind of attention?' it is implied that girls who dress immodestly are doing so in an unhealthy effort to get the wrong kind of attention.
a couple years ago i was going through a time in life where i was getting in extremely good shape. i felt great. i lived in exercise clothes. they were comfortable and kept me in the work out mindset. my mom and i were once exchanging upset emails and i will never forget that she mentioned, unrelated to anything else, that i used to wear stretchy yoga pants around my family. she said my brothers, father, grandfathers had all mentioned it at one point or another, i assume in relation to how uncomfortable it made them. she said i wore them because i was in shape and wanted people to notice it. this boggled my mind. why would i ever try to elicit supposedly sexual attention from my brothers or father? is it really so hard to believe that i liked them because they were comfortable? and that's it? how is it so incredible?
unless you count wearing yoga pants around my male family members, i don't believe my parents, bishop, young women's leaders, etc, would ever say i have/had "problems" with dressing modestly. however, i do not believe there is anything inherently evil about wearing a shirt with no sleeves. i am really not writing this because i wear bikinis or tank tops or short shorts (and i don't think those women should be blamed or labeled immoral). but there is something fundamentally wrong with telling women they need to be honest to protect men's virtue, and frankly, it is objectification.
i believe women who choose to dress modestly for religious purposes should do so to make a reflection of their inner commitment to the god who has asked them to do so. and for no other reason. men are agents unto themselves and discomfort at the sight of a woman in a sleeveless shirt inherently paralyzes religious worshipers who are supposed to go into the world and do good among all manner of people. modesty is highly relative and ever changing. a woman who wears a sleeveless shirt is probably not seeking sexual attention. and women are suffering from psychological and emotional illness because of the guilt and undue burden this idea places upon them.
i detest this idea. it wasn't until i was in my 20s that i realized i had never, ever really bought it. when i dress up, it is because it empowers me and makes me feel good. it is never because i want so-and-so-boy to notice how fine and foxy i am. girls are always told, 'do you really want to attract that kind of attention?' it is implied that girls who dress immodestly are doing so in an unhealthy effort to get the wrong kind of attention.
a couple years ago i was going through a time in life where i was getting in extremely good shape. i felt great. i lived in exercise clothes. they were comfortable and kept me in the work out mindset. my mom and i were once exchanging upset emails and i will never forget that she mentioned, unrelated to anything else, that i used to wear stretchy yoga pants around my family. she said my brothers, father, grandfathers had all mentioned it at one point or another, i assume in relation to how uncomfortable it made them. she said i wore them because i was in shape and wanted people to notice it. this boggled my mind. why would i ever try to elicit supposedly sexual attention from my brothers or father? is it really so hard to believe that i liked them because they were comfortable? and that's it? how is it so incredible?
unless you count wearing yoga pants around my male family members, i don't believe my parents, bishop, young women's leaders, etc, would ever say i have/had "problems" with dressing modestly. however, i do not believe there is anything inherently evil about wearing a shirt with no sleeves. i am really not writing this because i wear bikinis or tank tops or short shorts (and i don't think those women should be blamed or labeled immoral). but there is something fundamentally wrong with telling women they need to be honest to protect men's virtue, and frankly, it is objectification.
i believe women who choose to dress modestly for religious purposes should do so to make a reflection of their inner commitment to the god who has asked them to do so. and for no other reason. men are agents unto themselves and discomfort at the sight of a woman in a sleeveless shirt inherently paralyzes religious worshipers who are supposed to go into the world and do good among all manner of people. modesty is highly relative and ever changing. a woman who wears a sleeveless shirt is probably not seeking sexual attention. and women are suffering from psychological and emotional illness because of the guilt and undue burden this idea places upon them.
"Attachment is forbidden. Possession is forbidden. Compassion, which I would define as unconditional love, is essential to a Jedi's life. So you might say, that we are encouraged to love."
today my brother, who is an lds missionary, wrote home that he has feelings for a sister missionary. he's almost done with his time as a missionary, and he has a past of deep love and a sincere need to take care of and be attached to someone he loves. his relationships with his girlfriends influenced him greatly and he esteemed them in a way beyond teenage love.
my mom removed the paragraph about his feelings before sending it out. i got both versions, and thought it was an interesting choice.
i was surprised when, over dinner, my husband asked me what i thought and felt about his feelings. he probably wasn't surprised by my answer. i expressed frustration that mormon culture sexualizes all relationships with members of the opposite sex. we only begin dating at the age of 16, and only then on group dates, and many marry young. i remember reading, as a teenager, a book from a popular lds woman who suggested that lds girls remain physically and emotionally aloof from men until marriage, for their husband was the only person (of the opposite sex) that intimacy should be shared with. a friend from byu in the accounting major heard of seminars where they conducted seminars with students on how to interact witht he opposite sex because the university got so many reports on how weird their male graduates acted (i.e. refusing to go to lunch meetings one on one with female co-workers or bosses). this hypersexualization is, of course, meant to protect marriage and by extension the family that are so key to lds life and doctrine and happiness.
however, here we have young people who are scarred and struggling because of a lack of sexual experience. i mentioned again to hubs an article going around where an lds missionary in a tropical location struggled with the bikini-clad culture, but had a companion who was from a tropical location and expressed that the "immodest" women were normal to him--not that he didn't feel attraction, but it was a feeling he had learned to mediate and had become a non-object to him. my brother, essentially, is the first missionary--terrified by attraction, immobilized by it, praying to god continually to be delivered from it because he has been instilled with fear. he is an exceptional man and is doing what he is taught to be right. he is not at fault. but the suffering makes me so sad, and i think it shouldn't need to be that way.
my husband agreed. he suggested that if i hadn't grown up in mormon culture, i wouldn't have such a problem with jealousy in my relationships. i agreed. we talked a little more about it, and both feel very concerned for him.
my mom removed the paragraph about his feelings before sending it out. i got both versions, and thought it was an interesting choice.
i was surprised when, over dinner, my husband asked me what i thought and felt about his feelings. he probably wasn't surprised by my answer. i expressed frustration that mormon culture sexualizes all relationships with members of the opposite sex. we only begin dating at the age of 16, and only then on group dates, and many marry young. i remember reading, as a teenager, a book from a popular lds woman who suggested that lds girls remain physically and emotionally aloof from men until marriage, for their husband was the only person (of the opposite sex) that intimacy should be shared with. a friend from byu in the accounting major heard of seminars where they conducted seminars with students on how to interact witht he opposite sex because the university got so many reports on how weird their male graduates acted (i.e. refusing to go to lunch meetings one on one with female co-workers or bosses). this hypersexualization is, of course, meant to protect marriage and by extension the family that are so key to lds life and doctrine and happiness.
however, here we have young people who are scarred and struggling because of a lack of sexual experience. i mentioned again to hubs an article going around where an lds missionary in a tropical location struggled with the bikini-clad culture, but had a companion who was from a tropical location and expressed that the "immodest" women were normal to him--not that he didn't feel attraction, but it was a feeling he had learned to mediate and had become a non-object to him. my brother, essentially, is the first missionary--terrified by attraction, immobilized by it, praying to god continually to be delivered from it because he has been instilled with fear. he is an exceptional man and is doing what he is taught to be right. he is not at fault. but the suffering makes me so sad, and i think it shouldn't need to be that way.
my husband agreed. he suggested that if i hadn't grown up in mormon culture, i wouldn't have such a problem with jealousy in my relationships. i agreed. we talked a little more about it, and both feel very concerned for him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)