Women @GC?

[Anon70]

I happily avoided all of conference (except for reviews here and on Reddit). But I haven't seen much hue and cry about women speakers and pray-ers. Did the prophet include more than last time? Or have the women just quit caring and talking about it? I mean....if there is no one agitating for it......

[Corsair]

I feel like the criticism has moved from prayers into the more substantive imbalance of time between men and women speakers. I saw about two thirds of conference, but I often turned it off before the closing prayer so I can't entirely account for who prayed. But only six or seven women spoke through all 12 hours of conference compared to 13 apostles and another dozen or so Seventies. Eyring spoke twice and Uchtdorf spoke three times.

Women's session of GC once again had a man as the keynote speaker. I did ask my dear wife about this at one point. She responded that the women of the church want the prophet to speak to to them. Since women will never be a prophet or apostle, the gender ratio of speakers will always skew towards the men.

[Give It Time]

I feel like the criticism has moved from prayers into the more substantive imbalance of time between men and women speakers. I saw about two thirds of conference, but I often turned it off before the closing prayer so I can't entirely account for who prayed. But only six or seven women spoke through all 12 hours of conference compared to 13 apostles and another dozen or so Seventies. Eyring spoke twice and Uchtdorf spoke three times.

Women's session of GC once again had a man as the keynote speaker. I did ask my dear wife about this at one point. She responded that the women of the church want the prophet to speak to to them. Since women will never be a prophet or apostle, the gender ratio of speakers will always skew towards the men.

Your wife does adequately express the TBM woman's POV. My explanation was going to be that a woman will never be the keynote speaker at WC, because there are no women in the FP. The keynote at WC is always a member of the FP. I had forgotten about the prophet factor, but that would be true as well.

[alas]

That bit about calling the first presidency speaker at the WC the "keynote speaker" rubs me wrong. Only in WC do they even bother to call anyone a keynote speaker. The term is used to designate the most important speaker. So, when the current prophet speaks at the priesthood session, they do not put him above all the other speakers by calling him the keynote speaker. Only when a priesthood leader is speaking along with a bunch of women leaders, do they ever call anyone a keynote speaker. They should just call him "the obligatory male".

Edited to add, I think there is a general sickness among Mormon feminists. I don't have a name for the disease yet, but it has infected many of the feminist blogs. FMH is close to death. They are putting up new blogs about once a month, and then instead of the hundred or so comments they used to get, they will get between two and twenty. The have had a running commentary on each session of conference for years, like we do here, only this year they did the running commentary on the women's (and girls) session, then put up one open thread for all 4 other sessions with no commentary from the perma bloggers at all. More of their blogs now are about racial or LGBT issues than feminist issues, and every thing there is just sort of anemic.

I think it happened as the anger over Kate Kelly's excommunication died back, it sort of left this discouraged, not exactly giving up, but it is the same effect as when the September 6 were exed. I am starting to think 3rd wave feminists are wimps, to be so easily silenced. With the September 6, there were at least 3 exed for feminist ideas, and this time around, it only takes one excommunication? I want to write a guest blog for them and chew them out for giving up so easily.

[Give It Time]

I hope fMh stays around. They have a lot of important content.

I don't know if the third wave of Mormon feminists have given up or they see viable alternatives outside the church. There's not a lot of incentive to remain feminist and faithful.

[Jeffret]

I think more are disillusioned and have simply left. Around the time of Ordain Women and the heyday of FMH there was a lot of excitement that they could actually do something. They thought they could actually make an impact. Some of us could have told them significant changes weren't going to happen, but the effort was worth something. If only to show them how things are. I think a lot of those who were excited about feminism in the Mormon church have moved on in a number of ways. Some have just moved over to more social media sites, particularly Facebook. Quite a few left the church. Some just decided to go along.

It is kind of similar to the September Six. And others who could have met the same fate at that time. They thought they could make a difference and change the church. The church had to demonstrate that wasn't going to happen. A number of people left, one way or another, because of it. But church leaders demonstrated who is in control.

[alas]

I am alright with the ones who have essentially left the church. I mean, that is what I have done, so I don't think they gave up, maybe came to their senses. It is the ones who are staying in the church but going quiet that I am frustrated with.

In thinking over my frustration, I am partly frustrated with myself because I was one who stayed in the church but went quiet after September 6. I see it happening again and understand too well the discouragement and fear. But giving in and going quiet does not work. Been there, done that. The church either needs to see many women leaving, or for active women to keep up the pressure. There WERE positive changes. Women asked for women to be allowed to pray in GC and although not every conference has had a prayer by a woman, it did start happening. We got the RS presidency, P presidency, and YW presidency with pictures up in the Ensign along with other general authorities. They are now on the stand. The third wave feminists did make changes, while the second wave feminists just got the ringleaders excommunicated for talking about HM, or talking about spiritual abuse within the church. After an excommunication is the time to reorganize and show the male church leaders that we know they are really out of touch old men and that we have no intention of being quiet good girls. We need to keep saying that Heavenly Father would NEVER treat his daughter's the way theMormon temple ceremony treats women.

Or we need to just leave and tell people why.

It is one of those times I want to tell myself that I am an idiot for still caring.

[Emower]

That bit about calling the first presidency speaker at the WC the "keynote speaker" rubs me wrong. Only in WC do they even bother to call anyone a keynote speaker. The term is used to designate the most important speaker. So, when the current prophet speaks at the priesthood session, they do not put him above all the other speakers by calling him the keynote speaker. Only when a priesthood leader is speaking along with a bunch of women leaders, do they ever call anyone a keynote speaker. They should just call him "the obligatory male".

I disagree. The prophet is not referred to as the keynote speaker in the priesthood session, but neither is he referred to as such by tbm's during the women's session. He is just regarded as the most important speaker. And he is still definitely regarded as the most important speaker during the priesthood session as well, as he is in all the sessions. Well, until monson came along anyway.

[Thoughtful]

From the FMH and Exponent II FB groups, I would say they are becoming larger post -mo communities, or more Mormon sects oriented instead of just LDS. The church is hemorrhaging their best and brightest women, and I think it will be the downfall of the church.

My TBM relatives, YW leaders, temple workers, etc hate polygamy, don't believe it's inspired, and won't touch modesty or chastity lessons with a 10ft pole. They want to bless their children. They think 1:1 authority interviews with children is perverse. They want women to speak more in GC and think we need POC in the q15. Millennials even more so. The church as it currently functions will not continue to function without the buy in of women. It will be forced toward equality or fall on it's face.

Unless of course the church broke ladies can shame the rest of us into submission.

I predict a continued hemorrhage as the church retrenches on gender.

[nibbler]

I went back and looked at the last 10 general conferences. Here are some stats:

• There were five women speakers per general conference except the April '17 sessions where there were only four. Yes, four women speakers.
• There were always three women speakers during each of the women's sessions.
• Combining the two bullet points above, there were only two women speakers during non-women's sessions, except the April '17 sessions where there was only one.

One thing to keep in mind. I'll estimate that on average men give 30 talks each general conference. If we take the average number of talks to be 35 (the 30 the men give plus the 5 the women give), for things to be roughly equal the women would need to give 17 or 18 talks per general conference. There are only nine women that serve in a capacity as a general officer. Each of them would have to give two talks and some of them might have to give three if they move toward giving women as many talks as men.

There are a number of ways to address this problem.
1) We need a lot more women GAs. We need this anyway.
2) Shorten the *&@*% out of general conference. It is ridiculously long.

ETA:

They'll never shorten conference now. Now that at minimum a half of the PH/RS curriculum will be coming from conference they need hours and hours of talks to generate 6 months of material... to say nothing of GC talks also serving as sources for SM talks.

Pretty soon the 3 hour block will be watching reruns of conference and a correlated video of a SS lesson.

/rant

[Jeffret]

It is one of those times I want to tell myself that I am an idiot for still caring.

Possibly. Though it's hard to let go and give up on it. Especially if you've still got a connection to it.

[Jeffret]

From the FMH and Exponent II FB groups, I would say they are becoming larger post -mo communities, or more Mormon sects oriented instead of just LDS. The church is hemorrhaging their best and brightest women, and I think it will be the downfall of the church.

As alas mentioned earlier, it's always been the case that some go and some will stay and shut up and be quiet. But, I think there are more women these days than before who are slipping out the door. And some that stay are taking it more on their own terms. And not relying on leadership as much for their identity and satisfaction. It won't change things quickly, but it could have a significant impact. For women who engage in society outside the Church, the discrepancy between their roles and recognition in society vs. in the Church is growing. Women who are wholly focused around the family, home, and church won't notice it. There are still aw awful lot of sexist issues in society, but the Church certainly amplifies them.

Mormonism is sustainable when it maintains a certain amount of tension with the greater society around it. From this distinction arises the idea of a peculiar people, a special people. But, when that difference grows too great, the tension becomes more noticeable. Mormonism kind of has to always be 20-30 years behind society. If it drifts too far, then the members start to drift away or they start to incorporate more worldly practices into their lives. If Church leadership cannot quietly move with that, the institution is endangered, but the subculture and the institution are kind of self-correcting that way. Church members have this belief that they are focused on doing what is right and following god's will. That they stand for something and will not change. But, they are far more swayed by the society around themselves than they realize.

I suppose for someone who recognizes the flaws and errors in the Mormon Church, it's not a bad place to remain, if you enjoy the social aspects and don't mind tracking societal change by a decade or two. Me, I took the Church's teachings too seriously. I believed it when I was taught to stand for truth and justice, to seek mercy, and to dream the impossible dream.

[2bizE]

A thought occurred to me that many relief society women do not even know who the RS leadership is. They seem to change frequently. It's not until after they are released and write a book that people get to know him. I asked my TBM DW who they were and she hadn't a clue. Now, showcasing the women more could change this, or perhaps letting them actually run their own organization. But the RS is run by men, and the women are not integrate well. Even in their RS meetings, they learn from the teachings of the prophets manual. Do they have a teachings of Elaine Jack manual? Nope.

[MoPag]

A thought occurred to me that many relief society women do not even know who the RS leadership is. They seem to change frequently. It's not until after they are released and write a book that people get to know him. I asked my TBM DW who they were and she hadn't a clue. Now, showcasing the women more could change this, or perhaps letting them actually run their own organization. But the RS is run by men, and the women are not integrate well. Even in their RS meetings, they learn from the teachings of the prophets manual. Do they have a teachings of Elaine Jack manual? Nope.

I don't think any TBM women see the female leadership in the church as having any real authority. And they certainty don't have the "power" that the Q15 have. When I was TBM, I believed the Q15 were prophets seers and revelators. They talked for God. If God wanted me to hear something important He would tell his prophets. Women couldn't be prophets (because we can have babies ) So the women speaking didn't carry any more weight than a nice SM talk. In fact I bet most hardcore TBM women would rather have just the prophet speak to them instead of the female leadership.

[MoPag]

Only when a priesthood leader is speaking along with a bunch of women leaders, do they ever call anyone a keynote speaker. They should just call him "the obligatory male".

Now I know what to call him on the NOM thread for next WC

Edited to add, I think there is a general sickness among Mormon feminists. I don't have a name for the disease yet, but it has infected many of the feminist blogs. FMH is close to death. They are putting up new blogs about once a month, and then instead of the hundred or so comments they used to get, they will get between two and twenty. The have had a running commentary on each session of conference for years, like we do here, only this year they did the running commentary on the women's (and girls) session, then put up one open thread for all 4 other sessions with no commentary from the perma bloggers at all. More of their blogs now are about racial or LGBT issues than feminist issues, and every thing there is just sort of anemic.

I haven't been on FMH in a while. I like the Exponent II FB group that Thoughtful mentioned.

I think it happened as the anger over Kate Kelly's excommunication died back, it sort of left this discouraged, not exactly giving up, but it is the same effect as when the September 6 were exed. I am starting to think 3rd wave feminists are wimps, to be so easily silenced. With the September 6, there were at least 3 exed for feminist ideas, and this time around, it only takes one excommunication? I want to write a guest blog for them and chew them out for giving up so easily.

You should write a post! Maybe a rallying cry? I think we MoFems are just getting exhausted.

[2bizE]

A thought occurred to me that many relief society women do not even know who the RS leadership is. They seem to change frequently. It's not until after they are released and write a book that people get to know him. I asked my TBM DW who they were and she hadn't a clue. Now, showcasing the women more could change this, or perhaps letting them actually run their own organization. But the RS is run by men, and the women are not integrate well. Even in their RS meetings, they learn from the teachings of the prophets manual. Do they have a teachings of Elaine Jack manual? Nope.

I don't think any TBM women see the female leadership in the church as having any real authority. And they certainty don't have the "power" that the Q15 have. When I was TBM, I believed the Q15 were prophets seers and revelators. They talked for God. If God wanted me to hear something important He would tell his prophets. Women couldn't be prophets (because we can have babies ) So the women speaking didn't carry any more weight than a nice SM talk. In fact I bet most hardcore TBM women would rather have just the prophet speak to them instead of the female leadership.

I think you are correct. I hope that can change. The problem I see is women don't understand what the RS should become. It will never get back to how it was unless the management is released back to the women. I wonder if the brethren are nervous that if the women were given full authority over the RS it would grow into a magnificent organization and have little need of the church and the brethren.

[Jeffret]

I think you are correct. I hope that can change. The problem I see is women don't understand what the RS should become. It will never get back to how it was unless the management is released back to the women. I wonder if the brethren are nervous that if the women were given full authority over the RS it would grow into a magnificent organization and have little need of the church and the brethren.

Yes.

[Give It Time]

I think you are correct. I hope that can change. The problem I see is women don't understand what the RS should become. It will never get back to how it was unless the management is released back to the women. I wonder if the brethren are nervous that if the women were given full authority over the RS it would grow into a magnificent organization and have little need of the church and the brethren.

Yes.

Yeah, I agree. If the RS were given free reign, they would put the other organizations and the church away and I think that terrifies the Brethren.

[Thoughtful]

I sometimes wonder if I would be a feminist if I didn't grow up LDS. I don't experience discrimination in my day to day life, except at church. And at church, it's bad.