NOM

moksha wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 15, 2017 11:46 am

Corsair wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 15, 2017 9:05 am

I am going to actually volunteer to assist with the next youth temple night in my ward. It's going to be amusing to see the young men jockeying to perform the baptisms of some of the more popular young women. I'm sure that the issues will eventually work themselves out, but this transition period will be entertaining.

We all know that when white pants poke out it is from air bubbles in the water.

Yes, there will also be jockeying to hide His Majesty, and it will be glorious. Many young men will exit the pond hunched over, turned sideways, or just very quickly. Some poor guys just can't stay in contact with a female without um, reacting.

(Source: Myself, at my first dance, nearly bent over double so my partner wouldn't notice. I thought it was the best night of my life.)

Jeffret wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 15, 2017 5:34 pm

Thoughtful wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 15, 2017 4:53 pm

slavereeno wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:45 am

Wow, I see them really doubling down on the youth in any way they can. They must be worried about loosing them.

Well, they're about to lose my 3, based on this policy change.

Could you clarify?

I've been trying to stay engaged with the church, but this has caused me to not be interested in allowing my kids to attend the temple for several reasons that mofem bloggers are covering well, as well as my spouseman finally seeing the gender disparities are getting worse rather than better. Maybe the nail in the coffin for me, but potential shelfbreaker for him.

Thoughtful wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 15, 2017 6:39 pm

I've been trying to stay engaged with the church, but this has caused me to not be interested in allowing my kids to attend the temple for several reasons that mofem bloggers are covering well, as well as my spouseman finally seeing the gender disparities are getting worse rather than better. Maybe the nail in the coffin for me, but potential shelfbreaker for him.

Makes good sense. Sounds like the sort of thing I expected.

Could you point me to some of these mofem bloggers?

Jeffret wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 15, 2017 7:11 pm

Thoughtful wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 15, 2017 6:39 pm

I've been trying to stay engaged with the church, but this has caused me to not be interested in allowing my kids to attend the temple for several reasons that mofem bloggers are covering well, as well as my spouseman finally seeing the gender disparities are getting worse rather than better. Maybe the nail in the coffin for me, but potential shelfbreaker for him.

Makes good sense. Sounds like the sort of thing I expected.

Could you point me to some of these mofem bloggers?

Kiwi Mormon
By Common Consent
Exponent II

I tried to talk about this with my spouse today. I rarely discuss church “stuff” with him. But I wanted to know how he sees this. “What’s the big deal, the boys have the priesthood”. I have to admit I was floored.

Dropped it and tried to bring it up later in context of how our DDs would feel and he just refused to engage at all. Just keept saying, I don’t know to any question I asked. An example is, how do you think this makes our girls feel? Do you think there is a significant difference in how boys/girls are treated and what their responsibilities are? “I don’t know”

So seems like TBMs will not be bothered by this at all.

Thanks, Thoughtful! I found this one particularly enjoyable, in kind a painful sort of way: Church Announces Boys Can Do More

Anon70 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 15, 2017 9:42 pm

So seems like TBMs will not be bothered by this at all.

It's true that for the most part TBMs won't be bothered by this. Their loyalty is well ingrained and they have accepted that everything the Church does is proper and godly. For those that embrace the patriarchy, especially those that benefit from it, whatever their gender, this move makes perfect sense.

But for some people, this can create the cracks in the ice or smash them much wider. Not many, perhaps, but it will matter to some. I think the timing is particularly bad for the church. It's a patriarchy supporting move when patriarchal and women's issues are getting lots of notice.

In the broader society, the Church tries to #lighttheworld, but what they really get noticed for are things like this, patriarchal moves to limit women, ridiculous booklets on homosexuality, and turning off the microphone for girls who are different. A religion trying to promote itself isn't news. A religion making such prejudiced blunders is.

The tbm's in my life think it's just great. If it comes from the Brethren, it's practically the best thing ever. Since the girls cannot baptize now anyway, they don't give a flying rat's backside that their consolation prize is towel-girl duty.

FiveFingerMnemonic wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 15, 2017 10:13 am

I read somewhere that organizations with serious problems often make increasingly irrational decisions as time goes on and the issues aren't resolved. It sure feels sometimes as if that is what is occurring these days. Unintended consequences occurring from what they think are inspired decisions.

Yep. No rational person would think this is going to have a large effect on retaining youth. Go ahead and rearrange those deck chairs in the Titanic for all the good it does you.

Reuben wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 15, 2017 6:04 pm

Yes, there will also be jockeying to hide His Majesty, and it will be glorious. Many young men will exit the pond hunched over, turned sideways, or just very quickly. Some poor guys just can't stay in contact with a female without um, reacting.

(Source: Myself, at my first dance, nearly bent over double so my partner wouldn't notice. I thought it was the best night of my life.)

I expect the water in the font to be kept about 10 degrees colder. I know I would have had some incredibly embarrassing moments if I had been performing baptisms at this age.

Corsair wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 15, 2017 7:51 am

Mormon Church Changes Rules for Temple Baptisms, Allowing Male Youth to Officiate in Ordinances

This is from the First Presidency letter dated 14 December 2017:

The First Presidency wrote: Under the direction of the temple presidency, young women (ages 12-18) with a limited-use temple
recommend may assist with baptistry assignments currently performed by sister temple ordinance
workers and volunteers.

Under the direction of the temple presidency, all priests in the Aaronic Priesthood with a limited-use
temple recommend may officiate in baptisms for the dead, including serving as the baptizer and as a
witness. Bestowing the gift of the Holy Ghost continues to be solely a Melchizedek Priesthood function.

You may be wondering, "What can the Young Women now do in temples?" The answer is: hand out towels.

Actually, I can think of a number of ways this will be helpful to the LDS church like increasing the devotion of many youth. Also, it will hilariously backfire in certain situations. Unfortunately, "Studio C" is unlikely to do a sketch on this.

Everyone drop your towels and take a step back. Nothing changes in this church without a good, underlying, undiscussed reason. It is not to give boys more opportunities, or for girls to get to pass out towels. And be assured, the reason is only about the men. The church cares less about the women. Sorry ladies, just sayin'.
So, now we have to speculate. I speculate that temple attending priesthood brethren numbers are down. Wards are having a hard time getting men out to help with baptisms for the dead. Cancellations are up. Why not put the boys to work?
Question. Why can women not be witnesses?

2bizE wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 16, 2017 7:37 am

Everyone drop your towels and take a step back. Nothing changes in this church without a good, underlying, undiscussed reason. It is not to give boys more opportunities, or for girls to get to pass out towels. And be assured, the reason is only about the men. The church cares less about the women. Sorry ladies, just sayin'.
So, now we have to speculate. I speculate that temple attending priesthood brethren numbers are down. Wards are having a hard time getting men out to help with baptisms for the dead. Cancellations are up. Why not put the boys to work?
Question. Why can women not be witnesses?

I think you already answered your question, "the reason is only about the men. The church cares less about the women." Though we may need to tweak that a little bit. Church leaders prioritize strengthening the priesthood. They pursue policies that elevate men over women and promote traditional gender roles of dominant men and submissive women. They've got to create arbitrary, meaningless differentiations between men and women, boys and girls because it is becoming increasingly clear that there are very few actual differentiations.

blazerb wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 16, 2017 6:28 am

Reuben wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 15, 2017 6:04 pm

Yes, there will also be jockeying to hide His Majesty, and it will be glorious. Many young men will exit the pond hunched over, turned sideways, or just very quickly. Some poor guys just can't stay in contact with a female without um, reacting.

(Source: Myself, at my first dance, nearly bent over double so my partner wouldn't notice. I thought it was the best night of my life.)

I expect the water in the font to be kept about 10 degrees colder. I know I would have had some incredibly embarrassing moments if I had been performing baptisms at this age.

Cold water for the girls would make their situation worse. And by extension negate the effect of warm water for the boys.

If this had been policy when I was a teen girl, it would have ended my willingness to do baptisms for the dead. I had zero respect for the YM in my ward, except for one of my two brothers. They were the kind of teens who blessed the sacrament, them when excused to sit with their families, exited to the parking lot to listen to the radio and gab in one of the boy's cars. The fact that I later married one of them is beside the point. He grew up. But at that age the girls are more mature emotionally and spiritually (and physically) than the boys, and frequently think the YM are stupid children. When you have zero respect for the priesthood holder doing an ordinance, the ordinance loses its magic. It is like seeing a child molester in the temple. It makes you realize that there is no magic to bishops interviews, and no magic to the priesthood they hold. I think baptisms F D done by YM that the YW see as silly little boys will just cause them to lose respect for priesthood in general.

And as a YW, I would not have let one of the YM in my ward so much as touch me when dry, let alone see me dripping wet in a white, semi see through outfit. Just no.

I think this change is because they are having too much trouble getting adult men to show up and support baptisms for the dead.

A better solution would be to allow women or YW to act as witnesses. Women did witness baptisms for the dead until about 1950, so why couldn't they just go back to that policy? It would help solve the problem of not enough men, without insulting women by giving them more of what is essentially housework. Oh, gee, the YW can now work in the laundry. The fact that they can do all the laundry they want to at home already sure makes this extra special, special as in what you tell people who are second class.

I do not think that increasing the speed of the hamster wheel will help with retention. I think it will just speed up burn out. You can only run so long on the hamster wheel before you get tired, and all this does is speed up the wheel.

I don't know if this was discussed above. Is this being touted anywhere as a "revelation"?

alas wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 16, 2017 11:32 am

If this had been policy when I was a teen girl, it would have ended my willingness to do baptisms for the dead. I had zero respect for the YM in my ward, except for one of my two brothers. They were the kind of teens who blessed the sacrament, them when excused to sit with their families, exited to the parking lot to listen to the radio and gab in one of the boy's cars.

I was in the room when a neighbor boy, who had been interviewed and sustained, was ordained a Teacher in the YM meeting. During the prayer, he opened his eyes, sneered at me, and flipped me off.

Ummm....I kindof came away from that wondering why this kid was "worthy" to get that ordination. But, back in them TBM days, I figured the bishop was trying to keep the kid and give him a chance to "be successful", so the church took the hit.

I think its EXACTLY the same thing going on now.

Rob4Hope wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 16, 2017 11:37 am

alas wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 16, 2017 11:32 am

If this had been policy when I was a teen girl, it would have ended my willingness to do baptisms for the dead. I had zero respect for the YM in my ward, except for one of my two brothers. They were the kind of teens who blessed the sacrament, them when excused to sit with their families, exited to the parking lot to listen to the radio and gab in one of the boy's cars.

I was in the room when a neighbor boy, who had been interviewed and sustained, was ordained a Teacher in the YM meeting. During the prayer, he opened his eyes, sneered at me, and flipped me off.

Ummm....I kindof came away from that wondering why this kid was "worthy" to get that ordination. But, back in them TBM days, I figured the bishop was trying to keep the kid and give him a chance to "be successful", so the church took the hit.

I think its EXACTLY the same thing going on now.

Yes, the church loses youth because of this catering to jerks, rather than offend them. They think they are keeping the jerk in the church, but all they do is drive out people who take it seriously because they lose all respect for what is supposed to be sacred. When my oldest was seminary age, we were in Texas, so early morning seminary pulling all ten kids from six different high schools. Well, there was this girl whose daddy was a world famous heart surgeon. She was forced to go to seminary by her parents and hated it, so she disrupted so badly that the other students could not learn anything, so why go. When my daughter begged not to go any more and I asked her why, this girl was the reason. I brought it up with the seminary teacher, and why can't this girl be expelled or disaplined so the other students will stay. The reason of course was the rich, world famous daddy. You don't cross people who pay 10 thousand dollars a month in tithing. Better lose all the other teens than offend one rich man. But my daughter lost all respect for the church. And the little rich girl was pregnant before she was 17 and was totally out of the church by 18, so, just what was accomplished by "saving" this girl. They lost about 6 out of 10 of those kids.

alas wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 16, 2017 12:10 pm

Rob4Hope wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 16, 2017 11:37 am

alas wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 16, 2017 11:32 am

If this had been policy when I was a teen girl, it would have ended my willingness to do baptisms for the dead. I had zero respect for the YM in my ward, except for one of my two brothers. They were the kind of teens who blessed the sacrament, them when excused to sit with their families, exited to the parking lot to listen to the radio and gab in one of the boy's cars.

I was in the room when a neighbor boy, who had been interviewed and sustained, was ordained a Teacher in the YM meeting. During the prayer, he opened his eyes, sneered at me, and flipped me off.

Ummm....I kindof came away from that wondering why this kid was "worthy" to get that ordination. But, back in them TBM days, I figured the bishop was trying to keep the kid and give him a chance to "be successful", so the church took the hit.

I think its EXACTLY the same thing going on now.

Yes, the church loses youth because of this catering to jerks, rather than offend them. They think they are keeping the jerk in the church, but all they do is drive out people who take it seriously because they lose all respect for what is supposed to be sacred. When my oldest was seminary age, we were in Texas, so early morning seminary pulling all ten kids from six different high schools. Well, there was this girl whose daddy was a world famous heart surgeon. She was forced to go to seminary by her parents and hated it, so she disrupted so badly that the other students could not learn anything, so why go. When my daughter begged not to go any more and I asked her why, this girl was the reason. I brought it up with the seminary teacher, and why can't this girl be expelled or disaplined so the other students will stay. The reason of course was the rich, world famous daddy. You don't cross people who pay 10 thousand dollars a month in tithing. Better lose all the other teens than offend one rich man. But my daughter lost all respect for the church. And the little rich girl was pregnant before she was 17 and was totally out of the church by 18, so, just what was accomplished by "saving" this girl. They lost about 6 out of 10 of those kids.

What you posted resonates pretty big with me.

Lets not offend anyone, especially the rich ones. What a joke. The church is big about preaching that God is no respecter of persons, but the whole lesson flies out the window when we are talking about the "in crowd".

Anon70 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 15, 2017 9:42 pm

So seems like TBMs will not be bothered by this at all.

Bothered? They'll cheer from the rooftops.

Church is boring, ultra-conservative, and predictable. This culture keeps most faithful members in a constant state of being starved for something, anything new. When something new comes along it's exciting because for once in a long, long, long, long, time there's something different about the drudgerous routine that is church. Eventually the novelty wears off and we settle in for another 5 to 10 years of no changes.

What's interesting to me about the announcement is that they're replacing priesthood preview with something that both the young men and young women can attend, which is clearly an attempt to balance the scales. It's like they are aware of the gender gap but have no idea what to do about it.

nibbler wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 16, 2017 7:03 pm

Anon70 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 15, 2017 9:42 pm

So seems like TBMs will not be bothered by this at all.

Bothered? They'll cheer from the rooftops.

Church is boring, ultra-conservative, and predictable. This culture keeps most faithful members in a constant state of being starved for something, anything new. When something new comes along it's exciting because for once in a long, long, long, long, time there's something different about the drudgerous routine that is church. Eventually the novelty wears off and we settle in for another 5 to 10 years of no changes.

What's interesting to me about the announcement is that they're replacing priesthood preview with something that both the young men and young women can attend, which is clearly an attempt to balance the scales. It's like they are aware of the gender gap but have no idea what to do about it.

So true. An example is the way 20 years later they are still going on about The Proclamation on the Family like it is this amazing pronouncement, when it's really pretty pedestrian and says nothing new or interesting (other than taking a swipe at the LGBT crowd). But it was the closest thing to revelation most members had in their lifetime, so by golly they were going to act excited about it.