Distilling Criticisms

[lostinmiddlemormonism]

My criticism:


It is not what it claims to be.

[GoodBoy]

That's a great summary!

[Jeffret]

I think the fact it is not remotely what it claims and is based on fiction sums it all up.

It looks like I missed this one in my revised, augmented list. I think lostinmiddlemormonism's one above merges in with this one. But, that may just be my perspective.

[alas]

I apologize if my initial response used more colorful or critical phrasing than was useful.

It's fine. I'm being sensitive and moody today. It's one of those weeks where life seems to be in upheaval and I'm looking for normality. I think I read somewhere that when people feel unsure or are reminded of their mortality that they shift toward conservative and linear thought. It's an attempt to bring order to things that aren't.

I am sorry you are having one of those weeks. One of the good things about church was it gave a sense of normality, security, of surety, and comfort. Sometimes that was purchased by blaming oneself for whatever was going wrong in life, but at least that gave a sense that the world was controllable, if you could only figure out where you sinned. I know sometimes I still feel like all life anchors and mooring lines have been cut and I am adrift with no motor, sail, or paddle.

I think your list was a great start. And you did ask if you missed anything. And, yeah, Jeffret went overboard with his little speech. The example of the blind men with the elephant would have gotten his point across. I liked his speech after reading it through twice, but since I had to read it twice not to take it as criticism of me, I can see how you took it. I have always been fascinated with the taxonomy of tomatoes as a berry, pumpkin as a berry, zucchini as a berry, yet legally they are vegetables. Imagine the arrogance of the government ruling that fruit is really vegetable. And, I liked the math example too, because in highschool I was a math geek, until the teacher insulted me for being a girl with a sexist comment to the effect that I was so talented in math, too bad I would never use it for anything but doubling recipes. So, when time to pick a career, I decided I didn't want anything with a bunch of sexist retards, so math was OUT. And his prediction came true.

But I did love the one list item he added first about how the church thinks one size fits all. That covers a LOT of the problems right there. Consider, they think gays are really just like them, and if they only marry a woman everything will be fine. Gays can't really be gay, because while they can look at a man and feel attracted (at least I think Oaks and Packer were at least bi, if not leaning homo on the spectrum, because they think if given permission, all men will choose gay. And Bednar is most likely asexual.) they have been content to marry women. They think men can make all the important decisions for a church that is 60% female, and no woman's input is really needed in what lessons are taught in RS, because of course the men know exactly what women need. And that introverts can learn not to be introverts if you stick them in a calling where they have be be outgoing and friendly, so cure their "shyness" by making her RSP, or him EQP. They don't get scruplulosity or addictions and how shame and guilt feed that, but think a heavy dose of guilt is "motivating" to everyone. They have really struggled with mental health issues being based on sin instead of brain chemistry---never been depressed have they? They do not understand domestic violence, rape, child sexual abuse or any form of victimization. All they understand is their own narrow life experience. One of them once had surgery and suddenly his eyes were opened to pain, and he was just amazed at his huge brand new comprehension of suffering. My eyes got stuck at the top of my head and I couldn't get them down for weeks. He is 80 something and never before understood pain????? My G####%% what a sheltered life.

[Reuben]

A bit off-topic, but I need to say something.

And, I liked the math example too, because in highschool I was a math geek, until the teacher insulted me for being a girl with a sexist comment to the effect that I was so talented in math, too bad I would never use it for anything but doubling recipes. So, when time to pick a career, I decided I didn't want anything with a bunch of sexist retards, so math was OUT. And his prediction came true.

What... the... hell. That is all.

Now back to our regularly scheduled fascinating discussion.

[Jeffret]

And, yeah, Jeffret went overboard with his little speech.

I've very rarely been accused of being too terse.

As I've said, I recognize that mostly I write these sorts of things so that I can understand better. One of the things that really helps me understand is to tie different things together, to make connections, to analyze similarities or differences. That's part of why I tend to draw different thoughts together, as I did in that response. I was also in the mood for trying out a bit more colorful imagery in my phrasing, which may have come across as more attacking or critical. Any such criticisms, though, were at least as much self-directed as directed at any other person.

[alas]

A bit off-topic, but I need to say something.

And, I liked the math example too, because in highschool I was a math geek, until the teacher insulted me for being a girl with a sexist comment to the effect that I was so talented in math, too bad I would never use it for anything but doubling recipes. So, when time to pick a career, I decided I didn't want anything with a bunch of sexist retards, so math was OUT. And his prediction came true.

What... the... hell. That is all.

Now back to our regularly scheduled fascinating discussion.

This was 1970, Provo, so home to a lot of sexist attitudes, and not the worst sexism I encountered by being one of the top 20 math students and the only girl top math student, and before anyone ever considered that girls hate math because they resent being treated as second class by the male teachers. I was the ONLY one in that top class not referred or even told I qualified for a nationwide math test that could have earned me a huge scholarship. Better keep the girl out of the completion so a boy will get the scholarship because the girl will just get married and pregnant before graduating college. And funny, but with attitudes like that, no wonder girls were not going into STEM. By my senior year of highschool, I was about as angry of an angry feminist as they come.

[achilles]

5) Enforces its power through shunning, shaming, guilt, coercion, cult of personality, and deception when deemed necessary

For me, I think the manipulation part is the worst aspect, followed by tribalism and rampant "benevolent" sexism (or chicken patriarchy, or whatever you want to call it.)

[JustHangingOn@57]

I think the fact it is not remotely what it claims and is based on fiction sums it all up.

Did you not see that archaeologists just discovered the great Nephite (or Lamanite, I don't remember or care) city of Zarahemla? (shakes head in exasperation)...

[moksha]

I don't see any of those points covering the concern that the Church is not living up to its potential to do good in the world.

You know, you sky write that on a clear day in downtown Salt Lake and Chapel Mormons would disagree and the apologists would simply say, "We are under no obligation to do any good".

[Dravin]

I would add that it teaches a problematic epistemology and insists the results of that epistemology are pure unquestionable knowledge (unless it conflicts with the brotheren that is). This extends beyond just things like, "I felt something, therefore Joseph Smith was a prophet!" to things like, "I studied taking a job in city X but prayed and since I felt discomfort at the prospect that means a deity doesn't want me to move.", "I was considering which investment portfolio to go with and when reading option 3 a hymn popped into my head and made me feel peace so I'll go with it.", and famously "You're discussing the church with me but since I don't like the implications of what you are saying and they make me uncomfortable you are wrong and I will disengage."

To be fair this is hardly unique to Mormonism or even religion (it is very easy to take 'I feel' as 'I know this' regardless of religious views) but the epistemological issues primes the pump so to speak.

[MoPag]

I think that the social issues such as homophobic and misogynist are much more significant and not the result of the others. So, I would put as

#1. Run by 15 old white cisgender men, which results in being 25-50 years behind the rest of the world in recognizing the full humanity of women, racial minorities and those who are other than cisgender. So, it is in favor of strict sexual regulation, strict gender roles, and racism, homophobia, and other forms of bigotry that we thought were overcome 50 years ago.

The abuse that LaMachina mentions falls under the very strict sexual regulations.

I think men who tend to leave the church for those reasons listed in the OP, see those reasons as most important and homophobia and sexism are contained in them. But women who tend to leave the church over social issues see those social issues as much more important than history, honesty, and bla bla bla. My two daughters would have stayed in the church if not for those social issues. My oldest saw them and left during high school, when the way the YM were treated was glaringly different than the way the YW were treated. My second daughter did not really leave over homophobia, because she left in college and found a religion that was not sexist, then she realized she was not attracted to men but was attracted to women. My oldest decided she did not want her children raised in a sexist environment, so married a nonmember and never had her children blessed. My second being lesbian has no children. My son is the only one to stay active. So, in my family four out of six females are out over sexism, and the two being raised in the church are just hitting the age where they begin to see the sexism. None of the males have left, but one was never a member of record. My two daughters are not even aware of the history problems or really anything on your list. They are out over the 15 old white cisgender men running the church 50 years behind the rest of the world.

So, put that as your number one and see if any of the others fall under it.

Amen!

I'm part of a Post-Mo Women's FB group. I've never seen anyone in that all female group complain about the historical/truth claim issues with the church. They always talk about the abuses, sexism, racism and homophobia that caused them to leave.

[Jeffret]

I'm part of a Post-Mo Women's FB group. I've never seen anyone in that all female group complain about the historical/truth claim issues with the church. They always talk about the abuses, sexism, racism and homophobia that caused them to leave.

Over the years I've seen a few women focus on historical issues. Most of the time those women focus on polygamy. But, I have seen some women who are primarily concerned about general historical / truth claim issues regarding the Church. Far more women, though, describe more current issues, as you and alas describe.

I first noticed this pattern some years ago and have observed it ever since. I saw that some men would denigrate women's criticisms of the Church or reasons for leaving. In some instances some men would proclaim that a woman couldn't have a true un-testimony of the Church until she had thoroughly investigated its historical problems. Some men would insist that unless she investigated the Church's historical problems and accepted those as of paramount importance, she could't properly understand the problems of the Church. In my initial response to oliver_denom on this thread, my comment, "that does violence to the female perspective, subsuming it entirely under the male" wasn't so much directed at oliver_denom as at others who I've seen in the past.

Since I started pointing out these differences in experience and perspective, I've seen a lot less denial of women's different concerns. I still see that there are significant differences in men's and women's experiences and criticisms of the Church. As I've mentioned, my own concerns line up more un-stereo-typically with women's.

I've seen lots of people love the CES Letter. For some it is conclusive and creates a fundamental paradigm shift. It initiates the faith crisis. It presents a strongly male-oriented perspective. I find it dull, uninteresting, and rather pointless. I've never managed to get through the whole thing. There are some women who find the CES Letter very significant and meaningful, but I've observed that ex-Mormon men tend to rant and rave about how important it is far more than women do. A lot of times a man will read the CES Letter, precipitating a faith crisis, and then give it to his wife to get her to understand. She'll find it insignificant and unimportant.

Of course, this is complicated by individual variance. While I'm a man, I don't find the CES Letter personally meaningful. Some women do find it meaningful, only to share it with their husband and discover he doesn't.

[Hagoth]

This is a great discussion. I'll take my shot at it.

1) It's a pack o' lies.
2) A participant's value is measured by their devotion to men who unscrupulously promote and enforce the pack o' lies.