Pants, Prayers, and Priesthood

Over the past six months or so, in my cultural world, a lot has been made of these three subjects.  Many of you know exactly what I am talking about, but a few of my distant friends, not living along the I-15 corridor will be utterly confused.

In my world and from a very young age, I was taught/believed in very traditional gender roles - the father being a provider, overseer, and patriarch of a home, while the mother bore, nurtured, and taught children.  Both were divine callings from God and were the most important work one could do.  I was very much a traditional girl.  I loved playing with dolls, learning household chores and arts, and couldn't wait until the day I found my prince charming who would complete me.  I not only found comfort in the outlining of the role that was laid before me, I LOVED the idea.  I remember my mother teaching me and I, singing the words of a song; "When I grow up, I want to be a mother, and have a family.....one little, two little, three little, babies of my own.  Of all the jobs, for me, I'll choose no other.  I'll have a family.....four little, five little, six little blessings in my home."   As you can see, I literally took those words to heart.  I am a stay-at-home mother of six and it is MY calling.  As I have gotten older, I have come to realize that not all young girls feel/felt the way I did or had the same dreams I did. 

 This post is to acknowledge those girls/women, who, through no fault of their own, have found themselves "uncomfortable" or "unfit" for the callings presented to them from a very young age; not to demean those who embraced their calling, as I did, because to support and understand another's feelings, even if they differ from our own, doesn't mean that we have to abandon that which speaks to us.

I have one daughter, that from an early age didn't "fit".  Maybe this had to do with the fact that she was the only girl her age at church, maybe it's because she has a tendency to compare, but maybe it's simply because she came with a different set of talents, strengths, and interests than your traditional girl.  She waited in anticipation for Activity Days (the girls equivalent of Boy Scouts in our church) as she had watched her uncles be involved in Scouts; playing basketball, hiking, tying knots, scuba diving, and building things out of wood and metal....just to name a few.  Later I found out how disappointed and out of place she felt while making hair bows, jewelry, and writing/talking about her feelings.  None of these are her strong points or interested her in the slightest.  They only made her feel like something was wrong with her.  These activities also made it very apparent to her that she was different and that to be happy, she needed to conform to "love" these types of stereo-typical girl activities to be accepted and to prepare for her role as a homemaker/mother.  As we all know (in adulthood), not all mothers love to cook, craft, or are the "touchy-feely" type of women, but by the gender biases presented to her at a young age, her interpretation was to shame who she really was and to do her best to change.

About six months ago, there was a push, by a small group of ladies, to wear pants to church.  Traditionally, in my religion, women wear dresses to church.  This being deemed "their best dress".  This idea was proposed to show support of those who had felt marginalized over the years.  Some ladies feel their "best" in a dress (I being one), but some have felt very uncomfortable in a dress, not even like themselves.  On the onset, I found this to be a refreshing idea and since there is no hard and fast rule about what is to be worn on Sunday, only  "Church members are encouraged to wear their best clothing as a sign of respect for the Savior, but we don't counsel people beyond that", I saw no harm in it.  I also felt like trying to understand and support was a very Christlike thing to do.  Boy, was I wrong.  What followed were vicious back and forths over social media, death threats to those promoting the idea to wear "their best dress pants", and those offering support called to repentance.  I think this display of hostility against a cultural/social norm, not a rule, speaks volumes of the correlation found in my culture.

So, here we go again, with another push. This time for prayer equality in our upcoming General Conference where no woman has ever offered the opening or closing prayer.  There is no rule about this social norm either, but in 1978, then-church President Spencer W. Kimball did make an official statement allowing women to pray in sacrament meetings, saying "there is no scriptural prohibition against sisters offering prayers" and adding that it is "permissible for sisters to offer prayers in any meetings they attend." This has spawned another war of words over what is right for women in the church and what is wrong; where there is room for equality and where there isn't, and what equality looks like.

I am also aware of a petition going around to move the church in a direction of granting women the right to hold the priesthood.  This is a very touchy subject to most and one that I am not going to really get into.  I will say that child-bearing has long been held as woman's equivalent gift to the man's priesthood gift.  Unlike a woman's gift of child-bearing, given to her (and all women for that matter, regardless of faith, unless physically impossible) just by her mere genetic make-up, a man's ability to hold the priesthood is a validation of his morality.  She can share in his priesthood through marriage, but can't directly address God in the same way as her spouse.  So what is a woman's equivalent to a man's gift of fatherhood???  Just wondering?

Since I am inactive in my faith, I didn't take part in the Wear Pants to Church day.  Although, if I were active, I like to think that I would have had the courage to show up wearing my pants, even though I realize there would be a social price to pay.  I am inactive for my own reasons and don't fit into other proverbial "boxes".  So, when the reaction to questions that push the social norm, is "if you don't like it, just leave the church", be aware that it is people like me that you are asking to leave.  People that have invested.  People that have loved and served.  People that want to bring their best selves and share, even if they don't exactly fit.  People that believe that sometimes asking questions is what moves us forward. People that long to be a part of what has made them who they are.  People who love the gospel and are willing to endure the social fallout, because of the good that they see there...

or maybe, like me, they will eventually just get tired of trying to fit, being judged for it, take your advice, and just stay home next Sunday.  Don't be too surprised.

Differences.....

Over the past decade or so, through personal and professional decisions (not that I/we are professional at anything, but farming is our profession), I have been introduced and exposed to new ideas and thoughts.  This has been such a lovely experience for me - to meet new people, hear diversity of thought, and to view all aspects of my life through new eyes.  

 

You see, I live in a conservative, monochromatic, small community.  Not that we don't have our share of town kooks and weirdos (I, probably being one of them).  It is a great place to live.  A safe place.  A place I love.  Yet, when anyone attempts to do anything "outside the box", questions arise.  "Why do things differently?", "Isn't the status quo good enough for you?",  "Do you think you are better than the rest of us?", are all things said when new thought or behavior is introduced.  I think this is a natural human reaction, so I am not being disparaging.  I am just acknowledging that a lot of diversity of thought doesn't arise in a community filled with people of the same religious, economic, and cultural backgrounds.  Sometimes new views or thoughts are met with fear, simply out of ignorance.

This became very apparent for me in San Fransisco, while I was there chaperoning a high school band/orchestra trip.  San Fransisco is such the opposite of Preston, Idaho.  Instead of fields of corn, there were rows of houses.  In lieu of snow capped mountains reaching skyward, there were skyscrapers.  There were bridges instead of barns.  All of which fascinated me.

 

I was also fascinated by the talk I overheard on the bus.  I was surrounded by talk of "I would hate to live here", "it is so ugly here", "why would anyone want to live here?".  I, myself, probably wouldn't want to live in San Fransisco, but it does have some things my little town just can't offer.

 

  I am not sure how the kids felt when I tried to change their attitude of fear into one of inquiry.   They might have just wanted the old lady to be quiet.  Regardless, we talked of the music scene there, the diversity of cultures, and how nice the weather was year round.  I tried to point out the nice things about what we were experiencing and hopefully they could see that different doesn't have to be a comparison.  Different doesn't have to mean bad.  It can just mean different.

I really love the picture I posted above.  Why?  Because it symbolizes this whole thought for me.  We all have things we value: things we like and dislike, things we believe and reject, and things that are important to us.  Those things are what defines us as individuals -  it's the rock that is our foundation.   But what I have experienced and what I believe, is that our foundation should never inhibit us from building bridges to others:  other cultures, other religions, other views, and other ways of life.  There is value there.  If not for us, for those living that existence.  To demean their way of life, simply because it is different, without first trying to understand and learn from it, is to demean them as human beings. 

I took this picture while on our tour of Alcatraz.  It is a good reminder to me that out of the most dismal, desolate places, beauty can grow.  That the positive can be found in all kinds of places, if you are willing to look for it.