October 11, 2007
A Controversial Subject
Posted by sarah under Christianity, God, church, feminism, parenting, religion | Tags: , gender stereotypes, general conference, homemaking, housework, motherhood, parenting, relief society |After having read Sister Julie B. Beck’s talk given at the L.D.S. Church’s General Conference on Sunday (which you can listen to here, and in a few days you can read on the Church’s official website), I would like to share my feelings on my reconciliation to her words. Much of this post comes from an email conversation I had the other day with Azúcar, in which she helped me sort out the words and calm myself down.
Here is a brief quote from the talk (which I found not on the Church’s website, but on Feminist Mormon Housewives, a group blog dedicated to helping people in the church come to terms with their faith and become better Christians through examination and discussion):
“Mothers who know are nurturers. This is their special assignment and role in the plan of happiness. To nurture means to cultivate, care for, and make grow. Therefore, mothers who know create a climate for spiritual and temporal growth in their homes. Another word for nurturing is homemaking. Homemaking includes cooking, washing clothes, and dishes and keeping an orderly home. Home is where women have the most power and influence. Therefore, Latter-day Saint women should be the best homemakers in the world.
Working beside children in homemaking tasks creates opportunities to teach and model qualities children should emulate. Nurturing mothers are knowlegeable, but all the education women attain will avail them nothing if they do not have the skill to make up homes that create a climate for spiritual growth.
Growth happens best in a house of order, and women should pattern their homes after the Lord’s house. Nurturing requires organization, patience, love, and work. Helping growth occur through nurturing is truly a powerful and influential role bestowed on women.”
At first, I felt like the talk was so directed at mothers being better maids. The specific things she brought up later, kids in pressed clothes, missionary haircuts, house as clean as the temple, seemed so far from any doctrine that could help me be a better person. And saying that mothers who “know” do all those things seemed like such a slap in the face. Especially since it’s so cultural, and really unnecessary to salvation. (The “mothers who know” references a story well-known to Mormons, in which there are 2,000 young men who fight in a war and are not seriously injured, but have great faith that God will help them. When asked how they gained such faith, they respond that their mothers knew it.)
I don’t take exception to advice to be a better mother, but I do take exception to the notion that if my house isn’t clean, I am failing and/or unfaithful. I don’t believe it is only the mother who should be cleaning, but rather, it should be a full-family endeavor. Husbands have just as much responsibility in keeping their surroundings clean. I will say that it is definitely the parents’ responsibility to teach the children how to clean, and to involve them in the process whenever they can, but that burden should not be laid squarely on the mother’s shoulders. I’m not sure Sister Beck intended her words to be taken that way, but it seems to be how they came out.
After having such a negative reaction to this talk, and reading many other people’s reactions, I decided to try to find something that really could help me be a better mother and person. I’m already trying to live in a clean house, though it almost never happens. I don’t think missionary haircuts or white shirts mean anything. I try to be a leader, but I don’t think of myself as the primary example of leadership, because my kids have a father too. I know Sister Beck meant well, which is why I wanted to know how other people perceived her words. I wanted to have an alternate explanation that isn’t my own “she’s just reaffirming old gender stereotypes and throwing us back into ‘The Art of Homemaking’ so people think Mormons are happy because they look like June Cleaver.” I felt like I might have over-reacted.
Carina helped me think about it in terms of why, rather that how the message was given. It really is the why that is important. I’d gotten way too offended at the how. I still think the manner was offensive, but I’ve cooled down.
I did go back and read it again, and tried to add in some things that would help me with the semantics. So where she says “homemaking includes cooking, washing clothes, and dishes and keeping an orderly home,” the word “includes” is key. It also includes reading, playing, painting, laughing, etc, but those are things we already know. We have done as Daring Young Mom said, we’ve made the housekeeping part of the equation a joke. “It’s sort of en vogue to be a slacker mom, to joke about how big your pile of laundry is, how long it’s been since you did dishes, how you’ve given up trying to feed your kids enough veggies or that you’re always late for everything.” So when Sister Beck says we should be the best homemakers, she’s not saying we should be the best housekeepers. We can be the best at creating a loving and spiritual environment that is hopefully as clean as we can get it. Likewise, if we know a lot about mitosis and meiosis, it won’t help our children if we don’t have the skills to teach it to them. I have to believe that she’s not just talking about housework.
We, as mothers and part of a parental team, can create a powerful world for our children, one in which they are free to learn what they want, and they also see the value in learning what we want to teach them, or what society requires them to know, that is, how to be clean, responsible, respectful of others, kind, doing good to all man, virtuous, lovely…
(That last gratuitous reference is from the 13th Article of Faith of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It’s like a part of the Credo for the Mormons. “We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say we follow the admonition of Paul- We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.)
October 11, 2007 at 11:40 am
Nice post. You are so good to have given it so much thought. That’s how growth happens I think - really thinking about the stuff that bothers us, figuring out how we feel about it.
The talk rubbed me the wrong way as well, but instead of trying to find something good to take from it, I decided to just ignore it. It’s just one talk. I liked the talk from Elder Oaks. It resonated with me, so I kept that, and let go of the Beck talk, after requisite griping.
I will say that I have been dismayed, looking around at other mormon blogs lately, seeing all of the gleeful back slapping that people who DIDN’T struggle with the talk were doing.
I liked this insight from Mark at By Common Consent:
“When people talk about their favorite conference speakers, they often describe them in terms of speaking style. ”He really lays it on the line.” “She doesn’t pussyfoot around.” “He give it to you straight.” It has been my experience that when I have used phrases like that, it has been when I have taken some glee in seeing someone else put in his place. If I start to look forward to listening to Gordon B. Hinckley in the hope that he will lay the smack down on somebody, I have reduced his role from spiritual leader to that of a trash talking NBA power forward.”
October 11, 2007 at 11:50 am
Sue, that’s such a good point about people using their favorite talks as judgment tools. That’s exactly what I found on the fMh discussion from people who thought those who didn’t like the talk were such sinners for questioning the hierarchy. For me, it’s really important to understand what I’m endorsing, so I’m going to continue trying to understand as much as I can, and let others believe what they want. But I also fully endorse your approach.
October 11, 2007 at 12:33 pm
Hmmm… Where to start with this one?
Yes I really heartily agree with your initial reaction, that this talk reaffirms some negative gender-role stereotypes. I tend to think that no matter how much good this woman intends, she’s just passing on the oppression that’s been laid on her own shoulders, and telling you essentially: “I suffered through this hardship to be a *good* mother, so if you don’t do it, you’re going to hell.”
More to the point, it reads exactly like she’s telling you you must be a good housekeeper to be good in the eyes of God (and your husband, and your church peers). I think any wiggle room you see in her words is something you’re _trying_ to read into it because you don’t want to be angry with something the church seems to be advocating.
Don’t sweat it. Be angry! She clearly said some wrong-headed things, and I don’t think it has to hurt your relationship with the church, your family, your peers, God or your faith to have a strong opinion. You’re not blindly accepting, but it sounds like you’re trying to force acceptance of these words, and I don’t think that’s necessary.
By all means, modify the things she said and come up with your own lesson, fit it into your own life in a positive way, but don’t give credit where it’s not due. If it helps, take a transcript of the whole talk and rewrite it in words that both strengthen your faith and also strengthen your family’s role in keeping an orderly environment. And I’d even say take that idea of order well beyond your own home and personal appearance. We are all stewards of our fellow men, and of our world, and we should treat all things with equal respect. All of us should. Not just women, and not just in the home. Pitifully few of us actually live our lives according to that fundamental (and not just fundamentally *Christian*) framework.
Many religions have put themselves in the position of guiding people not just in spiritual matters, but in daily life, in personal relationships, in politics and beyond. While I disagree that any religion should go that far, I do think the people who are part of religions are *begging* for guidance in all these areas. Life is difficult and frightening, and having one source of inspiration and answers can be comforting. So while I disagree with the practice, as exemplified by that speech, I acknowledge that it helps some people much more than it hurts or oppresses them.
My biggest problem with it is that many people don’t have the ability or the courage to question their church leaders in the way you’ve done. That’s where it turns from simply wrong-headed to oppressive.
October 11, 2007 at 12:46 pm
nungnung, I’m glad you don’t think I’m “blindly accepting.” At the same time, I really, really believe that Sister Beck intended no harm. She was not trying to support female subjugation, but was relating what has helped her feel closer to God, and believes it can help others do the same. And maybe some of those people who are “begging” for guidance will find what they need.
October 11, 2007 at 2:16 pm
Hmmmm… I had some sort of an adverse reaction to Sis. Beck’s discourse as well mostly because in the beginning she made some reference to how “some of us will not enjoy motherhood in this lifetime” or something to that effect and it quite rubbed me the wrong way. Mostly because I don’t want to hear those words directed towards me or anyone at anytime. I like to keep the faith that motherhood is in my cards.
I’ll be really honest here too: I tend to tune out a lot when the relief society or primary sisters speak in GC. Something about the sweet syrup in their voice makes my mind wander off to la la land!
October 11, 2007 at 3:42 pm
Oh.
This talk, given by the RS President during the Sunday morning session no less… where to start?
After hearing this talk, I quietly walked to the bathroom and locked the door and sobbed my guts out for about a half an hour. Try as I might, I am completely unable to reconcile this talk with the Gospel or with who I am as a Daughter of God. From start to finish her words alienated and confused me. It was, for me at this juncture in my life, not just poorly chosen in its wording… it was destructive.
By the next night, I was still unable to find a way to understand or deal with what she said… except that the Lord only promised to never allow a PROPHET to lead his people astray. I finally got a blessing of comfort and counsel from Dadguy, and that has made all the difference for me. It has turned the whole experience into a different sort of message… “spend more time in scripture study and prayer.” and this is the sort of message I can get behind. The end.
(although I still gotta wonder… do they really have no one look over these talks beforehand to say “here is what you are saying… is that what you REALLY mean to say?”
October 11, 2007 at 3:57 pm
Kalli, you could also look at it like this, “some women will not enjoy motherhood, whether it be in this lifetime or the next.” That sounds ridiculous and dismissive of the women who want to be mothers and simply cannot, but there you have it. Not all mothers enjoy motherhood. *wink wink* I think talking about it to such a small segment of the church in GC is a little weird, even if you try to temper it with encouragement/condolences to those who don’t have any kids.
Bon, I hear ya. I fumed all day, until Derek finally said something about me being mad at him, and I had to explain and apologize profusely for acting that way. But yeah, a little proofreading and/or editing from a communications expert?
October 11, 2007 at 4:05 pm
Everything is vetted.
How can we pick and choose what comes in conference. If it is in conference, the message is something we needed to hear. First and foremost, everything must be confirmed for yourself, that’s what we teach and hopefully how we live.
(I’m freely cribbing from my email discussion with Sarah as well…)
When I first heard the talk I will completely admit that I was SAD and upset, I nearly tuned out. That’s when I gave myself a gut check: time to examine MY motivations. Just because this time it hits a little closer to home and my own insecurities, does it make a difference to whether or not I obey? What kind of feminist do I think I am if I am less willing to listen to another woman guide my progress than I am a man? Is it simply because she’s a woman that we feel this way, or is it because her topic related to some of the areas where we are most vulnerable?
If I take this counsel and beat myself in some sort of self-flagellation, I don’t think that’s fulfilling the counsel. I tend to castigate myself already because I feel inadequate in so many of those areas. Instead of taking on another hair shirt, I need to look at her counsel and apply it positively. We’re the CEOs of our homes, we can choose to do the work ourselves, or choose to teach and delegate. I would hope that we’re delegating the responsibilities. I hope we’re homemaking, not housekeeping. Obviously, not homemaking in the 1950s sense, but homemaking as in creating a powerful place for our families.
I can see some problems, not with the counsel, but with how we will implement it and how we might use it to judge others. Naturally, it’s just as wrong to use her counsel as a cudgel as it is to ignore it. Don’t we already have enough pressure? I don’t know. I think we had the wrong kind of pressure. Now maybe we have a better direction for the force to press. I can’t get hung up on the semantics of the talk; I need to find the spirit of her message.
So let me ask, why do we think the address was delivered? What do you think are the motivations? Are we truly being asked to do something that will make us inherently unhappy?
I need to be the one to bend my stiff neck.
October 11, 2007 at 4:18 pm
Azucar, you hit it. Everything must be confirmed for yourself. For some, this is easy and instant. For others, it requires copious amounts of thought, prayer, time, peppermint tea, whatever. I think your questions are really important. Those are the questions I’m trying to answer.
October 11, 2007 at 4:37 pm
“…all the education women attain will avail them nothing if they do not have the skill to make up homes that create a climate for spiritual growth.”
This is a statement that I simply cannot wrap my head around or manage to contort into my understanding of the divine nature of man. And by man, I mean man/woman. It is simply, and patently untrue. So WHAT… am I to make of it?
I believe, Azucar, that I shall reserve the right to pick and choose between truth and untruth as delivered from the pulpit in Conference, be the speaker man or woman.
Being called to repentance sucks, but that was not what this was about for me. I held up what Perez. Beck said, and tried to examine my life through it’s lens… I could not. Her lens is, frankly, and to the best of my knowledge, distorted. Perhaps I AM stiffnecked… but in order to progress, I have to shelve this talk. Perhaps I will gain a better understanding later, but please do not imply that a person is “picking and choosing,” when that may not be the case. I tend not to listen too closely what the GA’s talk about same-gender attraction as well.
October 11, 2007 at 4:41 pm
s’cuze me… “President Beck.”
October 11, 2007 at 5:01 pm
Azucar,
Upon a few moment’s cooler reflection… I am thinking you were not directing your “picking and choosing” comment at me, and possibly had not even read my comment.
At the same time, I did all those same thing you did… the gut check, the insecurities, the repentance portion. Obviously large chunks of her talk were applicable in my life, I am a work in progress.
I am defensive because I AM picking and choosing, a thing that I never thought that I would resort to doing with General Conference. I have held it up and examined it to death, and cannot reconcile it. I ask you to please not judge me for my inability.
October 11, 2007 at 6:26 pm
I think I must put this talk in the category of “What on earth was she thinking and how come nobody gave her some advice about how it would be taken around the world?” What bothered me the most about her talk at the Women’s Conference the week before(which had many of the same sentiments) were the photos. Why would we show photos of luxury US kitchens with granite counter tops and high-end appliances? Is this part of being righteous? Is this our ultimate goal? Her talk on Sunday came across as close minded, imperious, and judgmental. Not something I need in my life. But I guess I am old enough at 55 (and having been a RS pres recently myself) to just chalk it up to someone who has led a very privileged life and did not have a lot of inspiration in that talk. She just didn’t, but foolish and misguided people don’t negate the other true things in the church.I’m not going to take it very seriously and I don’t think any of you should either. Sarah, you are such a wonderful mother–just like your mother was when you guys were little (and still is!) You are someone who loves your children, who plays with them, who nurtures them. Your house is just fine. Please don’t change because of that talk!
And what is with the white shirt fetish suddenly? We all need to object to all these things that reduce the gospel to such a low level. Remember, between Mary and Martha, who chose the better part.
And one more thing–I think getting a PhD ended up making me a better mother. My home was not always neat and tidy, but my children saw someone who had lots of interests and who had some priorities about what’s important–you can ask them when they get out of jail (just kidding, they’re all great and doing wonderful things.)
As for me, I’m going to write her a letter and express my displeasure–I’m sure there’s a file there in SLC already, so it might as well get bigger.
October 11, 2007 at 8:36 pm
Bon, I’m sorry the talk caused you so much pain. I WAS extremely irritated after hearing it, and left snarky comments on T&S, FMH - well, all over the place, really. But it hasn’t bothered me since then, because, as I said before, I’ve decided to ignore the parts that are bothering me. When I say I’m ignoring it, I don’t mean that I’ve decided not to think about it because it’s troublesome and I think the counsel shouldn’t apply to me. I mean that I can’t allow this one issue where, to be frank, I think our leader is off-base, to affect my overall faith. So I shelve it, as someone else said.
Perhaps this is the wrong tack to take, but I’ve discovered something in the last five years as I’ve struggled with my faith. Almost all of the teachings and issues that give me pause have to do with cultural/social issues, and not spiritual ones. Ever since the church was restored, the church’s position on social issues (whether we’re talking women and the priesthood, racial issues, birth control, our treatment of our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters) has evolved and changed and floated around a bit. Our stance has NOT been unchanging or immovable. Past prophets and leaders have gone on record saying some seriously nutty stuff, because in addition to being inspired leaders, they are also human, with their own cultural biases and experiences. I put this talk on gender in the same social/cultural category.
I trust our leaders to give me counsel and advice about spiritual matters and doctrine. Anything that has to do with social issues, prejiduce, etc. - I take that to the Lord.
Our leaders AREN’T perfect. They aren’t inspired 100% of the time. We can sustain them in their calling and still recognize that when they were set apart they weren’t given wings and a halo and a heavenly GPS system that will always allow them to be 100% in tune with the Lord. They have free agency. They are going to be influenced by their own experiences and thinking.
When I started having issues with my faith, part of it was because I really believed that our leaders had to be perfect. Finding out that they weren’t, that some of them thought some crazy stuff, and were not always giving counsel straight from God, was very challenging to my faith. I was deifying my leaders, making them perfect, and they are not. They are human, and that’s as it should be.
Look at the prophets in the OT - some seriously messed up folks. Look at how often Joseph was chastised by the Lord. Brigham Young said some really awful things about race (common for the time, but awful from our 21st century perspective). Should the Lord have called a racist prophet? I guess BY was the person who was needed for the position at that time. Without BY, the church probably would not have survived. The Lord has to utilize actual human beings to serve in his church, and they are each going to come with their own personal load of baggage. Inevitably, sometimes people will be seriously off-base.
I’m not saying, disregard her counsel if you don’t like it. I’m just saying, President Beck has a calling, gave some counsel, but she has the same access to the Lord that you and I have. Direct. I don’t think twisting ourselves into knots trying to make sure we see 100% eye-to-eye with President Beck is not necessary.
Sorry, that was long, and I’m not even sure if what I said will make sense to anyone but me, but it comforts me.
October 11, 2007 at 8:42 pm
Oops, I meant “I don’t think twisting ourselves into knots trying to make sure we see 100% eye-to-eye with President Beck is necessary.”
October 11, 2007 at 10:51 pm
No judgments from me whatsoever. After all, in order to judge you I would have to remove the beam from my own eye.
I have never thought our leaders infallible; it turns out that we are all imperfect. However, I do understand the sentiment of her message outside of the semantic devices she used. I don’t think we are required, unless specifically asked, to accept all counsel immediately, that is the beauty of the gospel. We must all come to our own understanding and reconciliation.
As upsetting as her words initially were, I know I have changes I need to make. Perhaps this was the push I needed.
October 11, 2007 at 11:05 pm
OK, so I just asked my husband what he thought about the talk for the first time and he said,
“Eh.”
So I pressed him, and gave him my perspective. He said, “It just seemed kind of accusatory to me.”
Hmm. Interesting.
He gave me a parallel. “I have to hear about pornography all the time, ALL the time. I don’t have a problem, but there are people out there that do and they need to hear the message. So, I don’t think that you necessarily need to hear the message, but there are women who do need to hear it.”
Purple shirts for everyone!
October 12, 2007 at 11:23 am
I am so impressed at your desire to respond thoughtfully to this talk. So many people never move past a knee-jerk reaction to look for wisdom in someone else’s words when they don’t agree withthe person.
I don’t know any of the people you’ve mentioned in this blog post, since I’m not a Mormon. But I do know that God loves us unconditionally, and the state of our homes is not a requirement for him to love us.
The comments posted here gave me a glimpse into the Mormon world and I believe I’m better for understanding Mormons a little more.
October 12, 2007 at 1:08 pm
Hey Sarah and Sue, Thanks for sharing your insight and wisdom. I also felt that fmh and other sites were taking some mean-spirited stabs at those that were struggling with Beck’s talk. I especially didn’t like the condescending tone or editorial attitude that a certain person used to discourage comments by saying, Please re-read the article before posting a comment that is negative or disagreeing with my personal take on the intent of the talk. I thought this was too defensive and apologetic and discouraged a well-rounded discussion. I really aprreciate the comments found in this discussion.
October 12, 2007 at 2:40 pm
I liked President Beck’s talk. Maybe I’m in the minority. As a woman who desired 10 children growing up and has no biological children, I wasn’t offended by her frank words that not all women will enjoy motherhood. I struggled for some years before adopting. My son has brought me great joy and happiness. I also have taken in and adopted a family member’s daughter whom I dearly love. However, she comes with a lot of “previous life experience” that has required years of intense and on-going therapy. Her primary method of dealing with any stress or anger is to direct it solely towards me, and not always in safe ways. I will tell you that many, many times I truly do not enjoy being her mother.
As for the homemaking/housecleaning part that has seemed to cause great deals of stress and heartache for so many, I personally needed the reminder. I LIVE in my house, so it’s not a showcase. No one’s going to get food poisoning from eating off the counters, and there are no swamp things living in my toilet although I don’t clean it every day. However, there are areas that with a bit more effort would really promote more peace in my home. We have a lot of stress because of family members not being able to find things when they need them, including the clean laundry that they didn’t put away and is now mixed with the dirty laundry they have left piled on the floor. We are going to make a better effort to put things were they belong, so that this stress is lessened. My interpretation of that portion of the talk: What areas can I improve that will help bring peace/the spirit to my home? I don’t expect my home to be as clean as the temple, there are no children running through the temple with snowy/muddy boots on because they are having a “potty emergency”, but I do want the peace that will bring that spirit. Just as we clean the “sin” garbage from our souls that keeps the spirit out, we need to make sure that our homes are cleared of things that keep the spirit out. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve had those weeks (not just days) when you couldn’t find the floor, it’s not like the spirit is going to be thwarted by physical object anyway). I’m just saying that for our family, a cause of stress and contention comes from losing things and that’s something we are going to work on. I work part time while the children are at school, used to be full time. My children have been learning to do simple chores since they were small. They are learning to care for the house and cook. These are things that they will need to know for their own homes and as part of a family, it is their duty to pitch in; the mess isn’t all mine. I was put on earth to be their mother - not their maid.
I think that “mothers who know” are discerning mothers. Those who know to put a band-aid on the skinned knee and not yell about the blood stains on the floor; who know to find the camera to take pictures because DS is blue and the dog is green because DS found the food coloring; and who remember that vacuums work wonders because it was summer and the children wanted snow so they poofed a new large size container of baby powder all over their room. I check my children over when they leave the house on Sunday. DS for a clean shirt, his tie, and combed hair. That doesn’t guarantee that he’s going to make it to Church, let alone through Church, looking neat. He’s a dirt magnet. DD isn’t much better, she’s usually wrinkled by the time we get there. We make the effort so that the children will eventually realize that Sunday is different and our dress shows respect for Heavenly Father and Jesus. (Who cares what others think.)
Just as Elder Oaks told us that we need to prioritize, are there unnecessary things that are keeping us from making our houses a home? Are we and our families too busy to take the time to make sure that our home is the best it could be? Are we spending so much time in the car taking our children to various activities that we don’t have time to make sure they eat healthy foods, let alone see each other at all? I don’t think that my children have been deprived because they have not participated in organized sports. They play outside, ride bicycles, read, make projects, are learning to sew, and enjoy the time that we have to spend together as a family.
Just my take on the talk.
October 13, 2007 at 2:14 am
I thought the talk by Sister Beck was great and wise counsel. 1 Nephi 16:2 says, “And it came to pass that I said unto them that I knew that I had spoken hard things against the wicked, according to the truth; and the righteous have I justified, and testified that they should be lifted up at the last day; wherefore, the guilty taketh the truth to be hard, for it cutteth them to the very center.”
Its times like these that test the strength of our testimonies. Are we willing to take counsel from those who have been chosen to lead us? It makes me sick to read and listen to members of the church that don’t “agree” with the Sister Beck’s message in conference. Those members that have “issues” with her message are probably the same members that question their local church leaders as well. They probably don’t want to say prayers in church, give talks/lessons, don’t hold family home evenings, are not having personal/family prayers, not reading their scriptures or attending the temple. They probably find every reason possible to skip meetings they should be attending; yet they consider themselves faithful, active, strong, salt of the earth members.
Serving in the bishopric I see these kinds of thing happen first hand. You people are a burden to the church!! Grow up and start living the gospel standards!!
For your reading pleasure I have included some of the talk by President Benson from his 1987 conference talk titled “To the Mothers of Zion”. Read’em and weep!
“Our beloved prophet Spencer W. Kimball had much to say about the role of mothers in the home and their callings and responsibilities. I am impressed tonight to share with you some of his inspired pronouncements. I fear that much of his counsel has gone unheeded, and families have suffered because of it. But I stand this evening as a second witness to the truthfulness of what President Spencer W. Kimball said. He spoke as a true prophet of God.
President Kimball declared: “Women are to take care of the family–the Lord has so stated–to be an assistant to the husband, to work with him, but not to earn the living, except in unusual circumstances. Men ought to be men indeed and earn the living under normal circumstances” (Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, p. 318 ).
President Kimball continues: “Too many mothers work away from home to furnish sweaters and music lessons and trips and fun for their children. Too many women spend their time in socializing, in politicking, in public services when they should be home to teach and train and receive and love their children into security” (Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, p. 319).
Remember the counsel of President Kimball to John and Mary: “Mary, you are to become a career woman in the greatest career on earth–that of homemaker, wife, and mother. It was never intended by the Lord that married women should compete with men in employment. They have a far greater and more important service to render.
Again President Kimball speaks: “The husband is expected to support his family and only in an emergency should a wife secure outside employment. Her place is in the home, to build the home into a haven of delight.
“Numerous divorces can be traced directly to the day when the wife left the home and went out into the world into employment. Two incomes raise the standard of living beyond its norm. Two spouses working prevent the complete and proper home life, break into the family prayers, create an independence which is not cooperative, causes distortion, limits the family, and frustrates the children already born” (Spencer W. Kimball, San Antonio Fireside, Dec. 3, 1977, pp. 9-10 ).
Sister Beck was quoting President Benson, who was quoting President Kimball. “In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.” (2 Timothy 4: 3-4)
Put that in your self-righteous peace pipes and smoke it!
October 13, 2007 at 7:34 am
Your words are full of fear, hate and venom. They are self-defeating. I hope nobody dignifies this drivel with a response.
October 13, 2007 at 9:37 am
Sarah, before I comment I want it to be made known that I’m horrible at expressing myself that I don’t often comment or speak my mind. I don’t have anything amazing to say, but last night as I was lying in bed, unable to sleep for various reasons, I remembered something that your awesome husband Derek told me years ago that has always helped me.
I had just come home from my mission, and to make a long story short I was struggling with having any desire to be a part of the church. After General Conference one year I had a discussion with Derek. I told him that I was frustrated because it often seemed to me that things that were said at Conference by some speakers seemed to contradict things said by other speakers. It was just overwhelming to me and I struggled to sort things out in my mind. I can’t remember if it was his mission president or an institute teacher that told him this and I can’t remember exactly what Derek said, but basically he told me that the only things I should really worry about are the things that the apostles say (the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve). I can’t explain exactly why it helped me so much, it just has.
As for Sister Beck’s talk, I’m trying not to take it too seriously, but it still stung. I feel that some of the things she said weren’t based on doctrine. Having your house as clean as a temple? Ha! Ha! Since when did they allow children in the temple?
I did get a couple of good things out of the talk though. My sister and I both serve in the Young Women program. In the past couple of months we have heard some interesting comments from some of our young women. My sister made pizza dough for an activity and some of the girls said to her, “oh, you are so domestic.” At a getting-to-know-you activity we had to say a favorite type of book to read. I said I liked to read cook books and some girls said to me, “oh, you are so motherly.” Neither of these comments were said with admiration, they were very condescending. The young women see being a mother and taking care of a home as trivial work. Sister Beck’s talk reminded me that although the responsibilities of a homemaker are monotonous and seem trivial, they are more important that we realize.
October 13, 2007 at 9:51 am
Men and women are equal partners. One cannot obtain the glory of God without the other. However, the roles husbands and wives play on earth are different.
It troubles me that you say we should question our church leaders. We can’t pick and choose what commandments we keep, unfortunately too many members think they can and still think they are in good standing with the church. It doesn’t work that way.
The words I used in my last posting were straight from the scriptures and the prophets. Do you question them? How many sets of earrings do you have?
The church has raised the bar for missionaries to serve. Since then the number of missionaries have decreased, but the quality of missionary has increased. So it should be with current members of the church. We should raise our own bars and live better than we have been. The church might lose a few members, but the quality of member will be better.
October 13, 2007 at 10:56 pm
Yes, Remeny, I can see that we all have much to learn from you about how to become a better disciple of Christ.
October 14, 2007 at 3:45 pm
I’m relieved that at the end of the day God will by my judge and not Remeny.
Excellent discussion you have hosted here Sarah. Monday morning I was invited to contribute to a blog called Oppressed Mormon Housewives or something like that, a tongue-in-cheek response to the brouhaha taking place over at FMH. I truly did not have the energy to join in on either forum. Not at all being married to my house I cannot get past the word “housewife,” tongue-in-cheek or not.
But back to the topic of homemaking:
I have appreciated the discussion here and would just add that I had completely mixed feelings about the talk. And one of the first things I recognized is that I would’ve reacted more strongly to this 10 years ago as opposed to how I felt about it upon hearing it last week. As it was, part of me, while not offended, felt overwhelmed, because some of these are areas in which I too struggle. But part of me also felt relieved.
The world is screaming at me that I am supposed to want to have it all. Understood in that message is that in order to have it all I have to do it all. Well guess what? As a SAHM of 17 years who recently went back to work as my children all went to school the one thing I’ve learned is that I don’t want to do it all or have it all. At least not all at the same time anyway.
My mom used to write me these horribly scathing letters (I am emphatically not, in any way saying this is what Sis. B. was doing). At first I used to toss them aside. Eventually I learned to bravely make myself read them, setting aside the stuff that was just her blowing off steam but at the same time also finding enough nerve to look at myself and say, “Hey, I could do a little better with this.” So that’s kind of how I’m going to look at this talk–asking, “What is here that applies to me. Where do I have room to improve?”
I’m also reminded of a quote a friend of mine had on her wall. Something to effect that the last judgment will be nothing compared to the judgment we conduct on ourselves and each other as women in this life. It wasn’t so much the talk that made me think of that, but some of the discussion that happened after.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to go clean my room. Not because anyone told me to, but because I really want a clean room.