A defense of my Mormon feminism.

I've been writing this blog post in my mind for a few weeks now. Much like during the great pants debate, there have been lots of blogs and articles shared on Facebook for the last few weeks. Also much like the great pants debate, it has caused me to feel frustrated by what seem to be generalized statements thrust upon the motivations of those darned "feminists".

Because let's be clear, when you speak of "feminists" you are talking about me. A temple-recommend holder, temple garment wearer, three-hour block attender who reads her scriptures daily and prays fervently to find answers to her questions. You are also talking about other women who fit this description as well. You are also speaking of women who may not fit this description in one way or another. Basically, you are talking about a variety of people, and generalizations just ain't gonna work.

So here are some assumptions that have been directed at me through this transitive property of feminism. (That is likely the first and last mathematical principle ever to be found on this blog.)

• I clearly don't understand the Gospel
• I am unrighteous and being led astray by Satan as shown by my lack of testimony 
• The agitation I am creating in the Church is too political and not following the guidance of the Prophets and Apostles
• I think men and women should be the same
• I am not proud of being a woman or am somehow ashamed of womanhood 
• I am prideful and think women are better than men

I will now go on to talk about how these assumptions have made me feel personally. I want it clear that I am discussing my personal understandings, reactions, and feelings about these assumptions. I cannot speak for the whole of feminists any more than you can speak for the whole of your city, country, gender, etc. This point is important to remember when discussing anything. Seriously. Don't forget it. 

• I clearly don't understand the Gospel
• While I am not going to claim by any means to be in complete understanding of the Gospel, neither, I would argue, are you. We are all searching for answers to our questions. It just so happens that my questions might make you uncomfortable. But the truth is, the lack of adequate answers to my questions is making me uncomfortable. Which is why I still have those questions! I find it extremely important that we don't equate questions people have with a simple lack of Gospel understanding on their part. Just because you don't have questions about women and the Priesthood, doesn't mean others shouldn't. Allow them to have questions. You have questions about other things. Why is this any different?

• I am unrighteous and being led astray by Satan as shown by my lack of testimony 
• I will admit that I only saw once the inference that a woman who was talking about women and the Priesthood was being led astray by Satan. And I realize that this is definitely not a mainstream argument. That being said, I have felt the insinuation of unrighteousness couched in many comments. It is never, never, never appropriate to question someone's righteousness unless you have direct stewardship over them. It turns out, that isn't your job. 

• The agitation I am creating in the Church is too political and not following the guidance of the Prophets and Apostles
• One reason I find this to be problematic is a specific argument I simply can't leave unattended from the highly Facebook popular blog post "The Mormon Feminist Protest: And Why I Won't Be There". The author mentions that God's opinion doesn't change just because the world's opinion does. While this is completely true in some ways, I would argue that it is untrue in other ways. The world's way isn't God's way, and I find that to be very true. However there are many ways in which God has directed His church in such a way that it is palatable to the surrounding culture, allowing the Church to be accepted, spread, and enjoyed by more people. The Church changes culturally as the world changes culturally. While there are things that will never change (our beliefs in morality, our assertion of a Savior, etc.) there are many things that have changed, are changing, and will change. Isn't it possible that this is one of them?
• Finally, historically, the way change happens in the Church is by questions asked. This is a pattern of revelation shown to us in the scriptures. Ask and ye shall receive, knock and it shall be opened unto you. In an organization as large as the Church currently is (which is wonderful and problematic all at the same time), asking questions such as this will either need to be asked exactly to the right people (which people are not necessarily accessible to the public for meetings) or asking questions a bit loudly. \
• Oh also let me just introduce you to this quote by the late Gordon B. Hinckley. (for the full interview go here)
• David Ransom: At present women are not allowed to be priests in your Church...Is it possible that the rules could change in the future..?
  Gordon B. Hinckley: He could change them yes...But there's no agitation for that. We don't find it.
  
  
• I think men and women should be the same
• I don't think men and women are the same, I don't think they should be the same, and I never think they will be the same. I think gender is eternal, specific, different and sacred. Though I will admit that I don't quite know what the differences between gender are eternally (this is another question of mine that will likely be a lifelong quest), I know that there are differences and that they are important. 

• I am not proud of being a woman or am somehow ashamed of womanhood 
• I very much like my gender though I may not subscribe to the cultural gender norms many in the Church accept. I know that womanhood is important and divine. One thing I heard from one of my favorite humans Valerie Hudson Cassler about womanhood reminded me that we don't know what the feminine divine is. We have a clear idea of what men are and should be since the scriptures are largely, as she said, "Priesthood manuals", written by men and for men. Just because I don't yet fully understand what womanhood means doesn't mean I don't accept it. 
• This is linked to another difficulty I have had in that I, personally, struggle with a desire for children and I always have. Sometimes I want to have that desire, sometimes I want to want to have that desire, and very rarely and only in small snippets have I had that desire. May I suggest that the desire to have children can be a great gift, and those who do not immediately possess it are not unrighteous or ashamed of their womanhood, they are simply not given that gift by default? Perhaps it is a gift they must work for, I know it is something I am doing. So please, please, don't judge a woman as unrighteous even if she doesn't have that desire. Like having questions, I'm sure there are righteous things you do not have a  desire to do, why must this be different?
• I apologize this was a small tangent. It doesn't necessarily fit right into the topic at hand it is just something I've been struggling with for some time and wanted to write about it. Because that's how I do. 

• I am prideful and think women are better than men
• NO. In fact, I find that most of the arguments behind my feminism actually elevate the status of men. Many of my beliefs as a feminist stem from a place where both men and women lose something by the way things culturally are currently. The way we teach about sexuality hurts both men and women but is often considered something on the "feminist" agenda. The pedestal women are put on hurts both men and women in its implications. And a more specific understanding of women's role in the Priesthood (whether that is ordination or something else) will be of great help to both women and men. 
• I, for one, am often annoyed that I am not chastised as often as the men of the Church and worry that they aren't praised as much as they should be because of the cultural norms to which we often ascribe. So there is no way my feminism declares me to be better than men. 
• Another clear problem with this argument is the fact that I have encountered multiple men who call themselves feminists and who even are in the group who are "agitating" for female ordination. In fact, the first person I ever talked to and knew in real life that suggested their belief in female ordination was a man. A man that I was on a date with no less (it was clearly a good date). And to be quite honest I was a little uncomfortable with his assertions at the time. 
• I won't pretend I'm not prideful. And I won't pretend that perhaps my initial gravitation toward feminism in jr. high and high school stemmed from that pride. (Come on though, pretend your pride levels weren't through the roof at that age, I dare you.) But as I now contemplate my feminism, I do so in much prayer, asking near constantly for humility so that pride doesn't mar my way. And after all that asking, I'm still here. 

Let me conclude by saying, if you don't agree with me, that's fine, absolutely and completely. But I would prefer you talk to me about in a manner that doesn't presuppose something about me because of my ideas. I will be attempting in my very human way to do the same for you.  

If you are looking for more information on this, here's a wonderful article against female ordination from my favorite human. "The Two Trees". Also, from what I have seen of the blog "A Well-Behaved Mormon Woman", she doesn't seem to unfairly represent feminists. 

As for pro-articles, I would especially link you to the Ordain Women FAQ, and the All Are Alike Unto God FAQ. 

In the undecided category I would refer you to posts by Ask Mormon Girl on the Priesthood as well as this interesting debate/blog post on the motherhood/Priesthood parallel.