• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

"Mormon Men Are Groomed Not To Listen To Women"

Skwim

Veteran Member
.

"(RNS) —Last week, two seemingly unrelated stories appeared in my Facebook feed in rapid succession. The first was the unwelcome update that Lavina Fielding Anderson, who was excommunicated from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in 1993, has been denied re-baptism. Anderson’s excommunication was caused by her shining a light on what she called “ecclesiastical abuse” in the church. It was documented in a long, well-researched Dialogue article that chronicled how intellectuals and feminists were being disciplined by Mormon leaders for various things they wrote and said.

And then, Anderson herself was targeted for the things she wrote and said, her excommunication occurring as part of the famous purge of the group of church critics known as the “September Six.”

Since the 1990s, the church has made great strides in accepting as fact some of the exact claims that intellectuals, especially historians, were disciplined for writing about back in the day. Anderson was not excommunicated because the incidents she documented were false; she was excommunicated for bringing them to light. In church lingo, this was “conduct unbecoming a member.” Her sin was naming the incidents, and calling them abuse.

It seems logical that the shifting tides of how much better the church now treats intellectuals, coupled with Anderson’s stalwart church attendance and devotion in the intervening years, would have made her re-baptism a shoo-in. Nope. The First Presidency denied her request, apparently without explanation. It seems that the “shoot the messenger” approach is still with us.
.
.
.

I’m sorry to be so blunt about it, but there is no way around the reality: Women do not lead men in this church. Ever. Women do not even lead teenage boys in this church. Starting from at least the age of 12, if not earlier, men are conditioned at church to see women as ancillary to decision-making.

It’s not surprising, given this reality, that male church leaders are more likely to believe male perpetrators than they are female victims.

It’s a trust issue. It is human nature that when we are presented with cold, hard facts about a person we have counseled with, served with and sat with for many hours in meetings, our knee-jerk reaction is to discredit anything bad about them. We want to continue believing that this person is exactly what we thought they were: the affable and loving bishop, the kindhearted and funny member of stake high council. When the accused are people we know personally, seeing their names in connection with degrading stories of sexual abuse and predatory misconduct does not compute.

This is why the system is entirely stacked against women. It’s not just that women in the LDS church are not permitted to make decisions that affect anyone but other women and perhaps children (and even then, such decisions must always be approved by male priesthood leaders). It’s also that women simply do not have the access to decision-makers that men do."
source

.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
How is this news? They, and many other Conservative-minded denominations, do put women beneath men, and it's most certainly not "news" but as old as the Bible itself when Paul said a woman won't lead a man.
 

Prestor John

Well-Known Member
.

"(RNS) —Last week, two seemingly unrelated stories appeared in my Facebook feed in rapid succession. The first was the unwelcome update that Lavina Fielding Anderson, who was excommunicated from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in 1993, has been denied re-baptism. Anderson’s excommunication was caused by her shining a light on what she called “ecclesiastical abuse” in the church. It was documented in a long, well-researched Dialogue article that chronicled how intellectuals and feminists were being disciplined by Mormon leaders for various things they wrote and said.

And then, Anderson herself was targeted for the things she wrote and said, her excommunication occurring as part of the famous purge of the group of church critics known as the “September Six.”

Since the 1990s, the church has made great strides in accepting as fact some of the exact claims that intellectuals, especially historians, were disciplined for writing about back in the day. Anderson was not excommunicated because the incidents she documented were false; she was excommunicated for bringing them to light. In church lingo, this was “conduct unbecoming a member.” Her sin was naming the incidents, and calling them abuse.

It seems logical that the shifting tides of how much better the church now treats intellectuals, coupled with Anderson’s stalwart church attendance and devotion in the intervening years, would have made her re-baptism a shoo-in. Nope. The First Presidency denied her request, apparently without explanation. It seems that the “shoot the messenger” approach is still with us.
.
.
.

I’m sorry to be so blunt about it, but there is no way around the reality: Women do not lead men in this church. Ever. Women do not even lead teenage boys in this church. Starting from at least the age of 12, if not earlier, men are conditioned at church to see women as ancillary to decision-making.

It’s not surprising, given this reality, that male church leaders are more likely to believe male perpetrators than they are female victims.

It’s a trust issue. It is human nature that when we are presented with cold, hard facts about a person we have counseled with, served with and sat with for many hours in meetings, our knee-jerk reaction is to discredit anything bad about them. We want to continue believing that this person is exactly what we thought they were: the affable and loving bishop, the kindhearted and funny member of stake high council. When the accused are people we know personally, seeing their names in connection with degrading stories of sexual abuse and predatory misconduct does not compute.

This is why the system is entirely stacked against women. It’s not just that women in the LDS church are not permitted to make decisions that affect anyone but other women and perhaps children (and even then, such decisions must always be approved by male priesthood leaders). It’s also that women simply do not have the access to decision-makers that men do."
source

.
This is dumb.

Attend a Ward Council meeting then tell me women have no say in how a Ward is ran.
 

Prestor John

Well-Known Member
Hey! Don't be shooting the messenger. See the source

.
I didn't say that you were dumb. I said that "this" (meaning the source) is dumb.

It is complete nonsense. An opinion piece with no references written by someone who has probably never even been to a Church meeting.

It is dumb and you are spreading it's seeds around like a dumb farmer. (Not that you are dumb, but rather a farmer who farms "dumb".)

Did you even read the source? Did you try to fact check it before posting it?

I bet you didn't even have time to flush your morning dump before you were reposting this garbage.

Stop spreading the dumb.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
I didn't say that you were dumb. I said that "this" (meaning the source) is dumb.

It is complete nonsense. An opinion piece with no references written by someone who has probably never even been to a Church meeting.

It is dumb and you are spreading it's seeds around like a dumb farmer. (Not that you are dumb, but rather a farmer who farms "dumb".)

Did you even read the source? Did you try to fact check it before posting it?

I bet you didn't even have time to flush your morning dump before you were reposting this garbage.

Stop spreading the dumb.
My, my, someone has his grouchy face on tonight.
grouchy face.png
You know, if you do this too much your face will freeze into that of a grouch. :p In any case, here's a helpful clue. You know all those blue words that appear among all the black ones?

— Last week, two seemingly unrelated stories appeared in my Facebook feed in rapid succession. The first was the unwelcome update that Lavina Fielding Anderson, who was excommunicated from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in 1993, has been denied re-baptism. Anderson’s excommunication was caused by her shining a light on what she called “ecclesiastical abuse” in the church. It was documented in a long, well-researched Dialogue article that chronicled how intellectuals and feminists were being disciplined by Mormon leaders for various things they wrote and said

And then, Anderson herself was targeted for the things she wrote and said, her excommunication occurring as part of the famous purge of the group of church critics known as the “September Six.”.—​


If you click on them I bet they'll bring you to sites with supporting information.:D Just sayin'.

.
 

Prestor John

Well-Known Member
My, my, someone has his grouchy face on tonight. View attachment 33274 You know, if you do this too much your face will freeze into that of a grouch. :p In any case, here's a helpful clue. You know all those blue words that appear among all the black ones?

— Last week, two seemingly unrelated stories appeared in my Facebook feed in rapid succession. The first was the unwelcome update that Lavina Fielding Anderson, who was excommunicated from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in 1993, has been denied re-baptism. Anderson’s excommunication was caused by her shining a light on what she called “ecclesiastical abuse” in the church. It was documented in a long, well-researched Dialogue article that chronicled how intellectuals and feminists were being disciplined by Mormon leaders for various things they wrote and said

And then, Anderson herself was targeted for the things she wrote and said, her excommunication occurring as part of the famous purge of the group of church critics known as the “September Six.”.—​


If you click on them I bet they'll bring you to sites with supporting information.:D Just sayin'.

.
Now you are being dumb. It's infectious!

None of those links have "supporting information", just more opinions of ignorant people.

I am a member of the Church. I attend my meetings. Women are honored, cherished and placed into positions of authority in every Ward.

Stop spreading the dumb.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
I am a member of the Church. I attend my meetings. Women are honored, cherished and placed into positions of authority in every Ward.
Positions of authority??? You've got to be kidding. Unless, that is, you're talking about authority in the kitchen, in the nursery, or some other such menial place of operation. Oh yes, I forgot, they can teach and preach, and be missionaries, but that's about as much responsibility as men let them have.


  • Can women baptize?
  • Can they be in charge of congregational finances?
  • Can they plan and conduct weekly services?
  • Can they plan and conduct special services (weddings, funerals, and holidays)?
  • Can they supervise fellow religious leaders who are male as well as female?
  • Can they formally counsel church members in an official capacity?
  • Can they bless and serve communion?

NO They cannot.


They are nowhere near being able to do what men do. So while they may be honored and cherished to some extent, they are prevented from taking on any ritual authority and entirely shut out from administrative authority of the church. But I understand the 18th century "Boys Club" power thing. Don't agree with it, but do understand your psychological need for it.



.
 
Last edited:

Prestor John

Well-Known Member
Positions of authority??? You've got to be kidding. Unless, that is, you're talking about authority in the kitchen, in the nursery, or some other such menial place of operation. Oh yes, I forgot, they can teach and preach, and be missionaries, but that's about as much responsibility as men let them have.


  • Can women baptize?
  • Can they be in charge of congregational finances?
  • Can they plan and conduct weekly services?
  • Can they plan and conduct special services (weddings, funerals, and holidays)?
  • Can they supervise fellow religious leaders who are male as well as female?
  • Can they formally counsel church members in an official capacity?
  • Can they bless and serve communion?

NO They cannot.


They are nowhere near being able to do what men do. So while they may be honored and cherished to some extent, they are prevented from taking on any ritual authority and entirely shut out from administrative authority of the church. But I understand the 18th century "Boys Club" power thing. Don't agree with it, but do understand your psychological need for it.



.
The reception of the Priesthood and the responsibilities coupled with it has always been given to only faithful men since the days of Adam.

If you don't like it, take it up with God, but we in the Church aren't in the business of telling Him how to run His Church and Kingdom.

Women in the Church affect every single aspect of worship and service.

If, however, you are advocating that men and women should be required to perform all the same modes of service to God, then you will forever be beating your head against the wall because God has always required different sacrifices and services from men and women since the beginning of Mankind.

Just because a faithful woman cannot always serve the Lord in the same manner as a faithful Priesthood holder does not make her any less valuable to Him or the Church.

Men and women are different. The Lord made them that they. One of the reasons for this was because He would require different ways of thought and service from the different sexes.

You can only cry foul because you lack even the most basic understanding of God and how He works.

If you actually studied the Word of God you would come to understand better why He requires different services from his sons than He would from His daughters.
 

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
The reception of the Priesthood and the responsibilities coupled with it has always been given to only faithful men since the days of Adam.

If you don't like it, take it up with God, but we in the Church aren't in the business of telling Him how to run His Church and Kingdom.
More like take it up with the ancient men who wrote the Bible and the modern man who wrote the Book of Mormon based on his understanding of what the ancient men of the Bible wrote.
 

Lovableens

New Member
Hi there. My friend drew this on his bed this morning not knowing about it. Could someone help if they know what is this? Seems to me like some santanic writings
 

Attachments

  • E622CA03-7F1F-4576-8ACD-2E436ABFDADE.jpeg
    E622CA03-7F1F-4576-8ACD-2E436ABFDADE.jpeg
    143.2 KB · Views: 0
  • EDC54E5D-86FA-4171-89ED-A24F90917C09.jpeg
    EDC54E5D-86FA-4171-89ED-A24F90917C09.jpeg
    45.7 KB · Views: 0

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
Hi there. My friend drew this on his bed this morning not knowing about it. Could someone help if they know what is this? Seems to me like some santanic writings
I don't know what Satanic writings look like, so I wouldn't be able to comment on the similarity, but your friend seems a bit off to me. Does he often write on his bed linens? o_O
 

Watchmen

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
The reception of the Priesthood and the responsibilities coupled with it has always been given to only faithful men since the days of Adam.

If you don't like it, take it up with God, but we in the Church aren't in the business of telling Him how to run His Church and Kingdom.

Women in the Church affect every single aspect of worship and service.

If, however, you are advocating that men and women should be required to perform all the same modes of service to God, then you will forever be beating your head against the wall because God has always required different sacrifices and services from men and women since the beginning of Mankind.

Just because a faithful woman cannot always serve the Lord in the same manner as a faithful Priesthood holder does not make her any less valuable to Him or the Church.

Men and women are different. The Lord made them that they. One of the reasons for this was because He would require different ways of thought and service from the different sexes.

You can only cry foul because you lack even the most basic understanding of God and how He works.

If you actually studied the Word of God you would come to understand better why He requires different services from his sons than He would from His daughters.
You’re pivoting (and not very well). First you said women have leaderships positions too, but when it was pointed out to you how much MORE responsibility and leadership the men have you shifted to, “Well that’s how it’s always been. God said so.”

So which is it?
 
Top