Pants or no pants? The Mormon feminist movement

I haven't done any really serious posts yet on this blog... but there have been several experiences this past week where I've felt I should say something on the topic of feminism and my beliefs as a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

Whenever someone asks me what I studied at BYU, I say my major, Asian Studies, but I also throw in my minor, Women's Studies.  I do this because I put in so much work in my minor that it changed the core of who I am.  No other class has changed me more and opened my eyes to so much than my class with Dr. Valerie Hudson.  The class was "The International Political Economy of Women."  If you aren't familiar with Dr. Hudson's work, PLEASE read this article. When she gave this lecture in class about the creation, the Plan of Salvation, marriage, motherhood etc., I was completely in awe.  Since that day, those insights have helped to shape who I am today.  {If you are interested in reading other extremely insightful articles by Dr. Hudson, a good place is squaretwo.org.  Other intelligent people also give their LDS perspective on a variety of issues.}

While rummaging through Facebook, I noticed people commenting a lot on this "Wear Pants to Church Day" post.  This sparked my interest and I took a peek.  I was completely shocked by some of the extremes-- on both ends of the spectrum.  Where did I stand?  To be completely honest, I stood appalled.  Not at the event itself, which was a little humorous, but by one of the comments.  To summarize, a young woman said that the inequality in the church was men were ordained with the priesthood, while women just gave birth to children-- something that just happens and that it was nothing special.

Ouch. Being a mother now... nothing special?  That moment when I met my little son for the first time, after I had carried him within me for 9 months... all of that was nothing according to this woman.  It was biology, and why should we acknowledge and celebrate biology?

Sadly though, I believe this is the notion that most LDS women believe: that the equality of men and women is this:

men having the priesthood = women being mothers

Being a woman who grew up hearing this, this doesn't sit very well, especially when you are a budding feminist and believe that you are just as important, smart, and worthy as a boy.  Why does this not sit well?  Because of the statement that the young woman on the Facebook event made: priesthood is ordained, women just "get it."  It doesn't sit well because the priesthood is revered and those holding the great callings of our church are all men, and also because we know that pregnancy and especially labor/delivery is painful. it's scary. it's unpleasant.  So why do men get such a great gift and women get such a painful "blessing?"  Why do men get to have such great jobs out in the world and women have to stay home?  Why do men get the briefcases and women have to clean? (please note, this last question was particularly hard for me because I was not a neat child.  The briefcase was much more appealing than the dishes.)  These are the questions that I pondered even as a small child.  Did I want to get married?  Did I want to have kids if it just didn't seem that great?  Did I really want to be a mother if people who talked about motherhood weren't so happy about their lives?  What was happiness for a woman-- being a mother? being a career woman?  What has our key to happiness?

In this article by my friend Kelsey, who was also in Dr. Hudson's class with me, she also addresses this issue.  She states this:

Priesthood is NOT the equivalent to motherhood.

FATHERHOOD is the equivalent to MOTHERHOOD.

This is the equation.  THIS, my fellow feminists, friends, and family, is the key to equality between men and women-- not just in the church/home, but for the world.  So what does that mean for the priesthood?  What does that mean about the blessing to bear children for women?  As Kelsey charts out:

I don't think I need to explain "create" in both columns.... or nurture and provide, but "birth" in each of the columns is the key: "Birth" in the motherhood column.....  also self-explanatory.... but birth in the fatherhood column.  What is that?  That is the priesthood. And how is that the priesthood?  The priesthood, just as women bring physical children to this earth, men, through priesthood ordinances, bring God's children into the covenant.  Both men and women have the power to bring forth God's children in their own ways.  (Dr. Hudson's article, linked above, explains this in much more eloquently.) 

But what about the worthiness question?  Why is priesthood dependent on worthiness but bearing children not?  Yes, women do not have to live worthily to become pregnant and have a child, but women do need to live worthily to bring children into the covenant.  And that, if you are a faithful LDS member, you know is a gift.  To be born into the covenant is a blessing that is too often overlooked and taken for granted.  I was born into the covenant and I often thought, "Man, it'd be cool to be a convert."  But now in retrospect, I was so blessed to have a worthy father and a worthy mother to bring me into this world.  It needs to be both a worthy male and female to bring children into the covenant.  It doesn't matter if that man holds the priesthood.  The wife needs to be on board.  

A lot of the confusion also stems from the question of why men receive a painless gift and women a painful one.  My answer is, after prayer and pondering of the scriptures (again, this is personal), that giving birth is a sacred experience that is in similitude to Christ's Atonement.  Christ's Atonement was for our salvation, and salvation is life.  In 1 Cor. 15:22, "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive."  Through the Atonement, mankind is made alive.  Just as the immense pain Christ felt while atoning for our sins so that we may be saved and have eternal life, women go through immense pain in order to bring a new life to this earth.  Through Christ we have life; through mothers we have life.  

I know that the Gospel truth is, "motherhood is equivalent to fatherhood."  I know that God made Adam and Eve to be equal partners when it comes to parenthood.  {See "The Family: A Proclamation to the World").  Unfortunately, the people in the church (and out) are imperfect and we seem to teach otherwise.  That is why I believe it is our job as members of the church, as members of this society, to teach the truth.  Instead of pushing for women to be just like men (and wear pants), we should be celebrating and recognizing womanhood.  If the problem is inequality in visibility between the men and women in church, is the solution trying to mold/shape women into male shoes? Or is it making women's gender roles more visible in church discussions and settings?  We are women and we should be proud to be women.  Being one of the boys is not going to higher the pedestal that women are on. If anything, it increases the men's and still leaves the women behind.  I don't have a problem with the message behind the Pants Movement.  I have a problem with the symbol-- the pants itself.  

To the women of "All Enlisted" (the creators of the Wear Pants to Church Day), I applaud your efforts to bridge the gap of inequality between males and females in our church.  To the women who have felt sadness from being treated poorly, in any circumstance or setting-- I feel your pain.  Let us all band together and show that WOMEN are powerful.  Women deserve more recognition for their abilities in being mothers, nurturers, sisters, daughters, and most importantly, members of society.  We are equal to men in our own ways.  I pray that until the day the Savior comes, we will make an effort for women to be recognized for their own stewardships, responsibilities, and characteristics that make us priceless in our God's plan.