Boys and girls: Presidencies

Here’s something that’s more an interesting oddity than anything else: Pretty much every organizational presidency or presidency-equivalent (e.g., the high priests group leadership) in a ward involves the bishopric* calling the president, and then getting recommendations for counselors from the newly-called president. Those counselors are then called if the bishopric (or stake presidency, for some organizations) approves.

There is one** exception to this, though: The presidency of the young men’s organization. In that one, the bishopric selects the president and the counselors.

Interesting, and i wonder why.

* Well, in the case of a bishop the calling comes from higher, of course. Also, in some cases, such as an elders quorum presidency, the organizational president is called by the stake presidency upon recommendation by the bishop. However, the general pattern beyond that is the same, it’s just the authority issuing the calls that’s different.

** I think i’m right that this is the only one, that is—i don’t think i’m wrong, but if i am i’d like to hear it. In any event, the presidency of the young women’s organization is certainly not an exception.

Boys and girls: Callings

A few years ago, the church set up policies to protect children from sexual predators. (A good goal, certainly.) Among these, rules were set up for teaching primary classes that required that a primary class be taught by one woman, two men, or a married couple (i.e., a man and a woman). This makes it rather less efficient to have a man called to teach a primary class, since if a man is called to teach a primary class two people have to be called to teach it, not just one.* This means that, in most wards, women are more likely to be called to teach primary than men are.***

I tend to think that the heavy preponderance of women teaching primary classes simply serves to give support to the stereotype that women are the ones who should be involved with children, and that men should feel free to be the aloof father of Bambi type—in my own opinion, not very healthy.

* The policy puzzles me, incidentally. I mean, yeah, the popular stereotype of a sexual predator is certainly male, but there are a lot of female sexual predators out there. So why are women allowed to teach primary alone?**

** And yes, i know that the policy does provide some situations in which a man can teach a primary class alone. That’s certainly not the default, though.

*** This was probably already the case, but the current policy, i think, makes it even more so.

Boys and girls: The purpose of the thing

Once Mormon children turn eight, they get to participate in midweek activities. For the 8- to 11-year-old boys, this means cub scouts—a weekly program with clearly stated aims that moves the boys along in a progressive building of skills with formal recognition of progress made along the way. The 8- to 11-year-old girls are in achievement days, a biweekly* meeting with vague goals that don’t really progress to a specific end and don’t naturally lend themselves to any recognition for intermediate progress.

Of course, my experience with this is in the United States, where the Mormon church and boy scouting are linked to a very high** degree. In some other locations, achievement days is a sex-neutral (though still, as i understand it, sex-segregated) church program. I’m curious how the implementation of the program might differ in those areas.

* In most wards, that is—in my current ward, achievement days occurs weekly. Of course, my current stake has never met a meeting it didn’t like, so this difference makes sense in that context.

** And unhealthy, in my opinion, but that’s just my opinion.

Boys and girls: High adventure

The general policy of the church, as i’ve heard it from multiple bishops in widely dispersed areas, is that a large chunk of a ward’s budget allotment in any given year is supposed to go to the youth. This makes sense to me.

In addition, most bishops try to be fairly evenhanded about the way the budget is allotted*—the same amount of money for the young women as the young men,** or allotting the same amount per individual to each of those groups.

So far, so good. But then there are what might best be called special allotments—and, in my observation, the only one of these for the youth is annual or biennial funding for the priest-age boys to go on a “high adventure” trip.

Yeah, it’s cool that the 16- and 17-year-old boys get to go white-water rafting a few hundred miles away from home, or camping out at a national park none of them have ever gone to, or traveling by horseback through the mountains. But what do the girls get along those lines?

Yep, that’s right—bupkis.

Incidentally, this is a recurrent theme over at the Spanish Fork 401st Ward blog—see, for example, their Young Men/Young Women activities calendar for this past April.

* This is spelled correctly, but doesn’t look like it is to me.

** Not that great of an approach when there are very different numbers of young men and young women, but it’s an easy way of dealing with ward budgets, and having seen ward budgets up close, i’m not going to begrudge making them easier.

Boys and girls: Networking

I am not a fan of boy scouting. Not at all. However, i have to admit that there’s one thing it has going for it: There’s a built-in mechanism for the boys involved in it to meet other boys with similar interests through the institutions of camporees and jamborees.

Girl scouts have similar things, but the church doesn’t sponsor girl scout groups, for whatever reason.* Odd, really, that the church would be linked at the hip with a group that has as a stated purpose the development of boys into strong-willed, independent men, but has nothing to do with a group that has as a stated purpose the development of girls into strong-willed, independent women.

* I’ve heard that this is because of the cookie sale fundraising requirement, but that rings false with me. If fundraising was an issue, the boy scouts wouldn’t be allowed to send people to scout training meetings at Mormon churches to drum up donations—but they do, they most certainly do.

Introducing a theme: Boys and girls

Sometimes i feel like i’m the only active Mormon guy around whose family is done with childbearing and has only daughters, no sons.* Having all daughters, though, has had the result of me being intensely aware of differences in the treatment of girls and boys in church culture and programs.** I have a few thoughts on the subject, and i’ve been wanting to see what happens if i devote a series of four or five posts to a theme—so the next few posts will be on that subject.

We’ll see if it works out well.

* And no, we didn’t keep “trying” to have a son until we gave up. Actually, i only wanted daughters, even before Jeanne and i started having kids—and i can produce witnesses to that fact. The assumption that all daughters was some sort of a disappointment isn’t a Mormon thing, though—i get that from all directions.

** Me being me, that would have probably been the case anyway, actually. Having all daughters and no sons certainly makes it more personal, though.

Buying prom dresses

I’ve heard lots of people complaining lately that “it’s impossible to find a modest* prom dress” these days. This is generally taken to be an indictment of how horrible “the world” has gotten lately.

Well, two problems.

First, i remember hearing precisely the same complaint back when i was in high school (the mid-80s, for what it’s worth), and i’ve seen such complaints in print from the early 60s, and much of me thinks that Ardis over at Keepapitchinin** could probably dig the same thing up from the mid- to late nineteenth century. And even if i’m wrong on that last one, it’s not like this is a new complaint—so exactly why is this surprising anyone these days?

Second, i take issue with the entire proposition. There’s lots of modest (see the first footnote) clothing out there, including formalwear for teenage girls—though i will readily allow that the “prom” section of any semi-randomly selected department store is unlikely to provide many (if any) prom dresses that would be allowed in the door at a church dance. Move to other sections of the same store, and you’ll find a lot of prom-suitable dresses and sets with covered shoulders, knee-length or longer skirts, and so on.

Really, as i see it, the real problem is that people actually believe the branding at their local department stores.*** So please, stop trying to use it to indict people who aren’t you.

* This is using the usual Mormon meaning for the word modesty, which i still think is wrong. Given the context for the discussion, though, it makes sense to use it here.

** An amazing and wonderful blog on, for lack of a better description, the cultural history of the Mormon church. You should add it to your list of regular reads.

*** Well, and that they actually think prom is worth blowing that much money on for a single-use piece of clothing. But that’s a whole nother issue, and beyond the scope of this blog.

Mormon headlines

Photocopier humor, not by me, from an unknown source. I like them, though, so if you know where they’re from, let me know.

Ancient Tins of Wheat Discovered in Garage

Investigator Admits Feeling Tingle in Big Toe, Agrees to Second Discussion

Deacons Quorum Advisor Compares Priesthood to “the Force”

Family Maxes Credit Card at Costco to Replenish Food Storage

Area Man Feels Holy Ghost During Disney’s “Lion King”

C.S. Lewis Rejects Posthumous Baptism

Elders Quorum Instructor Skims Lesson During Opening Exercises

Pioneer Reenactment Reenacted

Family Home Evening Degenerates into Pudding Fight

Spirit Whispers for Area Man to Sell Amway

Prototype of Franklin Planner Found in Nauvoo Dig

Priest Reporting on Campout Says “It Was Fun”

Area Woman Calls for More Stylish Male Temple Caps

Ensign Forgets to Use “Name Withheld” on Sex Abuse Article

Steve Martin Finally Admits to Conversion

Area Man Surprised at How Dirty Temple Slipper Soles Have Become

Richard Dutcher Announces Feature-Length “Johnny Lingo” Remake

Church Approves Hometeaching Via Email

Steed Family Book of Mormon Auctions for $23,000

Scrapbookers Scrapbook About Themselves Scrapbooking

Temple Escalators Remarkably Clean, Area Woman Observes

Ward Has Potluck, No Jello Served

Ward Discovered Where All Sing During Hymns

Sacrament Meeting Speaker Forgets to Apologize for Poor Speaking Ability

First Presidency Issues Letter Asking Members Not To Submit Elvis Presley’s Name For Temple Work Again

Magna 122nd Ward Relief Society Sends White Shirts and Ties to Africa

High Councilor Begins Sacrament Meeting Talk Without Attempt at Joke

New Church Policy Forbids Use of Church Parking Lots for Teen Driver Instruction by Parents

Stained Glass in New Chapel “An Exception”, Says Church Spokesman

Secret Girls Camp Video Spurs Copycat WWF Series

“I Hate Homemaking Meeting Crafts”, Admits Local Mom

Male Primary Teacher Called

Priesthood Holder Completes Home Teaching by 25th of the Month

Local LDS Ward Starts Sacrament Meeting on Time

Elders Quorum Moving and Storage a Real Moneymaker for Church

Ward Boundaries Realigned, Everyone Happy

Elders Quorum Instructor Prepares Centerpiece for Lesson

Bishop Attends Sunday School, Is Welcomed As Visitor

Church Basketball Injuries Fewest In Years

Ward Chorister Sets New Record for Slowest Singing of "Come, Come Ye Saints"

Jewish Family in Provo Confused When Called “Gentiles”

Provo Baptist Family Reports: Never Invited to Sacrament Meeting, Regularly Invited to Dinner by LDS Neighbors

Utah Legislature Passes Bill to Restrict Sales of Cola Drinks to Minors

Ensign Publishes 135th Article with “Legacy” in Title

High Priest Stays Awake in Sacrament Meeting, Wrestles Children While Wife Dozes

Returned Missionary from Hawaii Fails to Reprimand Congregation for Not Responding Loud Enough to His "Aloooooha!"

Sacrament Meeting Talk Ends Early, Bishop Closes Meeting Anyway

Congregation Sings "How Great Thou Art" in Under Two Minutes

Why we should not repent daily

Jeanne and i have been reading through the B.H. Roberts-edited History of the Church together. (It’s taking us a long time.) Recently, we ran across an interesting line from Joseph Smith (on 27 June 1839):

Repentance is a thing that cannot be trifled with every day. Daily transgression and daily repentance is not that which is pleasing in the sight of God.

This goes against what i think is a fairly common Mormon meme, namely that we sin every day, and therefore we have to repent every day. According to Brother Joseph, though, God thinks—or at least hopes—otherwise.

Anyway, just throwing this out there as an interesting item. I don’t have much to say about it in depth right now, though, ’cause i’m still mulling it over.

Against overextension

God seems to be into dietary restrictions without regard to whether it's a health thing or not. (Consider the prohibition on shellfish in the Mosaic code, and on meat sacrificed to idols in the early Xian church.) I think we've done ourselves a disservice by treating the Word of Wisdom as a “health code”—it's not, it's a dietary restriction. Full stop.

Yeah, it probably is just me…

Is it just me, or does anyone else start thinking that they’re gonna be breaking out the Jenna Jameson movies when they hear announcements about the “adult session” of stake conference?

Just a brief rant today

We just had stake conference here, and there were dozens (seriously, dozens) of mentions of the importance of getting 19– to 25–year-old men to serve as full-time missionaries, but only two phrases given in passing that even acknowledged that 21+–year-old women can serve as full-time missionaries.*

Well, as a father of daughters and no sons, i started to get annoyed at having to sit through being told multiple times that i was remiss in my spiritual duties if i didn’t “prepare [my] sons to serve a full-time mission”—so i have this to say:

No, i’m not preparing any sons to serve as full-time missionaries—but i am preparing my daughters to, and i’m preparing them to be better teachers on their full-time missions than your sons will ever be.

* And this is through priesthood leadership meeting, the adult session,** and the general session.

** That reminds me of something. I’ll post it next time.

’Nother thought on Mothers Day

Also, as far as i can tell, there is no directive in the Church Handbook of Instructions for the youth to hand out chocolates or flowers to the adult women in the congregation at the end of sacrament meeting on Mothers Day.

Doctrine vs. practice

You know, there’s no canonical requirement for the Primary children to sing on Mothers Day. Just sayin’, you know?

Naked people doing naked things

I’ve heard a lot about pornography lately (read: the past few years) from church leaders, both local and general. It would be correct to sum up everything i’ve heard from them in two sentences: “It’s a bad thing” and “Don’t consume it”.

I think it’s interesting that the reasons given for this take a number of different forms, but they tend to center around the claim that pornography leads to sexual lust among the unmarried, and to sexual separation among the married. In particular, since the consumption of pornography is an individual act, it leads the one using porn to become sexually fixated (even if temporarily) on individuals other than one’s spouse. Another, less frequent but perhaps more potent, reason is that the consumption of pornography by one member of a married couple is effectively a form of adultery, given the New Testament view that lusting after someone who’s not one’s spouse is equivalent to adultery.

These reasons make sense to me, but they leave out one particular market for porn: married couples—specifically, married couples who consume pornographic material together as part of their sexual experiences as a couple. (This is not one of my particular kinks, but i know people for whom it is.) This leads to an interesting question: Is the consumption of pornography by such couples as couples the sort of thing that would be considered acceptable by church leaders? I suspect (with a likely 100% certainty) that the answer is a firm “no”, but none of the reasons* generally given in church settings against the consumption of pornography necessarily lead to that answer.

So: Why would the answer be negative?

* One possible exception: That the creation of pornography necessarily involves immoral acts, particularly fornication, by those creating it, and so the consumption of pornography rather directly encourages immorality. For the sake of argument, let’s limit ourselves to pornography involving only sexual acts between people married to each other, so as to make that one less of a distraction.

Ignoring the prophets, again

M. Russell Ballard’s “Raising the Bar” address was delivered in the October 2002 general conference. (Yes, it was that long ago, and yes, you really are that old.) The quote everyone seems to use from it is:

Please understand this: The bar that is the standard for missionary service is being raised.

To my mind, though, the most interesting thing was stated very near the end of the address (emphasis added):

Upon you bishops and you stake presidents rests the responsibility to recommend only those young men and women whom you judge to be spiritually, physically, mentally, and emotionally prepared to face today’s realities of missionary work. Brethren, judge wisely and remember: Not every young man needs to be called to serve away from his home; some may best serve under your direction as ward missionaries.

In my observation, however, this has been pretty much ignored—the goal is still to get every male 19-year-old in the church to serve as a full-time missionary, and those that don’t are viewed as failures on the part of the young men’s program leadership and/or the priesthood leadership of the ward and/or the young man himself (or, possibly most often, on the part of all three). And even if that’s not the view in a particular case, there’s certainly still a cultural bias against a young adult male in the church who opts (for whatever reason) not to serve as a full-time missionary.

And so, as is always the case when i notice something like this, my question is deceptively simple: Why?

Ignoring the prophets

I remember Boyd K. Packer speaking in the October 1998 general conference—and it was striking enough that Jeanne and i looked at each other with a “Did he really just say that?” reaction—about scheduling youth activities, and the need to make sure we don’t overschedule our youth with church things. The entire address is worth reading, but here’s the money quote:

I must touch upon what must surely be the most difficult problem to solve. Some youngsters receive very little teaching and support at home. There is no question but that we must provide for them. But if we provide a constant schedule of out-of-home activities sufficient to compensate for the loss in those homes, it may make it difficult for attentive parents to have time to be with and teach their own children. Only prayer and inspiration can lead us to find this difficult balance.

We often hear, “We must provide frequent and exciting activities lest our youth will go to less wholesome places.” Some of them will. But I have the conviction that if we teach parents to be responsible and allow them sufficient time, over the long course their children will be at home.

There, at home, they can learn what cannot be effectively taught in either Church or school. At home they can learn to work and to take responsibility. They learn what to do when they have children of their own.

Or, to summarize: Please cut back on scheduled activities!

Didn’t happen, though—leading me to wonder why. Any ideas?

What other people think

Heard in a sacrament meeting address: “You shouldn’t go to any movies that don’t follow church standards, because non-members might see you there and think less of the church because of you.”

Now, beyond the fact that i strongly doubt that non-Mormons care at all about what movies Mormons watch, it brings to mind something i saw in an email forward once, which was a list of lines headed by “You know you’re a victim of bad timing if…” One of them was “…you don’t have an umbrella, so you take shelter in the only place available, the awning of a local movie theatre—but it’s an X-rated theatre, and that’s the moment your minister decides to take a walk around the neighborhood.”

On the meaning of an adjectival affix

Serious question: Is becoming Christlike the same thing as becoming like Christ?

Even a child can see through it!

So my 9-year-old was looking at the current nursery manual with me this evening, and she saw one of the first suggested activities in the “I Belong to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints” lesson (lesson 25, page 104, for those who care to follow along). It reads:

Display the picture on page 106. Tell the children that this is a picture of Jesus Christ and we belong to His Church. Point to the picture and ask, “Who is this?”

Answer: “Jesus Christ.”

Anyway, my 9-year-old read that and said “Isn’t that a little silly? You tell them what the answer is, and then ask them?”

Basically, she was calling the manual out on being manipulative. I think this is evidence that i’m raising my children right.*

* And yes, i realize that there are people out there who would argue that this is evidence that i’m raising my children exactly wrong, and that i’m evil. That’s okay—i’ve learned to live with that.