A rumination essay with elements drawn from On Morality by Joan Didion
Guest Post by Tess Brody. Tess is a former LDS young woman who has spent the past few years reframing her perspective on the natural world and her place in it. She has found solace and grounding in her writing.
As it happens, my ribs ache from Adam’s transgression, yet I am punished for Eve’s decision. To be a woman is to face exoneration on a plea deal of purity that will never be ordained by a court of law because to be a woman is to be a mother, and I cannot possibly be both. I would like to be as divinely loyal as Ruth, yet I find myself distrusted because of our first mother. I would like to be as divinely strong as Esther, yet I find myself diminished in the shadow of Samson’s strength. To be a woman is to be a temptress, but to be a woman is to be obedient. To be a woman is to be a perfect mother, but to be a woman is to be pure and chaste. I am faced, it seems, with the constant duplicity of the expectations of womanhood, and my mind veers inflexibly toward the particular. We believe that men will be punished for their own sins and not for Adam’s transgression, (Joseph Smith, Article of Faith II).
Here are some particulars of the divine. The first name in this essay is Adam’s, and Eve only exists secondary to him. Here are some particulars of anointed divination. Mary has yet to be mentioned by name, her story merely alluded to in the first paragraph of this essay. Here are some divine particulars of my divinity. I have managed to ignore Lilith’s story until this point, choosing, as many clergymen do, to ignore her disobedience in favor of Eve’s nearly perfect submission. This is what it is to be a woman, to be a god. Begging to be believed, factitious in the eyes of the beholder. There is no winning way to exist as a woman. We believe that through the atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel, (Joseph Smith, Article of Faith III).
There is an inherent dissonance in the story of the Virgin Mary. Should her divine testament be accredited to mendacity, then to be a woman is to be a liar, an adulterer, and a whore. Should her divine testament prove to be authentic, then to be a woman is to be a virgin, a mother, and a saint. Because we cannot accept the Bible without accepting Mary, her son must be the product of immaculate conception. A virgin mother, the exemplar of womanhood, virtuous and devoted. All women must be Mary, but no woman can be Mary lest they claim divine power. We are the ones left to burn for such atavistic standards, and divinity becomes nothing more than a brutal punishment. Biblical women lend a guiding hand for their modern daughters- be as loyal as Ruth, be as brave as Deborah, be as cunning as Delilah (do not be as naive as Ruth was, do not claim priesthood as Deborah did, do not get in the way of men as Delilah did). Vestigial values sprout from me, planted in my chest by the gentle hands of my Biblical sisters, but I am unable to identify which belong to women and which belong to my Mormon bishops (who were, of course, men in the exclusive). We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed we may say that 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, (Joseph Smith, Article of Faith XIII).
5 Responses
Rhetorical: The first JS quote is directed to men. Are women supposed to assume that he meant to include us? Why assume that? When he refers to “mankind” being saved, what kind of salvation is it for women, when the men are at the center of our individual salvation process?
It becomes impossible, after all, to ignore that the Mormon gospel was created by men, for men. Women are inserted as afterthoughts, or not thought of at all.
I was thinking about the title of this post (there is a lot of thinking going on about the rest of it) but what I keep coming back to is we don’t link “divine” and “girlhood” in our narrative. We have traces of the “Adam-God” narrative in our theology that give us a sense that “boys” and “men” change and that that process is (in theory) what is happening. We have the short stories of Jesus as a youth – the ditching the family to teach in the temple story (more or less) and we are told “Jesus grew in wisdom and stature” but we never get that about Mary or any other female in our scriptures that I am aware of.
We only get to see “Heavenly Mother” (if we get to see Her at all) as a “fertile” support character – without Her own backstory.
NOTE: I know it can be “handwaved” into “all females have a similar backstory to males” – just like “all female bodies are actually defunct male bodies that lucky for us can have babies” was how female health was handwaved for centuries (and actually proven to be the other way around in utero – worth more in-depth research).
“There is no winning way to exist as a woman.” Wow. Yes.
There is so much truth to this. Being a woman is a mess of contradictions. We are expected to be everything for everyone, but will always be damned for it.