Is physical beauty important for women called into positions of influence in the church? Because small groups of men decide who all of our leaders will be, an unconscious bias towards a certain look could affect who they consider for callings.
I have noticed favoritism towards men’s callings when a past stake president called his brother-in-law to the high council, then his next-door neighbor as bishop, and son-in-law as counselor in that bishopric. At the top levels of the church, relatives of general authorities also receive many high level callings. (For example, a shortcut to a prestigious priesthood calling might be to marry one of President Nelson’s daughters.)
While male church leadership can sometimes feel like a good old boys’ club, what about the female leaders? Who do these men call as presidents of the general female auxiliaries? A quick google search for “LDS female leaders” showed me a recent interesting trend.
If I let my eyes half close and my vision blur, I can’t tell which leader is which. (In all honesty, even with my eyes wide open I have two of them that I have consistently mixed up for years.)
To be picked by male leadership as a general president, does it help your chances to be thin, blonde and pretty? It’s been a long time concern of many Mormon feminists that the leaders of the so-called “largest women’s organization on earth” are handpicked exclusively by the men, not women. Should it also be a concern to us that qualified leaders might be eliminated from consideration if they don’t fit the beauty image the male leadership has a preference for?
These women are certainly smart, capable and accomplished to be called into these positions – but it bothers me that they likely had to clear a hurdle of specific beauty standards for male leadership to have considered them at all. If LDS women are at the mercy of men to select them for callings – and their physical appearance is (at the very least) a factor in getting called – is it any surprise that Utah leads the nation in cosmetic surgery and procedures?
I wonder what female leadership would look like if the women in the organization itself were choosing the leaders. I believe we’d choose women with a much wider variety of physical traits – different ages, skin colors, body size, height. I have no opposition to beautiful blonde women as leaders – but according to the internet only 4% of people are naturally blonde. I feel that small pool of women has been overrepresented in recent history.
While women of color have been slowly breaking into counselor positions in the modern church, the presidents remain all white women. (Some notable women are Reyna I. Aburto, Chieko Okazaki, and Tracy Y. Browning.)
Occasionally there is a woman who bucks the traditional beauty standards. Many women have mentioned Barbara Thompson (though a counselor, not president) as being inspirational to them specifically because she looked more like regular women in the church.
I am aware that plenty of brunettes have also served in female auxiliary callings over the years, including Susan H. Porter, current general primary president (who finally broke the years long blondes-only streak). Does this mean only current top male leaders have a preference for blonde hair? Does it mean women in the past just didn’t have access to dye their hair as easily as women do today? Or has God just preferred blonde women for leadership in the past decade or so? I have no idea.
Looking at past Relief Society presidents, the top row+ were all plural wives to men in top leadership of the church.
So which is worse? Having to fit a narrow beauty standard, or having to sleep with a general authority to get called? Either way, I wish women who are actually members of the Relief Society were the ones picking who our Relief Society leaders were (from ward level to general level), not the men in charge of us.
***2024 is Exponent II’s 50th anniversary! Help us last another fifty years by subscribing or donating***
20 Responses
As a short, chubby (I sure wasn’t as a teen, but I felt like it), brunette, I never felt like I was attractive. Ever after marriage. It wasn’t until I was in my late 30s when I thought I could actually be pretty.
Tall, thin, and blonde wasn’t *explicitly* mentioned, but that’s who was always held up as a beauty standard where I grew up. I’d love to see a much larger variety in the Relief Society leadership. I know it’s too much to how for an openly LGTBQ+ leader, but I hope for such days.
One hundred years ago Louie B. Felt and May Anderson were certainly not *openly* LGBTQ, but their story makes for a fun rabbit hole:
https://lattergaystories.org/louiefelt/
You hit the nail! And whether it not she is blonde, it seems to matter that women in auxiliary leadership at least keep their greys hidden and use Botox/fillers. I can’t find links right now, but I have read multiple articles about the link between women and how they fit into physical attractiveness categories and how much power they have in strong patriarchal societies. And yes, LDS women are used as examples in these articles.
I have definitely felt like pretty women at the ward level are called to be over the young women more often than others. So if that’s not just all in my head (and I don’t think it is), that means in order to have direct influence over the next generation of girls, you’d have to fit the right look the ward bishop has in mind. As women, being pretty ups your ability to have an impact because office your looks are your main key to getting noticed and called by the men.
If I remember correctly, Barbara Thompson was the victim of intense criticism and abuse by church members because she wasn’t tall and thin. It was so bad it distracted from her ability to get much done. Sometimes, we blame the people at the top when it is the rank and file who determine the kind of women they want to see give an address at General Conference.
I used to be a missionary on Temple Square and we had to take classes on dressing and makeup because we were told that we were the face of the Church and it was necessary to meet the world in a way that the world would recognize. To dress too plainly or with too little make up confused many people into thinking we were one of the fundamentalist break off branches of the church. Sometimes, it is easy to think choices are made for negative reasons, when they are made with specific intent to open doors that would otherwise be closed. I’m not saying I like it, but beautiful women open doors that are shut in the face of less photogenic women.
I hate that the pressure comes from the bottom up, too. Maybe the solution to that is to have more totally normal looking women in these positions so it’s not an aberration anymore – like, give us the opportunity to get to know how fabulous and fun and strong make women who don’t meet traditional beauty standards can be.
For example, Ilona Maher from the Olympic rugby team has recently blown up on social media with millions of new followers – precisely because she *doesn’t* fit typical beauty standards and she’s speaking out about what femininity can be. She’s become a national treasure overnight precisely because she’s big and strong and speaking up for women and girls.
Also, maybe the prophet could stand up and in one conference talk admonish everyone to not be jerks about women’s appearance, because that would nip it in the bud pretty dang fast, too.
That’s horrible. I loved her talks. She was real.
I wasn’t a Temple Square sister, but the rumor was that only the prettiest sisters got called to Temple Square – I had a Temple Square sister doing her in the field experience as my companion and she was stunningly pretty. The Elders in the ward thoughtfully commented on how I looked “weathered” by comparison. Possibly my wardrobe took a much harder beating from tracting in all weathers, riding bikes etc. I did get offered classes on makeup and looks in the MTC, and I remember feeling devastated that our Relief Society meeting led by top female leaders was all about looks. One sunday the sermons was “Immodest, I’m modest the difference is in the details” — like anything in my wardrobe as a missionary was immodest. Don’t let anyone see the top of your knee-high nylons if there is a slit! The other sunday we were warned against “GTC” (Gaps, thighs and cleavage). The MTC was such a bros club with everything obviously designed for male missionaries and women were an afterthought. I had looked forward to Relief Society as something finally designed especially for sister missionaries. Turns out it was designed with men in mind — remember you’re the billboards of the church, but also don’t distract the elders. Or put more simply be attractive, but don’t attract anyone.
Does anybody know if the general presidency members have stylists? I hadn’t picked up on the number of blondes before, but I have noticed many of them have similar haircuts and they all seem to have a lot of similarly styled jackets in friendly colors. Pastels, primary colors, pinks, that sort of thing. Don’t get me wrong, I like color, but when you see them all together it does look like a uniform.
Also, now that I think about it, I have a friend with red hair who suddenly went blond when she was serving as a member of the general RS board.
Just wondering….
Also, to your point, Emily Belle Freeman has lost a lot of weight. Don’t know what the precipitating factor was, though.
That’s a great question. I wouldn’t be surprised if they do have them. (Don’t pay top female leaders a salary like the top male leaders, but do splurge on stylists and makeup and new clothes for them – because that’s what’s important!)
The matching jacket colors comes from a directive that women were to wear bright colors and shorter skirts so as to differentiate them from the stereotypical appearance of women who were in fundamentalist sects. Women were to look modern.
Ah. Thank you.
Did that just inadvertently create a new, weird Mormon woman pastel-barbie look? Here’s an idea: let women dress however they feel comfortable dressing and just be themselves!
Ooh! Pants!
I wonder if any of it has to do with them being the age where disguising grey hair becomes more of a thing? I’m a brunette and started coloring grey when I was 22. When I was in my 40s and wanted to start transitioning to natural hair, my stylist told me the only way to grow it in inconspicuously was to go ash blonde. I said no way was I going that much lighter. Then the pandemic hit and I had 18 months where I was either wearing a scrub cap or at home and I took the opportunity to grow it out with a reeeally bad color line. That bad transition time would probably not be ok for the “faces of the women of the Church”. Other than Chieko’s gorgeous silver locks, I can’t think of many who have been grey during their time in their leadership callings, which is what makes me think blonde is the go-to. Or, maybe they all have been blonde all their lives (but I doubt it)?
RS Gen. Pres. Barbara B. Smith had silver hair.
Couple thoughts… blonde makes us feel younger (I’m a natural blonde but am going brown as I age), and the other thought is- women in Utah and the Mormon church are basically taught that our bodies and looks are our currency. Thats the evolution of our culture and teachings for women in a nut shell. It’s sad and should definitely change in all respects- for us as women as we look at ourselves and for the church as they find other women that are not stereotypical to fill positions . We’d all benefit
I’ve lived in Utah for all but a few months of my 43 years on earth. I can’t compare it to anywhere else with much personal experience, but I think you are absolutely right. In a patriarchal church where women can’t get ahead on their own merits, we are at the mercy of men (either the one we married, or the one in leadership who might extend a calling to us) to do anything that will give us influence. If my husband can be called as a mission president, then I get the experience of being a mission president’s wife. If my bishop thinks I’m cool, he might put me in charge of the teenage girls for a couple years. It’s hard to get men to notice you without looking a certain way that attracts their attention.
Other women’s organizations (like the YWCA or National Organization for Women) would absolutely balk at the suggestion of giving outside men full authority over choosing the leadership of their groups. It would just sound silly, right? (NOW calls up some men and asks them who they can have as their next president – and every single president is pretty and blonde and reports to those same men. That is exactly how silly we look to the rest of the world when we call the Relief Society a “women’s organization”. We are not that at all. No one else calls us that except ourselves.) (Also, we are nowhere near the largest women’s organization – a ten second google search disproves that as well.)
I feel like this comment went off into tangents. Ha ha. IN SUMMARY: You are right and I agree with you.
haha, and I agree with you!
Sister Julie B. Beck came and visited our stake for a special stake relief society meeting. She told us that she was furious when she saw that her portrait was airbrushed, she tried to tell church employees to knock it off and she wanted people to see her as she really was, but they ignored her. She wasn’t wearing makeup there–I was wondering why she looked so different from her portrait, and was glad she explained it to us and the whole coordinated outfits thing and spiced up bio I seem to recall being brought up too. She didn’t also approve of the pressure to be skinny and said, “I like eating my potatoes, and I’m not going to stop just so I can be more slender.” (I don’t remember what the context was, so nobody spread any rumors of auxillary leaders being told to diet please). In fact she was the very auxilary leader that tried to speak out more in the mormonleaks videos, and people were surprised leaders didn’t heed her advice.
In a related story about image (this ties in, I promise)… I have a relative in the Tabernacle Choir and she expressed some surprise that they never wear the same choir robe twice–apparently some older ladies approached the choir and volunteered on their own to make all of their robes NEW everytime they have a performance and they took them up on it, instead of you know, this might violate some kind of scripture, maybe Luke 20:46, Isaiah 3:24, or 1 Thessalonians 5:22 (I’m not against choir robes, or changing things up, they have some serious performances around the globe and it adds to the appeal, but someone saying we would like to dedicate our time and talents to you never wearing the same robe twice and they just say sure that’s sounds normal for the church to do is baffling) The reason I tell both of these stories is that from what I’ve been hearing, and there’s more examples than these (cheesy Days of ’47 Floats that never converted anyone, I’m looking at you), volunteers and employees and influencers control the image of the church and some people, even in leadership positions are powerless to stop it (today leadership decisions have to be unaminous, unlike in Joseph Smith’s time–so if someone is hey these nice red chairs aren’t right–they should be given to people in the audience who have a real need for them–let’s carve out a nice nook for nursing mothers in the conference center instead of banning them for translation purposes and they can have the armchairs, all another leader has to do is say, we get so much disrepect nowadays, we can’t take these chairs out–then they are stuck unless the Spirit knocks them over the head, and since 99%+ the Spirit is just the light of Christ, it’s not going to knock you over the head). I remember Elder Packer taking a jab at the parades church leaders participate in by telling a story where a little girl kicked a rock at Brigham Young’s carriage, disgusted at the leader worship, and said he’s no better than anybody else–Elder Packer said she’s right. The only thing I can do is be the best Christian I know and pray thy kingdom come, because the church has to change as prophesied and remove the bad branches on the olive tree in order to be ready for the second coming.
It’s possible that the last 72% of the female presidents being blonde was a coincidence as we do have a much higher percentage of blondes in Utah with our nordic heritage (I’d say only half of those photos are what our culture would say is attractive for women)–but that short hair being at 100% is very puzzling, with maybe the exception of Elder Eyring’s wife. I’ve seen sister missionaries with long enough hair it falls in the toilet, is this just an empty nester thing?