by Alan Buys

I once had a conversation with an elementary school librarian. She told me about the difficulties of getting some of the rowdier children to be quiet and respectful in the library and, when I questioned, explained a strategy that she had found effective in managing them. She had one little boy who was particularly rowdy, and in order to keep him from causing trouble, she told him that he was going to be her “special helper”. As part of this role he needed to sit by her desk quietly, so he could help her show the other students how to behave. He also helped her put books back where they belonged and helped her keep the computer area organized. After he received this assignment, his behavior was much better. He felt special enough that he didn’t act out again.

What does this rowdy little boy have to do with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and what does he have to do with feminism?

Consider another interaction I have had many times with members of our faith. It goes something like this. A well-intentioned brother will say with self-deprecating levity, “Women don’t need the priesthood. They are just naturally better. Men need the priesthood so we will straighten up and fly right.” Or a well-intentioned sister will offer, “Motherhood is the highest and holiest calling. It makes women far better than men, so why would I want to be the same as a man? I don’t need the priesthood because I am already better.”

Consider also the consistency of messages from church leaders that include phrases like “Women, we need your strength. We need your voices. We need your input in our councils. We need you to be engaged. You are so important to the kingdom. You are important to the church.”

While messages of belonging and encouragement of this kind are often directed at the general membership of the church, (both men and women), they are rarely directed with the same frequency and urgency toward exclusively male congregations. There is a clear emphasis on telling the women of the church that they are special, loved, and important to the church at all levels, but as Elle K observed in a recent blog post for The Exponent, women only made up 3.7% of speakers in the general sessions of the last conference with only one sister speaking. She also notes that, in the Relief Society meeting, women have in the past made up the majority of the speakers but were a minority of speakers in this last conference, with the majority of the time going to the First Presidency.

I do not bring this up to diminish motherhood or the contributions of women in local leadership of the church. When the brethren say that women are incredible and that motherhood is holy and exalted, they are not lying, but I think that since those statements are true, then they should be backed up by involving women more fully in the church.

Cutesy justifications that insist that women are better, rather than lead to more inclusion of women in leadership, instead serve as a justification for their marginalization.

This isn’t without precedent outside of the church. There is a long tradition in patriarchal societies of focusing on the virtues of womanhood and motherhood in rhetoric while simultaneously degrading and oppressing them in practice, and they were also only reverenced insofar as they remained “pure” and “virginal”. No expectations of purity were ever truly leveled at men, and the punishments were always one-sided. For example, the Law of Moses, had strict rules about women’s virginity including provisions that a new bride who was not a virgin should be stoned, (Deuteronomy 22:20-21) but a man who was found having sex with a woman was to be fined fifty shekels of silver and forced to marry the girl (Deuteronomy 22:29).

Or think of the woman taken in adultery, (John 8), presumably, it took two to tango, but why isn’t the man also brought before the Savior?

This double standard set a precedent for the cutesy comments by church members from today. Since women have traditionally been held to higher moral standards than men, many have drawn the conclusion that women are intrinsically more virtuous, and the oppression survived alongside that belief.

Much later, in the Middle Ages, chivalry emerged ready to put women in their “rightful place” on a pedestal for men to protect, honor, and love, but the chivalrous protection of women only applied to virgins and other men’s wives. According to the Columbia Encyclopedia, chivalry was often corrupted, and knights were usually having sex with the virgins they swore to protect.

Chivalry was just a small moment in a long tradition of men oppressing women in the name of protecting them.

Elevating women in rhetoric and placing their whole worth on their sexual purity and motherly instincts while simultaneously controlling or marginalizing them is not a new trend. In order to break this pattern, the church must back up their words with actions. We must work to include women in decision-making and leadership at every level of church organization. Yes, that means ordaining them to the priesthood. If we do this, we will show the women of the church that they matter instead of just telling them.

The current state of the church reminds me of a librarian who is just trying to get a rowdy kid to behave by telling him that he is special.