I listened to the Beck talk again
 

and there was nothing there that hasn't been said 100 times. She just said it in more direct ways. I.e. you need to be a good homemaker. Getting an education doesn't mean much, if you are not a good homemaker. Being a good homemaker includes cleaning, cooking, washing.

I think this talk was vetted. It says nothing different than we have been told before.

Was Beck's aggression subconscious or conscious? I'm not sure, because I'm not sure how smart she is.

Was this the post you made for Cougarboard, only to discover that Jefe has blocked you?

No. Farrah and I watched the talk again. I think it was more offensive to her than me. I told Farrah, "what guy doesn't want his wife to cook better?" She did not take kindly to my endorsement of her talk.

But seriously, she was not going out on a limb. Do you disagree? I think these hard-core homemaker types have a place in the church (clearly they have the central place). I just worry that others will feel excluded and unwanted and unappreciated. I have a daughter, and I will fight hard against this element in the Mormon culture, that subliminally tells her "no, you can't do this".

I slept through the talk, which is why I haven't argued specifics yet. My wife thought it was a good talk and one in particular that the many new members in our branch needed to hear so they understand the importance the church places on the home, the family and the role of motherhood.

No talk is designed for everyone.

She didn't say you need to be a "good" homemaker. She said you need to be the world's best homemaker. And you need to have children who grow up to be bishops and stake presidents.

Was I listening to a different talk than anyone else? I got absolutely no response to this post on CB about the specifics of what I heard her say:
http://www.cougarboard.com/noframes/...tml?id=3074057

I truly think the way she made her points was disturbing - unintentional, but disturbing.

I suppose there might be little harm in it, but it seems odd for our international women's organization to have a President who seems so ordinary. Why we don't have a woman physician who is on top of her game, or a woman author leading the group is beyond me. Here we have a non-working mother of three with nothing extraordinary to her name. And then she gives such a lame talk.

I believe that talk proves the speakers write their own talks.

Socal, why do you think it was unintentional?

I put you in the subconscious camp. But when you think about it, to say it was subconscious is to insult her a bit. That she is not very self-aware.

What was Elaine Jack's background? It's interesting that it was her presidency that seems to be the only time women leaders in the church captured the Mormon public's imagination.

She seems oblivious, and not very articulate. We have so many gifted women in our midst, why are some of the leaders of our women's organizations so ordinary?

We should have some of best and brightest, most educated women being the leaders, not just the average run of the mill types there.