Chieko Okazaki interview in Dialogue

[MikeWaters]

https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-c..._V45N01_CO.pdf

This is interesting on a number of fronts.

Okazaki was part of the last RS general presidency that really got independent Mormon women exicted. At least that is my perception. I don't follow the scene very closely.

Okazaki relates that her presidency was never consulted about the Family Proclamation. And never even consulted when they made the new manuals for Priesthood/Relief Society. They did get some input in after the draft was completed, having asked for it.

She paints a picture of a male-led leadership who don't even think to consult women. About anything.

The interview also describes the stripping of power from the Relief Society General Board over the years.

We may focus a lot on the gay Mormon issue. That's what the leadership of the church wants. They want it in our minds.

But the larger issue facing Mormonism is what to do about the women. What is the role of women in this church? And is the current model tenable going into the future? Will the modern woman in the United States hold out any interest in the Mormon church?

It's my impression that if you are a working single professional woman, going to LDS church and specifically attending RS feels so anachronistic that is shocking to the senses. Often lightly educated women, who have had no careers, or never worked at all, or are working poorly-paid dead-end jobs. There's exceptions of course. But that describes I think the majority of the women I have seen. And that model is fine for many. It's just that it becomes the dominant model that resents all other models.

[BlueK]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-c..._V45N01_CO.pdf
It's my impression that if you are a working single professional woman, going to LDS church and specifically attending RS feels so anachronistic that is shocking to the senses. Often lightly educated women, who have had no careers, or never worked at all, or are working poorly-paid dead-end jobs. There's exceptions of course. But that describes I think the majority of the women I have seen. And that model is fine for many. It's just that it becomes the dominant model that resents all other models.

The sad thing is that the resentment is totally misplaced. The feminist movement in the 70s and 80s went pretty hard after the traditional stay at home mom, and now more than 30 years later, in the church, the resentment from that group often ends up being unfairly directed toward LDS working women and moms, who 99% of the time don't agree with the extreme feminist view anyway. Many of these women grew up assuming they would be stay at home moms. But what happens if marriage doesn't come for them at age 19? They go to school and get an education. Then if still single they go to work and often thrive in their careers. And then just because they later get married and have kids but still work doesn't make them bad LDS women or moms.There is nothing wrong with an LDS woman getting an education or even working. A lot of positive values are learned from working that can make someone a better servant in the church and the home. We need to embrace diversity in the membership because we can all learn from everyone's different experiences.

Also, as far as the kids are concerned, going to a quality daycare or preschool actually produces positive results for the kids. They learn how to get along with their peers and to respect authority both at home and in school. A well run preschool teaches self discipline and structure. Back in the 70s and 80s was when almost all of the comment from the bretheren about this topic came from, and at that time most child daycare was very poor. There were problems. However, it has improved tremendously since then as so many women entered the workforce and created the market that demands high-quality childcare. It exists now, but it's expensive, which means mom has to be working at a pretty good job for it to make sense for her to work. If she doesn't have the background for that, then yes, staying at home is probably the best option. Still, kids always benefit if mom is well rounded and educated.

What the stay at home moms who married very young, didn't finish college and haven't gotten any significant professional work experience don't understand in their resentment is, that those more educated working moms still have all the same responsibilities at home that they do, ON TOP of work responsibilities. My wife has had to endure completely out of the blue unsolicited comments like, "we display the proclamation on the family in our home so our kids grow up learning what proper gender roles are." Comments like that are completely wrong in the context of the gospel anyway, and make me want to throw up. My wife had to work with this sister in the same calling for a few months and it was a major headache, as she found her to be very lazy and totally unreliable in her calling. My wife has a very long commute from work and had to figure out how to leave early every other Wednesday to rush to the church by 5:45, which was extremely difficult because this self righteous sister who was at home all day wasn't even responsible enough to reliably get to the church five minutes away from her home to open the doors for the kids coming for activity days. Never mind the fact that my wife had to basically do all the planning and all the work as well. This sister was released and two or three others who were called ended up being pretty much the same. Only the last one, who happened to be the bishop's wife proved to be diligent and responsible. Finally, after a year of this my wife was just released and given a different calling.

In my core I don't have anything against stay at home moms. My mom was one of those, and my wife would be a tremendous one herself if and when she stops working outside the home. Unfortunately, I think our culture has a strong tendency to cultivate laziness and lack of responsibility in this segment of the membership. I guess it's somewhat understandable because of what you're talking about. We don't really train for it among the young women like we do with the young men. Also, I really think one of the unintended consequences of women marrying very young before they get much education or professional work experience is that in a sense they don't grow up in certain ways. They aren't exposed to as many different types of people, so it's really easy to become closed minded and judgmental. And at least my wife has experienced that many of them she's worked with in church callings aren't reliable or responsible. Never having to have been reliable and accountable in a work setting means many of them even in their 30s are still like when they were fresh out of HS, when it comes to outside of the home responsibilities.

[MikeWaters]

I have nothing against SAHMs either. My mother was one. And my wife is one right now (by her own choice).