Dear Mr Kano,
Congratulations on making an important contribution to the conversation about gender inequality in the LDS Church. Clearly the New York Times presented an unbalanced piece when they neglected to address the significant concerns of men in the church; including the absence of padded chairs in men’s meetings, a need for a father’s lounge to care for babies, and an equal opportunity responsibility to move ward members.
I appreciated your use of an ad hominem argument to point out how insignificant and unimportant the views
of the people you disagree with are. History definitely demonstrates that the majority is always right and, if only a few people experience or believe something, it shouldn’t be taken seriously. In fact, dismissing them or even ostracizing them is the most effective route.
Andy, I want to let you know that I read through all of your suggestions carefully (I call them suggestions because demands are so unseemly coming from a faithful Latter-day Saint man). After prayerfully considering each point, I want to let you know that I fully support you. I can envision an LDS meetinghouse where all can partake of padded seats and fathers can enter a quiet room to soothe and feed fussy babies. I delight at the vision of youth and women volunteering in nursery while men meet with a purpose to learn the domestic arts. And brothers and sisters lifting couches and bookshelves into moving vans together? Be still my heart (just be certain that unmarried men and women don’t ride alone in the same vehicle).
I only have one dilemma, Andy, and it’s kind of an important one. You see, I am a woman and, while naturally more spiritual than you are, my responsibilities reside solely in the realm of nurturing others and bearing children. I do not have any authority to grant your requests. You see, I belong to auxiliaries of the church, can sit in on some meetings, and ask my righteous Priesthood holder husband for his opinion, but I do not have any authority over important matters such as these.
With this in mind, I want to let you know that I fully support your proposals. I will gladly stand behind men having comfortable seating, nursery assistance, and father’s lounges. I’m assuming that, once these needs for equality are met, you will then be comfortable with women acting in God’s name to bless, heal the sick, administer ordinances, baptize, lead congregations, become mission and temple presidents, and manage church finances? Sounds like a modest proposal to me.
Andy, we are brothers and sisters in Zion and I want you to know that your concerns are heard. I do want to caution you, however, against the slippery slope you are heading on. We have a living prophet and, if we believe he is inspired by God, it is not up to us to make demands or agitate. I hope you will carefully consider publicizing these types of important issues in the future. Take heart, because, as a man in the LDS church, you actually have the potential to authorize important changes such as the purchase of padded chairs and podiums (sadly, I am not qualified). If local leaders are not responsive, I would encourage you to be patient and to be sure to re evaluate both your testimony and worthiness.
Kind Regards,
Mindy
I love this! So glad you wrote it!
Best response to his blog I have read. The sad thing is, all the things he asked for, we want for men as well. We do not dismiss him as absurd or criticize his objections to his “sacred role” as defined by LDS culture. Wish he would do the same for us!
Oh my gosh! This is just so amazing and wonderful and well written. I can’t wait for Andy to read this article- hopefully he can also take notes on how to write a blog post.
What a perfect response to that article. Wonderful!
Thanks, everyone, for your kind feedback and responses. 🙂
As an LDS woman, I simply do not agree with Mindy and do not support any woman who agrees with this in any sense.
I found Mr. Kano’s letter to be well-natured and funny, an excellent response to the immature actions of the women who “demanded” something that has already been given to us.
I agree with Mr Kano
We live in a twisted society that believes that in order to gain equality, women need to take away from or be the same as men.
as a feminist, I DO NOt want to be the same as any man. I want to be proud of my womanhood and teach my children to embrace the gender given to them by God. My roles and responsibilities are different from men and I have embraced them to the best of my ability.
my husband is the priesthood holder in our family and I would never try to take that away from him because right now I have a huge advantage! Every day, I feel a powerful bond between me and my baby. Every decision I make is for this precious human being that I am growing! Hormones are driving me to “nest”/prepare and I feel that incredibly connection. My husband REALLY wants to feel that, But only gets a glimpse of what I feel at ultrasounds and already feels so disappointed that his paternity leave is so short, even more so that he could be deployed when the baby arrives and he’ll miss that precious time.
To assume that we are unequal is not only selfish, it’s foolish. If anything, I have the greatest advantage
Obviously I am not LDS but I appreciate a good rebuttle. I also appreciate women standing up in their faith based communities for more rights.
As I consider the different conversations I’ve had on this topic, two things come to mind, One is that it feels so personal and a criticism or call for change can feel like a personal attack and sometimes even like a betrayal, especially when it is public or outside of the church community. Our faith is precious to us and this obviously effects how we interpret what we read. The second is that, when these types of conversations happen, the community begins to question someone’s worthiness. assumes that can’t overcome an offense, or that they lack understanding of the gospel. Why else would they struggle with something that seems so clear/obvious to us, especially if it’s been spiritually confirmed? This is one of the things that got in the way of my sharing my own experiences – opening myself up to judgment in such a public way. It’s becoming clear to me that spiritual direction is not as cut and dry as I once believed. I consistently hear a doubting of the source of the story from individuals who can’t relate to these experiences, but I find myself doing it too.For me personally, Kate Kelly’s words “Equality is not a feeling” really resonate with me. It can be measured in tangible ways and the conversation doesn’t always have to lead to women’s ordination. I think this dialogue is important because it allows us the opportunity to see the experiences outside of our own within our own faith community. These women are not anomalies. They matter. They’re experiences matter – including their spiritual experiences – as much as the positive experiences of their sisters in the gospel matter. Most of them are speaking up because they love their faith as much as women who have never experienced any inequality or frustration. They could just walk away, but they choose not to. Mormonism is not just the faith of the people who are perfectly satisfied the way things are. Is talking with The New York Times right for everyone? No. But it is certainly one way to begin dialogues like this one.
I’d sign their petition if they didn’t have the part about God being both male and female in it. I think of Him as a father and not androgynous. The actions of a few movers and shakers have changed history more than the masses ever will. So for that, I applaud this group. Many good things are coming our way.
AmberandDarren – I’m confused. So you’re saying that if you were to have the authority to use your priesthood power (which women have naturally, and/or are given in the temple, according to most people who are against this effort), you would suddenly not be able to bond with your baby or lose him? Where does this idea come from?
Actually, as I write this, I bet I know where. I bet you are assuming that motherhood is the equivalent to priesthood, so if you used your priesthood, you couldn’t have motherhood. Well, it’s not. The proper comparisons are motherhood-fatherhood, and priesthood-priestesshood. Fathers have/use priesthood and mothers have and could use priestesshood.
Bridget – I don’t know of any Ordain Women petition, but their mission statement does include the phrase “God is male and female, father and mother, and all of us can progress to be like them someday.” (emphasis mine)
This is a common belief among many LDS people — that ‘God’ is a plural word (we know for sure the Elohim is plural), and that it refers to Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother. Even the Proclamation on the Family speaks of both of them. OW is clearly using this understanding of God, because they use the word ‘them’.