The Church falls on its face with latest essay about women in the Church

[Dr. Sunstoned]

This essay reads like it was authored by a man. We all know that women do not hold the same decision-making power as men in the church. They don't even get to manage the Relief Society without priesthood "oversight." It's the twenty-first century, and yet Mormon leadership is still stuck in the 1950s.

[Moksha]

Isn't the Relief Society Presidency outranked by the newest 12-year-old deacon?

[IWMP]

An update. I should have noticed the wording, "Members of the Relief Society, Young Women, and Primary General Presidencies serve together with members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles and other General Authorities to serve God and His children. Women serve on many of the highest governing councils and committees in the Church."

After a little more work, here's my best breakdown of women's service on the seven committees:

2 committees, 3 places each, 6 places:
...all held by Relief Society general presidency.

3 committees, 2 places each, 6 places:
...2 held by the Relief Society general presidency members,
...2 held by 2 of YM presidency,
...2 held by 2 of primary presidency.

1 committee, 1 place:
... held by Relief Society president.

1 committee, no women.

So, in total, in the 7 LDS committees, there are 13 committee memberships, held by seven women. Four women each hold one. And three women (the Relief Society presidency) hold 9 of the committee memberships.

The women's positions are all defined as 'part-time callings', the men's positions are all full-time paid.

Also probably depends on what is meant by, "serve on". Would a woman making them tea and coffee be counted as serving?

I think it's a lot of pressure the relief society presidency is under if they are serving on multiple committees but only titled as the relief society presidency. If they were titled for everything they do then it would be quite stark.

[Marcus]

An update. I should have noticed the wording, "Members of the Relief Society, Young Women, and Primary General Presidencies serve together with members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles and other General Authorities to serve God and His children. Women serve on many of the highest governing councils and committees in the Church."

After a little more work, here's my best breakdown of women's service on the seven committees:

2 committees, 3 places each, 6 places:
...all held by Relief Society general presidency.

3 committees, 2 places each, 6 places:
...2 held by the Relief Society general presidency members,
...2 held by 2 of YM presidency,
...2 held by 2 of primary presidency.

1 committee, 1 place:
... held by Relief Society president.

1 committee, no women.

So, in total, in the 7 LDS committees, there are 13 committee memberships, held by seven women. Four women each hold one. And three women (the Relief Society presidency) hold 9 of the committee memberships.

The women's positions are all defined as 'part-time callings', the men's positions are all full-time paid.

Also probably depends on what is meant by, "serve on". Would a woman making them tea and coffee be counted as serving?

I think it's a lot of pressure the relief society presidency is under if they are serving on multiple committees but only titled as the relief society presidency. If they were titled for everything they do then it would be quite stark.

I think you are missing the point of this thread.

[Marcus]

Jana Riess has recently put out an article along a similar line.

As someone who has studied the way women’s voices have been amplified and silenced in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, especially online, I found it fascinating that three different statements about women and the church shared in the past week all reflected the same theme.

Overall, the church is telling women, “We need you, but stay in your place.”

The first statement came from Elder Dale G. Renlund, who spoke at a women’s conference in Arcadia, California. The second was from the global Relief Society Broadcast, also headlined by Renlund and reflecting views of church leadership. And the third was an official church Gospel Topics essay “Women’s Service and Leadership in the Church.”

The article is worth a read and Jana makes some very valid observations.

Thank you for posting that. Jana Riess always makes great points, and she adds a lot of depth. The comments after that particular column are very telling.

[IWMP]

Also probably depends on what is meant by, "serve on". Would a woman making them tea and coffee be counted as serving?

I think it's a lot of pressure the relief society presidency is under if they are serving on multiple committees but only titled as the relief society presidency. If they were titled for everything they do then it would be quite stark.

I think you are missing the point of this thread.

Apparently I do that a lot? According to you. I think the whole point of a discussion forum is to discuss and share thoughts and yet somehow, there seems to be these hidden rules that somehow means that most of what I post is either irrelevant or incorrect, according to you.

What exactly is the point of this thread and how is it that my response doesn't seem to be the correct response?

[Marcus]

Also probably depends on what is meant by, "serve on". Would a woman making them tea and coffee be counted as serving?

I think it's a lot of pressure the relief society presidency is under if they are serving on multiple committees but only titled as the relief society presidency. If they were titled for everything they do then it would be quite stark.

I think you are missing the point of this thread.

I think you are missing the point of this thread.

Apparently I do that a lot? According to you. I think the whole point of a discussion forum is to discuss and share thoughts and yet somehow, there seems to be these hidden rules that somehow means that most of what I post is either irrelevant or incorrect, according to you.

What exactly is the point of this thread and how is it that my response doesn't seem to be the correct response?

I have no opinion on "most of what you post." Regarding my specific response to you about your post and the point of the thread, I based that on the title of the thread, the op, and the essay which was linked.

Getting people to talk about the work women do and how much pressure is on them is the smokescreen thrown up by the LDS church to deflect people away from the fact that having 3 or so token women on committees in a church they say has 17 million members does not support their argument that LDS women also serve in leadership positions, just as LDS men do.

[IWMP]

I think you are missing the point of this thread.

Apparently I do that a lot? According to you. I think the whole point of a discussion forum is to discuss and share thoughts and yet somehow, there seems to be these hidden rules that somehow means that most of what I post is either irrelevant or incorrect, according to you.

What exactly is the point of this thread and how is it that my response doesn't seem to be the correct response?

I have no opinion on "most of what you post." Regarding my specific response to you about your post and the point of the thread, I based that on the title of the thread, the op, and the essay which was linked.

Getting people to talk about the work women do and how much pressure is on them is the smokescreen thrown up by the LDS church to deflect people away from the fact that having 3 or so token women on committees in a church they say has 17 million members does not support their argument that LDS women also serve in leadership positions, just as LDS men do.

I don't understand why you think I missed that.

You do have an opinion because you frequently pull me up on my relevance. Recently, in another thread, asking me if I meant to reply elsewhere. I decided to ask someone else their opinion of that post and it's relevance and was told it isn't off topic.

[drumdude]

I have no opinion on "most of what you post.’

When I post something posters deem irrelevant or dumb, I definitely prefer to be ignored than directly confronted on it.

If I was constantly directly confronted then I would start to feel unwelcome on the board. I hope that’s not your intention.

[Marcus]

I have no opinion on "most of what you post." Regarding my specific response to you about your post and the point of the thread, I based that on the title of the thread, the op, and the essay which was linked.

Getting people to talk about the work women do and how much pressure is on them is the smokescreen thrown up by the LDS church to deflect people away from the fact that having 3 or so token women on committees in a church they say has 17 million members does not support their argument that LDS women also serve in leadership positions, just as LDS men do.

I don't understand why you think I missed that.

You do have an opinion because you frequently pull me up on my relevance. Recently, in another thread, asking me if I meant to reply elsewhere. I decided to ask someone else their opinion of that post and it's relevance and was told it isn't off topic.

Great, then you can ignore my opinion and go with that one. Or, maybe not rely on others opinions so much.

As for "why you think I missed that," it was because you didn't talk about that, and instead you talked about how hard the Relief Society women work and the pressure on them, which is, as I stated above, "the smokescreen thrown up by the LDS church to deflect people away from the fact that having 3 or so token women on committees in a church they say has 17 million members does not support their argument that LDS women also serve in leadership positions, just as LDS men do."