Continued discussion about gender inequality in LDS church

[Marcus]

I broke off this post from the thread on the LDS church essay on women to widen the discussion to gender inequality.

There has been some interesting discussion on reddit about this topic. This is from the SLTrib's mormonland newsletter, dated 3.20.25:

Renlund addresses gender equality
Speaking at a women’s conference this month in Arcadia, California, apostle Dale Renlund tackled head-on a question about the church’s lack of gender equality and representation.

“The reason for the asymmetry between men and women regarding priesthood office ordination has not been revealed,” Renlund said. “Any proposed reason for that asymmetry with regard to priesthood office ordination is speculative.”

The absence of a reason, the former heart doctor cautioned, “doesn’t give us license to change the asymmetry just because we want to.”

Renlund did, however, assure the hundreds of women gathered to hear him speak that “any unfairness that’s created by the asymmetry can and will be made right through the Atonement of Jesus Christ.”

In the meantime, he observed, church leaders “haven’t done as good a job as I think we can” to address existing imbalances “within the bounds that God has set.”

He concluded: “So, we’re going to do better.”

Renlund’s comments about ordination in the faith’s all-male priesthood echoed a similar warning he issued three years ago regarding the church’s belief in Heavenly Mother.

“I wish we knew more and you may wish you knew more as well, but reason cannot replace revelation,” the apostle said at the time. “Wanting to know more, asking questions, is not a bad thing. But speculation can sometimes … divert us from what has been revealed."
https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2025/03 ... es-gender/#

[Marcus]

There has been some interesting discussion on reddit about this topic. This is from the SLTrib's mormonland newsletter, dated 3.20.25:

Renlund addresses gender equality
<snipped>
https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2025/03 ... es-gender/#

And some further analysis of Renlund's comments:

LDS Apostle Dale G. Renlund addressed gender inequality in priesthood ordination. He acknowledges the church’s gender imbalance but quickly pivots to uncertainty: “The reason for the asymmetry between men and women regarding priesthood office ordination has not been revealed.” This statement is designed to prevent further questioning while implying that the answer, if there is one, belongs only to God. He then warns that “any proposed reason… is speculative,” which serves as a way to dismiss critical discussion while absolving leadership of any responsibility to provide clarity. By framing speculation as dangerous, he discourages members from thinking critically about these issues. The refusal to address gender inequality is not due to a lack of revelation but a reluctance to challenge entrenched power structures.

Despite claiming no one knows why women are excluded from ordination, he simultaneously asserts that the “asymmetry” (what normal people call prejudice or sexism) cannot be changed simply because people want it to. This is a contradiction: if there is no divine revelation supporting this inequality, why should members accept it as immutable? Why assume the asymmetry is intentional rather than a cultural holdover? His phrasing suggests that obedience to the status quo is more important than the pursuit of truth or fairness.

Renlund then attempts to pacify his audience by stating that any unfairness caused by the asymmetry will be made right through the Atonement of Jesus Christ. Rather than addressing the pain and exclusion women feel now, he pushes the resolution into the afterlife—essentially telling women to be patient, suffer in silence, and trust that all will be fixed later, when the men get around to it. This is a common tactic used to justify institutional inequalities: rather than taking responsibility to create justice in the present, leaders defer to a promised future where God will supposedly make everything fair.

https://wasmormon.org/church-admits-gen ... to-change/

[bolding added by me.]

The top comment in the reddit thread is particularly on point:

Yes, the reason for the asymmetry between men and women regarding priesthood office ordination has not been revealed. Just like the priesthood restriction was not revealed for over 120 years. Then, lo and behold, we were told it wasn't a restriction after all. It was just a policy. Just a stupid man-made racist policy put in place by an arrogant, privileged, racist white man. Do you think brother Renlund, that the gender restriction might turn out to be similar?

https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comme ... o/mnp6a5k/

[Marcus]

I hope you don't mind, Riverdale, that I am quoting your post over here, where I wanted to further discuss the topic:

Brad Wilcox did not help with this talk.

“Some lady walked up to me that I didn’t even know, sees my nametag, and she’s like, (mumbles) ‘Brigham Young University … ’ (shouts) ‘WHY DON’T YOU GIVE WOMEN THE PRIESTHOOD?!’

Just like that! And I said, ‘Good to meet you too.’

And then I asked, ‘What’s the priesthood?’

And she said, ‘Well, uh, I don’t know, but I think the women should have it.’

Seriously? ‘I don’t know, but the women should have it?’ What’s malaria? ‘I don’t know, but the women should have it?’

Lol. Somewhere he's gotten the idea that disparaging people is an effective tactic in preaching his religion.

[Rivendale]

No problem. I actually meant to reply to your comment.

[MG 2.0]

I hope you don't mind, Riverdale, that I am quoting your post over here, where I wanted to further discuss the topic:

Brad Wilcox did not help with this talk.

Lol. Somewhere he's gotten the idea that disparaging people is an effective tactic in preaching his religion.

Inquiry: Brad Wilcox: “Some lady walked up to me that I didn’t even know, sees my nametag, and she’s like, (mumbles) ‘Brigham Young University … ’ (shouts) ‘WHY DON’T YOU GIVE WOMEN THE PRIESTHOOD?!’

Brad Wilcox has recounted an interaction where a woman questioned him about women's ordination in the LDS Church, framing it as an example of what he considers misguided inquiries. According to reports, he described the encounter as follows:

The Confrontation: A woman approached him, noticed his BYU affiliation, and loudly demanded, "Why don’t you give women the priesthood?!" Wilcox responded sarcastically, "Good to meet you too," before questioning her understanding of the priesthood.

His Critique: He dismissed her objection by comparing it to demanding treatment for malaria without understanding the disease: "What’s malaria? ‘I don’t know, but the women should have it?’" This analogy frames the woman’s question as uninformed.

Context: Wilcox has used similar rhetoric when addressing priesthood-related questions, including historical racial restrictions. He often reframes such issues as "asking the wrong questions," redirecting focus to doctrinal explanations rather than systemic critiques.

The interaction highlights a recurring theme in Wilcox’s approach to contentious topics: challenging critics to define terms before engaging, while sidestepping direct institutional accountability. Critics argue this tactic avoids addressing systemic concerns about gender equality in LDS Church governance.

Perplexity A.I.

I suppose this is another example of a believer answering a critic in a manner that throws the critic off guard and off line. The question is whether or not this is either warranted or necessary. I think that it might be both if the person being addressed is either ignorant and/or unaware of all of the moving parts and they are focused on simply one thing...gender ideology and modern feminist rhetoric that has gone large scale within a certain segment of society.

I don't think this woman may have had any idea and/or appreciation for the doctrinal underpinnings that undergirded her rather silly/ignorant question/approach to Brad Wilcox.

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

No problem. I actually meant to reply to your comment.

That's my fault, I'm sure! I was setting up this thread and going back and forth, so I'm glad we got everything together.

Wilcox is so disparaging of anyone and everyone who believes differently than him. Why the LDS church thinks that is a good example for their youth is beyond me.

[Rivendale]

No problem. I actually meant to reply to your comment.

That's my fault, I'm sure! I was setting up this thread and going back and forth, so I'm glad we got everything together.

Wilcox is so disparaging of anyone and everyone who believes differently than him. Why the LDS church thinks that is a good example for their youth is beyond me.

Here is what I find perplexing. Wilcox has been giving this misogynistic and racist speech for years. He is a master in eisegesis (as is Kerry Muhlestein) especially for gender issues. Public schools actually use him for their maturation programs. Nobody said anything until it was leaked to Dehlin and within days Wilcox was apologizing on social media with his wife staring him down in the background. I am actually surprised that leaders didn't claim women were less valiant in the pre-existence but I may have missed it.

[MG 2.0]

No problem. I actually meant to reply to your comment.

That's my fault, I'm sure! I was setting up this thread and going back and forth, so I'm glad we got everything together.

Wilcox is so disparaging of anyone and everyone who believes differently than him. Why the LDS church thinks that is a good example for their youth is beyond me.

The youth and other members might actually appreciate his direct approach.

Inquiry:

One person on a message board said, "Wilcox is so disparaging of anyone and everyone who believes differently than him. Why the LDS church thinks that is a good example for their youth is beyond me." What might be a rational answer that could be given to this person in support of Brad Wilcox?

Here’s a rational response that could be given in support of Brad Wilcox, grounded in his teachings and roles:

Focus on Intent and Doctrinal Clarity: Wilcox’s direct style often aims to clarify LDS teachings on grace, repentance, and covenant living. His analogy-heavy approach (e.g., piano practice for spiritual growth) emphasizes personal transformation over mere rule-following, which he frames as a loving invitation to deeper discipleship. While his tone may seem sharp in isolated moments, his broader message centers on Christ’s grace enabling growth rather than demanding perfection.

Role in Youth Leadership: As a Young Men general leader, Wilcox focuses on empowering youth to embrace their divine potential, emphasizing trust and responsibility. His talks, including His Grace Is Sufficient (the most-viewed BYU speech ever), resonate with many Latter-day Saint youth seeking reassurance about their worthiness and God’s love.

Acknowledging Imperfections: While Wilcox has faced criticism for past remarks (e.g., racial implications in a 2022 devotional), he has publicly apologized and engaged in dialogue to address concerns. The Church likely views his willingness to learn and adjust as part of a leader’s growth process.

Doctrinal Consistency: Wilcox’s emphasis on covenants and grace aligns with Church teachings that stress both divine assistance and personal effort. His rhetoric, even when blunt, often targets misconceptions (e.g., “earning heaven” vs. “learning heaven”) to reinforce core principles.

In sum, supporters might argue that Wilcox’s approach—though sometimes polarizing—aims to combat complacency and inspire commitment, which the Church may see as valuable for youth navigating cultural and spiritual challenges.

Perplexity A.I.

There are two sides to every coin.

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

That's my fault, I'm sure! I was setting up this thread and going back and forth, so I'm glad we got everything together.

Wilcox is so disparaging of anyone and everyone who believes differently than him. Why the LDS church thinks that is a good example for their youth is beyond me.

Here is what I find perplexing. Wilcox has been giving this misogynistic and racist speech for years. He is a master in eisegesis (as is Kerry Muhlestein) especially for gender issues. Public schools actually use him for their maturation programs. Nobody said anything until it was leaked to Dehlin and within days Wilcox was apologizing on social media with his wife staring him down in the background. I am actually surprised that leaders didn't claim women were less valiant in the pre-existence but I may have missed it.

Lol, me too. I'm not surprised at the public schools thing however. Saddened, yes, but I have seen way too many reports in recent years of wildly inappropriate things going on in Utah schools, which is invariably excused by LDS school officials--of course until they are caught.

I didn't know Dehlin broke the news about Wilcox, good for him!

[MG 2.0]

That's my fault, I'm sure! I was setting up this thread and going back and forth, so I'm glad we got everything together.

Wilcox is so disparaging of anyone and everyone who believes differently than him. Why the LDS church thinks that is a good example for their youth is beyond me.

Here is what I find perplexing. Wilcox has been giving this misogynistic and racist speech for years. He is a master in eisegesis (as is Kerry Muhlestein) especially for gender issues. Public schools actually use him for their maturation programs. Nobody said anything until it was leaked to Dehlin and within days Wilcox was apologizing on social media with his wife staring him down in the background. I am actually surprised that leaders didn't claim women were less valiant in the pre-existence but I may have missed it.

Apparently he was taken to the woodshed:

Inquiry: During 2024 and 2025 has Wilcox toned down his rhetoric?

Bradley R. Wilcox, the LDS leader and BYU professor, continues to be a prominent public figure, frequently speaking at youth events and general conferences throughout 2024 and into 2025. His recent addresses, including the October 2024 General Conference talk "O Youth of the Noble Birthright," focus on themes of covenant identity, resisting negative societal influences, and encouraging youth to embrace their spiritual heritage. These talks highlight positive messages about self-worth and spiritual potential, without the controversial racial or gender rhetoric that previously drew criticism.

There is no evidence in the available 2024–2025 sources that Wilcox has repeated the specific racially or misogynistically charged statements that led to the 2022 backlash. His recent public statements and conference addresses are summarized in official church publications and do not reflect the same problematic tone or content. Instead, he appears to have shifted towards more widely accepted and less divisive topics, emphasizing encouragement and faith.

However, none of the recent sources explicitly discuss whether Wilcox has addressed or changed his approach to gender issues or directly referenced his past controversies. The available evidence suggests a noticeable moderation in his rhetoric, at least in his high-profile, public-facing talks since the 2022 incident.

We don't want him falling into the same trap Paul Dunn fell into. Sometimes these folks get a bit 'gitty uppity' as they are talking to youth and trying to entertain. Keeping attention spans is not an easy task.

Give him a pass? Maybe. He is human after all. Years and years ago (1980's) he came to the school I was teaching at and gave some kind of presentation to the student body. He was very engaging...and still is. Sometimes those folks can go overboard and need course correction.

I would imagine his wife gave him a talking to also. Just guessing.

Regards,
MG