truth dancer wrote:It will change when the leaders are committed to stopping abuse. It will change when women no longer will join the church because of the repression. It will change when leaders want to improve marriages. It will change where the church has no choice but to evolve with society. I'm guessing it will take at least fifty years.
~dancer~
I've always thought that the church was a generation behind on some issues. Fifty years is right, which is fifty years too long for me. My children would be parents by then.
Each one has to find his peace from within. And peace to be real must be unaffected by outside circumstances. -Ghandi
Gazelam wrote:The only thing we take with us into the next life is progeny.
A mother raiseing her children in righteousness is exalting.
Think about it.
Gaz
What about the father? Is it not exalting for fathers to raise their children in righteousness? I've never understood why people are so quick to exclude the father from parenting.
One of the biggest problems in society today, especially African American society, is the lack of a father in the home. Even if he's physically there, he needs to be emotionally there, as well. To suggest otherwise is archaic.
Each one has to find his peace from within. And peace to be real must be unaffected by outside circumstances. -Ghandi
Gazelam wrote:Because one of them needs to be there full time. The provider has to go out and provide.
Um, sitting at home watching The Young and The Restless is not the same as being there emotionally. A woman can work and still be there for her kids. Some have no choice. It's a difficult balance, but difficult is not impossible.
Each one has to find his peace from within. And peace to be real must be unaffected by outside circumstances. -Ghandi
The only thing we take with us into the next life is progeny.
A mother raiseing her children in righteousness is exalting.
Think about it.
Why do you think the only thing you take with you into the next life is progeny? I've never heard this before. What about all the lessons you learned here? Relationships (at least those who have been sealed to you), increased knowledge, etc. etc. etc.?
There is no one on the planet who is more passionate about taking care of one's children than I. What I think is so sad is the virtual elimination of fathers in this picture. The research is consistent and strong that children do better with fathers involved in the lives of their children. The more the father is involved the better. There is no question about this.
We have completely learned this from evolution with the amazing invention of male parental investment but even without an understanding of history and the evolution of humankind, we have research to prove this.
Why not have both parents raise children in the best way possible? Why not have a couple decide how they can best manage and care for their children? This idea that a woman must stay home and take responsibility for the raising of children speaks of fathers who do not want the responsibility and stress, and husbands who don't want their wives participating in society in any meaningful way.
~dancer~
There's always enrichment...and the occasional tea party...I like tea...wait a minute...hot chocolate party. Sorry.
I'm so bad. I'm sorry. Pray for me, TD
Each one has to find his peace from within. And peace to be real must be unaffected by outside circumstances. -Ghandi
personally find them very comfortable, but (I admit) I think they are very ugly on women and wish that wearing them was optional. They are very out-of-date and not becoming on a woman at all (which, perhaps, was the original intent by the prudish designers?). But, unfortunately, they've become more than symbolic in Mormonism, which explains the obsessive demand that the garment be worn as much as possible (except for the three "S's," of course: sports, showers, and sex!).
I think you speak to the issue.
I'm trying to be sensitive but the reality is, women feel ugly in garments. I doubt there is a man alive who finds garments attractive on his wife. This is not a healthy thing for any intimate relationship. in my opinion, marriage is difficult enough without the added unhealthiness of men not being physically attractive to their wives and women feeling completely unattractive to their husbands.
I remember a woman telling me, "The best birth control is garments... it destroys any thoughts of sexual intimacy for men and women."
And we wonder why LDS men are having issues with porn?
I'm NOT suggesting most folks have issues with garments (although I am absolutely certain many women do... many men too if they are being honest regarding their wives needing to wear them 24/7), but I'm saying you and Rollo, are rare in that you believe they are totally symbolic.
I don't want to get into particulars about the difficulties garments caused me but lets just say, I have never worn anything more uncomfortable, unattractive, irritating, ugly and odd. As I said, I wore them out of obedience ... as a sacrifice demonstrating my willingness to follow the prophet and abide by the rules of the church.
I don't think they are nearly so bad for men and I have met a few women who like them but in my opinion, it is odd for women to have to wear undergarments designed for women two hundred years ago.
For those folks who enjoy them and find them meaningful GREAT! I really mean this. :-)
~dancer~
Try wearing them around a non-member mother who insists on coming into your room while dressing...the bottoms peeked out from underneath my nightshirts, I had a lot of explaining to do. My mom thought I had lost my mind.
They weren't too uncomfortable, but after 20 years of wearing drawers, it was quite a change.
Each one has to find his peace from within. And peace to be real must be unaffected by outside circumstances. -Ghandi
The ward I was baptized into had a lot of "power females". These women were highly educated, they were independent, they were doing their thing. However, they seemed to be ok with emotionally taking a backseat to their male counterparts. The degrees were fine, but once all that was over, they were to settle down, marry, and have some kids.
I have one close friend who is Mormon, and she's going for her PhD. Not the typical Molly Mormon at all. Very sharp, very outgoing. I love her dearly. She's in her mid 30s, dating a good guy, but smart enough not to fall for the first peter priesthood that comes along.
Each one has to find his peace from within. And peace to be real must be unaffected by outside circumstances. -Ghandi
truth dancer wrote:I'm trying to be sensitive but the reality is, women feel ugly in garments. I doubt there is a man alive who finds garments attractive on his wife.
I agree 100%.
in my opinion, marriage is difficult enough without the added unhealthiness of men not being physically attractive to their wives and women feeling completely unattractive to their husbands.
My wife and I have never really had that problem, because she's never been shy about shedding the garments when it's 'playtime'.
And we wonder why LDS men are having issues with porn?
TBM's have long had serious sexual hang-ups. And it's only going to get worse: the manual for next year's priesthood and Relief Society classes is none other than "The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball"! ;)
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)