Women teaching patriarchy to women.

[TripletDaddy]

I appreciate the responses, but truthfully, they are pretty unconvincing. It seems that the basis for this supposition is that women are better with newborns and they tend to wash dishes and cook more effectively than men.

What is the nexus between being a good housekeeper and being hard-wired to be closer to the spirit.

Assuming for a second that women are closer to the Spirit, can someone then please explain why we have zero women in the Q12, feeling the Spirit and receiving direction for the entire Church? That is kind of a huge hole in the "women are closer to the Spirit" argument when you consider that ultimately, all decisions that are based on the guidance of the Spirit run through men.

I am not sure either gender is inherently closer to the Spirit. I can't see much of a purpose for it being that way, given that both genders are under instructions for salvation.

[RobinFinderson]

I appreciate the responses, but truthfully, they are pretty unconvincing. It seems that the basis for this supposition is that women are better with newborns and they tend to wash dishes and cook more effectively than men.

What is the nexus between being a good housekeeper and being hard-wired to be closer to the spirit.

Assuming for a second that women are closer to the Spirit, can someone then please explain why we have zero women in the Q12, feeling the Spirit and receiving direction for the entire Church? That is kind of a huge hole in the "women are closer to the Spirit" argument when you consider that ultimately, all decisions that are based on the guidance of the Spirit run through men.

I am not sure either gender is inherently closer to the Spirit. I can't see much of a purpose for it being that way, given that both genders are under instructions for salvation.

None at all. For that matter, what is the nexus between emotional sensitivity and spirituality? That is another ridiculous social construct.

[UtahDan]

I am not sure either gender is inherently closer to the Spirit. I can't see much of a purpose for it being that way, given that both genders are under instructions for salvation.

I don't think women are naturally closer to the spirit, but I am toying with the idea that men come with more of the "natural man" than women do. That is, more of a predilection for things that drive the spirit off. Obviously men and women are not identical.

[LA Ute]

Speak for yourself! I seldom stink, even when I sweat profusely. My theory is that people shower too much and this breaks down the body's natural ability to fight odor causing bacteria. My body has lots of natural bacteria fighting powers.

Of course I was generalizing. There are many exceptions, including, prominently, you and me.

[I.J. Reilly]

I appreciate the responses, but truthfully, they are pretty unconvincing. It seems that the basis for this supposition is that women are better with newborns and they tend to wash dishes and cook more effectively than men.

What is the nexus between being a good housekeeper and being hard-wired to be closer to the spirit.

Assuming for a second that women are closer to the Spirit, can someone then please explain why we have zero women in the Q12, feeling the Spirit and receiving direction for the entire Church? That is kind of a huge hole in the "women are closer to the Spirit" argument when you consider that ultimately, all decisions that are based on the guidance of the Spirit run through men.

I am not sure either gender is inherently closer to the Spirit. I can't see much of a purpose for it being that way, given that both genders are under instructions for salvation.

I will agree with Robin on this one and say that there is no nexus between being a good housekeeper and being close to the spirit. I also don't believe that I made that argument. Correct me if I am wrong. Housekeeping responsibilities, to me, seem to be almost totally socially constructed and more a by product of women being expected to be in the home and therefore having more time to do such home-bound tasks.

As far as women being closer to the spirit, I don't believe that women have any more right to the spirit then men do, only that they are more likely to respond to the feelings and promptings of the spirit. Men, whether by socialization or by genetic makeup (my belief) are more likely to search out empirical evidence. Women respond more to things of an emotional nature.

I don't know why there aren't any women in the Q12 other then to say that in the church they don't hold the priesthood and the Q12 is strictly a priesthood calling.

DDD would you say that you believe that there is little difference between men and women beyond physical differences? If not, what is your position on this?

And Robin, take a shower. I know plenty of kids that have taken your theory of the bodies natural odor fighting abilities just about as far as it can go and they still stink. I don't think your theory holds water.

[TripletDaddy]

DDD would you say that you believe that there is little difference between men and women beyond physical differences? If not, what is your position on this?

I definitely believe that there are all kinds of differences between men and women.

I don't believe that either gender is more predisposed to be close to the Spirit. That seems strange to me. Frankly, given the average age of the folks on CUF, the notion of women being more prone to the Spirit strikes me more as a vestige of the "blacks were less valiant in the priesthood" indoctrination of the 60s-80s than any solid doctrinal take on spirituality. Broad, sweeping statements, no real basis for making the statements, immediately alienate a huge demographic based on some immutable trait (used to be race, now it is gender)...sounds very familiar to me.

[I.J. Reilly]

I definitely believe that there are all kinds of differences between men and women.

I don't believe that either gender is more predisposed to be close to the Spirit. That seems strange to me. Frankly, given the average age of the folks on CUF, the notion of women being more prone to the Spirit strikes me more as a vestige of the "blacks were less valiant in the priesthood" indoctrination of the 60s-80s than any solid doctrinal take on spirituality. Broad, sweeping statements, no real basis for making the statements, immediately alienate a huge demographic based on some immutable trait (used to be race, now it is gender)...sounds very familiar to me.

I see a line between women being predisposed to being close to the spirit and women being predisposed to being more receptive to the spirit. Like I said, I don't think any sex has any more right to the spirit only that one gender is generally more receptive to that feeling.

[RobinFinderson]

I see a line between women being predisposed to being close to the spirit and women being predisposed to being more receptive to the spirit. Like I said, I don't think any sex has any more right to the spirit only that one gender is generally more receptive to that feeling.

This makes no sense to me I.J. Can you start by explaining what it means to you for anyone to be receptive to the feeling of the spirit? It is some kind of sensitivity, right? But how do YOU know when someone else is sensitive to something? Obviously because there is some kind of physical manifestation of that sensitivity. For example, when a man has sensitive teeth and he drinks a glass of ice water, that sensitivity registers on his face, right? So what is it about women that you are picking up on that suggests that they are more sensitive to the spirit?

I think women tend to be a little bit more emotional, and that is about it. I make no claim to knowing why it is true, but it is what I have observed -- women are a bit more emotional than men. I don't even have a hypothesis.

So when you say that women are more receptive to the feeling of the spirit, what you are really saying is that women are more emotional, right? Because that is what we see. They are a bit more moved in testimony meeting. They more readily speak from the heart. They are more prone to open displays of their feelings.

But that isn't receptivity, that is just emotion. Women are a little bit more emotional, so naturally they are going to express their spiritual receptivity through emotion. That is pretty cool, which we can all see because we all feel strong emotion from time to time. But really, what I am trying to say, is that an emotional response is not the only legitimate response to spiritual experience.

I've noted that women seem to me to tend to be a bit more emotional (and by extension, men tend to be a bit less emotional). That is as far as I'm willing to stick my neck out. One might have an emotional or a cerebral or an ecstatic or an orgasmic reaction to 'the spirit.' Who is to say that one mode is inherently more 'receptive' than another?

Here is a nice bernini sculpture that addresses the topic. Check out the look on her face. I've seen that look before.

[ERCougar]

Ok, since we have a mix of believers and non-believers, replace the words "spirit" and "spiritual" with "compassionate", "kind", "nurturing", etc. My conception of spirituality has nothing to do with "emotional"; I find overly emotional people annoying, manipulative, and not able to control themselves, hardly traits I would seek after. I would incorporate into my definition of spirituality a willingness to incorporate and appreciate non-physical manifestations into one's reality, to give feelings the same value as thoughts.

I think women are naturally prone to all of these traits.

[marsupial]

I think women tend to be a little bit more emotional, and that is about it. I make no claim to knowing why it is true, but it is what I have observed -- women are a bit more emotional than men. I don't even have a hypothesis.

So when you say that women are more receptive to the feeling of the spirit, what you are really saying is that women are more emotional, right? Because that is what we see. They are a bit more moved in testimony meeting. They more readily speak from the heart. They are more prone to open displays of their feelings.

But that isn't receptivity, that is just emotion. Women are a little bit more emotional, so naturally they are going to express their spiritual receptivity through emotion. That is pretty cool, which we can all see because we all feel strong emotion from time to time. But really, what I am trying to say, is that an emotional response is not the only legitimate response to spiritual experience.

I've noted that women seem to me to tend to be a bit more emotional (and by extension, men tend to be a bit less emotional). That is as far as I'm willing to stick my neck out. One might have an emotional or a cerebral or an ecstatic or an orgasmic reaction to 'the spirit.' Who is to say that one mode is inherently more 'receptive' than another?

Here is a nice bernini sculpture that addresses the topic. Check out the look on her face. I've seen that look before.

Are women really more emotional or is it just that it is more culturally acceptable for a women to show their emotions?

I don't believe that either of the sexes is more emotional, spiritual, compassionate, nurturing, etc. than the other. Men tend to keep their emotions to themselves, women tend to let them out and share.

[TripletDaddy]

Personal observations of the niceties of women aside, is there any scriptural or revelatory basis for the notion that one gender, as whole, is more receptive to the Spirit? Or more likely to act on the Spirit? It would be interesting to explore that avenue.

Absent any such teachings, I am still in the dark as to why anyone would think, let alone promulgate such thought as doctrine.

[ERCougar]

Are women really more emotional or is it just that it is more culturally acceptable for a women to show their emotions?

I don't believe that either of the sexes is more emotional, spiritual, compassionate, nurturing, etc. than the other. Men tend to keep their emotions to themselves, women tend to let them out and share.

Women have larger limbic areas (emotional center of the brain) and a larger corpus collosum (essentially the connection between the left and right sides of the brain, likely making them more able and willing to express emotions and feelings--men tend to isolate to their left hemisphere).

Men have larger brains. Ergo, we're smarter.

EDIT: I did a quick google search to make sure I wasn't talking out of my arse here and came across this article. It's fairly recent and easy to read: http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...rain-her-brain

[Babs]

Women have larger limbic areas (emotional center of the brain) and a larger corpus collosum (essentially the connection between the left and right sides of the brain, likely making them more able and willing to express emotions and feelings--men tend to isolate to their left hemisphere).

Men have larger brains.

EDIT: I did a quick google search to make sure I wasn't talking out of my arse here and came across this article. It's fairly recent and easy to read: http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...rain-her-brain

Aw, how sweet of you - going out and finding an article easy enough even for us small-brained girls.

[Colly Wolly]

http://www.cougaruteforum.com/showthread.php?t=4908

[wuapinmon]

I don't believe that women are more genetically in tune with the Spirit, or potentially so (cue woot to come in and condescend to us all about how little we know about genes).

I think it's cultural. If you go back to early Christianity, I believe, you'll find that men were considered to be more spiritual than women.

Sexual dimorphism certainly exists, but as it relates to spiritual matters, it would seem unjust for God to make it more difficult for those who putatively exercise his power to commune with Him.