Clinging to the past

In case it has not been obvious, these last few posts go together and I will continue posting about this for the next few weeks. Topics we are going to look at include how the current paradigm is bad for women, how it is bad for men, and whether constructed gender differences even make sense.

For this post, I want to go with a question at the end of the last post. It built off of the question of whether women have this special gift of being able to predict and understand men's needs, and whether men would be willing to give that up. I suspect not.

My thinking there has been going on since reading an older conference talk in my personal study, "The Moral Force of Women" by Elder D. Todd Christofferson, from the October 2013 General Conference:

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2013/10/the-moral-force-of-women?lang=eng

I suppose what stuck with me most was how he acknowledged the historical double standard, and even said the response you would hope for would be men improving themselves, but then still spends more time asking women not to change. His is not the only talk to contain those themes. That quote from Sister Nadauld has been used often, and always in the same way.

I agree that the solution to the double standard is not women becoming worse. I find it frustrating that the answer is always then a focus on how women need to stay soft and good so that we can continue to elevate men. We are so lovely and supportive and uncomplaining, and completely and utterly failing at elevating men.

Yes, we often succeed at making men comfortable, but this does not improve them. If discomfort is not absolutely necessary for change, it is at least one of the most reliable motivators. Working toward change will disrupt comfort anyway, so it may be best to not get too attached.

Still, when women are telling men that they need to change, suddenly off the pedestal we come. Men get condescending if that works and angry if it doesn't, sometimes scarily so.

The truth is, I am a compassionate person, so I will always be more drawn to alleviating discomfort than causing it. I am seeing too many examples, though, of ways that women accommodate men, and choose our words carefully, and try so hard not to hurt any feelings, and there is no reciprocation and no reward. Encouragement to be selfless shouldn't lull us into being ineffective.

If I may draw another lesson from racism, people will often react to criticism of racist behavior - even when mildly and kindly given - as persecution, drawing a disproportionate defensiveness in response. As frustrating as this is, it makes sense. In a white supremacist society there has been so much designed toward the comfort in being white that anything threatening that can feel fundamentally wrong and frightening.

Our society is male supremacist too.

I know some men are better. I believe that more men can be much better, but the change will take conscious effort. I am afraid that the motivation is not there.

I will keep at it from my end, knowing that I may tick off several people, and being torn between caring and not caring. How we balance that will have to come later on.

For now, though, there is something that I have been hinting at that I am ready to come out and say now:

The biggest current threat to marriage and family is men.

I will back that up over the next week or two.