I'm Proud to Be An American Even When I'm Not Proud of All of Its History

Happy Independence Day! I am grateful to be an American. And to the extent that I and my fellow countrymen live consistent with the ideals that this nation is predicated upon, I can also claim to be proud to be an American.

I have long been drawn towards the Lee Greenwood song, God Bless the USA which includes in its chorus the words, “I’m proud to be an American, where at least I know I’m free….” Prior to this year, I have never thought to call that pride into question. However, as I have been exposed to and considered different voices and stories, I can now see where many may not identify proudly or even positively with America. For many, their experience of American life and their exposure to certain realities within its history are more likely to invoke pain or shame to the extent that those experiences are not consistent with the promise of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

One friend, who I know to have great empathy for those who are oppressed, expressed, “I am feeling a little less patriotic this 4^th of July. I acknowledge the massive amount of freedom and privilege I have been awarded by just being born in this country. I do, also, recognize the deep amount of pain and denial we carry.” I assume her comments are largely in reference to the pain of BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and people of color) who have been raising their voices in protest to racial injustice and shedding light on systemic racism and on the glorification of historical figures who could be identified as oppressors as well as liberators. 

Earlier today I watched a video of descendants of Fredrick Douglass reading and commenting on a speech titled “What to the Slave is the Fourth of July?” which was originally delivered by Fredrick Douglass in 1852. I had never before considered the perspective and experience of a Black person on the 4^th of July. And I can see where many familiar with Black history in America would not associate that date with freedom and would not perceive many of the founding fathers as virtuous or honorable. 

For individuals who are descendants of people who were enslaved during the formation of the United States of America, and throughout the century that followed, the date July 4, 1776 would not have represented liberation, independence or freedom. Rather, it would serve as a reminder of a time in our history when people who looked like them, and people who are related to them were treated as subhuman and denied human rights and dignity. I hope that I can mourn with those that mourn the reality of this history and of its effects today.

Nonetheless, I continue to rejoice in America. I recognize that there are significant faults, both past and present, but I still believe that it is a great land of liberty and that a loving God was instrumental in its ongoing establishment and preservation.

I have recently been reading a little bit about George Washington. I started by reading a 2005 forum address by biographer David McCullough. He mentioned that General Washington’s decision to turn back his command of the military to Congress after the war is “one of the most important events in our entire history”, and that when England’s King George III heard that Washington might do so he said, “if he does, he will be the greatest man in the world”.

In an attempt to learn more about that unfamiliar-to-me act, I sought out additional information online about the event and eventually read Washington’s Address to Congress Resigning his Commission as found in the National Archives.

As I understand it, Washington’s act of resigning his commission was so highly revered because he possessed near-absolute power but chose to not retain or exploit that power. He could have elevated himself. He chose instead to trust the system that had been established and, like Cincinnatus, to return to the farm and assume the role of humble citizen. In doing so, he honored what his soldiers had fought and died for.

I find it significant that George III did not say “if he doesn’t [give up control of the military], he will be the greatest man in the world”, rather, he said, “if he does”. This to me acknowledges what true greatness is and suggests the kind of greatness that America aspires to. It is not dominance, conquest and power that makes America great, but virtue, brotherhood and faith.

In reading and rereading Washington’s resignation address, I am impressed by his humility. This humility includes reference to the hand of Deity. He acknowledged his self-perceived inadequacy, or “diffidence”, but noted that it was “superseded by a confidence in the rectitude of our Cause, the Supreme Power of the union, and the patronage of Heaven.” He later expressed his “gratitude for the interposition of Providence.” He believed in their cause, and he believed that God was acting to guide, support and protect them.

Perhaps most powerful to me were these words, offered towards the end of his speech prior to formally offering his Commission: “I consider it an indispensable duty to close this last solemn act of my Official life, by commending the Interests of our dearest Country to the protection of Almighty God, and those who have the superintendence of them, to his holy keeping.”

I believe that this land was prepared and preserved by God, and that He did keep and guide those who were instrumental in attaining and retaining this land as a land of liberty. I believe that General Washington recognized and felt that guiding hand. And I believe that the work of attaining and retaining this land as a land of liberty is a work that continues to unfold and continues to be threatened.

In celebrating the 4^th of July today, I acknowledge pain and errors past and present, but I also rejoice in and give thanks for the liberty with which I am blessed. I am grateful for the freedom of speech that allows to me to learn from the voices of others as well as to contribute my own voice. I am grateful that the right to freedom of speech and assembly allows individuals to advocate for rights that they have been unjustly denied. I am grateful for the freedom of the press that can help expose and mobilize individuals to act against injustice and in defense of virtue, brotherhood, liberty and life. 

I am grateful for the freedom of religion that allows me to know and worship God. And I am grateful that the establishment of the freedom of religion in our nation helped to prepare the world for the prophesied restoration of the fulness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For these reasons and many others, I am proud to be an American and hope and pray that I can act consistent with the best of its virtues and ideals.

General George Washington Resigning His Commission by John Trumbull

Thoughts on Abortion & How We Talk About It

As I have spent time on Facebook in recent weeks, and as I have tracked various news stories, I have noticed that the topic of abortion is one that is being debated in both policy and among groups of friends and strangers. I have read others’ perspectives with interest and compassion, taking special interest in those who believe and feel differently than I do. While wanting to join a conversation that I feel is significant, I haven’t felt that responding on social media posts is the right way or place to challenge a position with which I disagree. I have worried that if I were to join the conversation in that way, that things could be misunderstood and that I might inadvertently show disrespect to persons that I respect and care about and that it might ignite or fuel contention or opposition among strangers or friends. 

That said, I do have a position that I hold, and want to share my thoughts and my voice with those who might be asking questions and looking to the rationale of others as they try to identify where they stand. Accordingly, here, on my own personal blog and Facebook wall, I am sharing some of my personal beliefs on the topic of abortion as well as sharing some observations I’ve made regarding why it feels like such a difficult discussion to have with individuals who believe differently. 

My position on Abortion

My position on abortion is based on two beliefs:

• The termination of a pregnancy is the termination of a life. 
• Life is sacred and is something to be protected. 

Because I believe these two things, I am opposed to elective abortion. 

You’ll notice that I used the qualifier of “elective.”  This is to allow options in extenuating circumstances involving medical necessity to preserve the life of the mother, and involving instances of rape, including incest. 

This position is one that often guides me to vote in favor of conservative politicians. It leads me to mourn the real and painful loss of life I see inherent in neonatal deaths such as miscarriages and stillbirths. And it guides responses I give when others ask me my position on the issue of abortion.

It does not guide me to villainize those who believe differently, and it has not motivated me to ever censure a person who believes differently or who has sought out an abortion. I do not know their experience, their journey, or how or why they made the decision they did, and I recognize that even if I did know, it would not be my place to judge or comment on it.

I usually avoid divisive topics. I want to be a peacemaker. At times I find myself at odds with myself as I recognize that there are times and situations in which making peace requires more than avoiding conflict. I’m very good at avoiding conflict, and that tends to be my default mode. In choosing to now share my position on a topic that I know to be hot and divisive, I hope that my voice can help to invite and build peace in how this topic is discussed, and I also hope to advocate for peace and protection toward those who I understand and believe to be vulnerable lives who are unable to advocate for themselves. 

Observations about How We Talk About Abortion

I’ve noticed that it is very difficult for a lot of people to have civil discussions on the topic of abortion with people who do not already agree with them. There are strong feelings that are stirred up. And there are many times that parallel conversations take place without any real understanding. 

I’ve noticed something that individuals with conflicting positions (I don’t want to use the term “sides” as I think it simplifies the complex positions that different individuals take and I feel like the black and white characterizations make it harder to see and understand each other) have in common is that most are powerful advocates. I love, respect and admire those who assume the role of advocate. Those who are opposed to abortion are often so passionate in their position because they are advocating for the unborn. Those who are in favor of abortion are often so passionate in their position because they are advocating for quality of life and opportunities for women. And they advocate even more passionately for victims of rape, including incest, and those whose health is endangered by a pregnancy. They also advocate for loved ones who have had or are considering abortions, in defense of them as good moral people rather than allowing them to be characterized as individuals who may have deprived vulnerable others of life.

It is hard to see eye to eye and speak heart to heart when the stakes feel so high. And because so many are fierce advocates of others that they see as vulnerable victims, passion is brought into the dialogue.  To be casual would feel grossly inadequate.  And reasoned consideration can feel too casual. This can be an obstacle to understanding and civility.

Another major challenge in conversations about abortion is the lack of consensus around the difference between a fetus and a baby. Where my position is that the termination of a pregnancy is a termination of life, and I would choose to use terms such as “baby”, “mother” and “death”, others believe that before birth, the developing body is not considered a human life and choose terms such as “fetus”, “woman” and “aborted fetal tissue.” When there is disagreement on this point, it is hard to find consensus or a foundation for other related conversations. And on top of that, the word choices that others use can invite defensiveness.

I have also observed that many challenges in respectfully discussing abortion surround proposed and passed legislation that dictates specific legal consequences for women and medical professionals who participate in facilitating elective abortions. I recall recently seeing a meme that emphasized that the legal penalty associated with a victim of rape having an abortion could be more severe than the penalty for the perpetrator of that rape. There does seem to be injustice in such a scenario, and it is reasonable for people to advocate against injustice and in defense of those who are victims of trauma who then must face further legal trauma. I personally have not read the recent, relevant laws that have been proposed. But I anticipate that I wouldn’t fully agree with aspects of them, despite my position opposing abortion. If I were voting on them, I would read them and I would want to understand why people who feel strongly both in favor and against each piece of legislation takes the position that they do. Being partisan doesn't often lead to the best solutions. And catchy soundbites don't tend to represent the full story. I think there needs to be more separation between conversations about abortions and conversations about specific legislation on abortion, and more education and understanding, so that if and where there needs to be adjustment to legislation, that there is space for conversations and finding points of agreement.  

There is a lot more that can be said about the topic of abortion and how it is discussed. I have not mentioned many major talking points. Part of this is because I am not writing this with the intent of convincing other people to believe one way of the other. I’m not brave enough yet to make a post in which the primary objective is to advocate against abortion. Rather, I am presenting a little bit about what I believe and why, and showing some reasons that I believe that this is such a difficult conversation to have without it resulting in division and hostility. So, my intent in writing this is more about inviting others to listen and learn respectfully before and while advocating in order to minimize contention and division. And it is to provide what I hope is a respectful, well-reasoned position for those who are interested in considering it.

If people have questions or comments that they wish to share, I’m open to having a conversation. But, I would request that this not become a space for attacking other people or their beliefs or positions. Feel free to add to the conversation, but please don’t treat others who think differently with contempt or disrespect.  

The world has enough division and contentiousness.  It needs more connection and compassion.  Let’s shoot for the latter.

Year of the Arizona Roadtrip!

When I was reviewing 2017, I realized that I'd logged quite a few miles traveling.  I made it out to the United Arab Emirates, North Carolina (including a day trip to DC and a night in Virginia), Georgia (twice), Florida, Texas and Utah.  Since I figured that I probably couldn't top 2017 distance-wise, I decided to focus my wanderlust on more local desinations.  I have unofficially dubbed 2018 my "Year of the Arizona Roadtrip".  I guess since I've written it here, it is no longer unofficial!

Some of my local adventures this year thus far have included:

• Ziplining in Oracle
• Visiting Tonto Natural Bridge in Pine
• Visiting Boyce Thompson Arboretum in Superior
• Hiking Wave Cave & Hieroglyphics Trail in Gold Canyon
• Hiking Tom's Thumb in Scottsdale
• Hiking EJ's Peak and Bulldog Saddle in Mesa
• Hiking Silly Mountain in Apache Junction
• Hiking in Papago Park and Hidden Valley Trail in Phoenix
• Hiking in Sabino Canyon in Tuscon
• Hiking Fountain Hills Trail in Fountain Hills
• Hiking Stone Mountain in Georgia (Whoops!  So much for only local trips!)

Here are a several pictures photodocumenting some of my adventures:

After ziplining in Oracle with Chelsie

Tom's Thumb with Jill

From the top of Bulldog Saddle with Dad

From the Wave Cave with stake friends

Boyce Thompson Arboretum

Spring in the desert!

Hieroglyphics Trail

On the side of the trail hiking back down Wave Cave

Tonto Natural Bridge

Pine Creek Trail in Pine (Tonto Natural Bridge)

Sabino Canyon in Tuscon

I'm looking forward to future Arizona adventures.  Let me know if you want to join me.  I even have a State Parks pass now!

Lessons on Insecurity from Moroni

Moroni is one of my personal heroes.  His hero status isn’t only influenced by the greatness of his virtues, but also by his imperfections, relatability and vulnerability.  Many associate Ether chapter 12 with the powerful assurances that Moroni received from the Lord in verse 27 when he was taught that weak things can become strong and that God’s grace is sufficient.  I find that the context for the verse deepens the significance of these principles.

In the verses preceding Ether 12:27, Moroni chooses to be vulnerable and outline several fears that he harbored in his role as a writer/historian.  It’s interesting to note that Moroni is essentially interrupting his abridgement of the history of the Jaredites in Ether 12 to include these insecurities.  He didn’t have to write these things.  But he did.  And we were among his intended audience.  I think he knew we needed to learn from his experience.  He saw our day and he knew that his struggle would also be our struggle.

Moroni identifies five relatable insecurities that he humbly and courageously discloses to the Lord, and to us:

• He fears being mocked
• He compares his weaknesses to others’ strengths
• He feels awkward
• He feels uncomfortable about a part of his body
• He feels inadequate

These insecurities are universal thoughts and fears that tend to dissuade many individuals from sharing and developing their talents.  These fears often motivate procrastination.  They can also overshadow the elation of accomplishment and merited feelings of hope.  Whenever I write a blog post, I discover that I need to exercise courage to finish writing my post, courage to post it on my blog, and then courage to share the post through social media.  If I am able to successfully exercise courage those three times (or even just one or two of them), I often then experience what I like to refer to as an “insecurity hangover” in which I think of ways my writing might be inadequate, where I compare it to the work of others (and I choose the most unfair comparison groups possible, of course), and where I fear it being mocked by trolls, or worse yet, I fear it being disapproved of by people I respect.

From a gospel perspective, this experience could be viewed with agency in mind.  When thinking of agency as relating to our being “an agent to act” rather than an object to be acted upon, using fears is a powerful strategy of the adversary to prevent people from acting.  When acted upon by fear, it is easy to abdicate agency.  That could be manifest as not finishing a project, not sharing it, or abandoning future projects and possibilities.  We decide not to act, and thus the influence of our words and the power of our creative works do not have the opportunity to make any impact.

It is important to exercise faith and courage to act.  And through the grace of Jesus Christ, we can find a strength beyond our own to act.  Moroni modeled well the pattern of taking insecurities and vulnerabilities and presenting them to the Lord and receiving reassurance.  But, as it characteristic of the process of growing and becoming, he didn’t automatically have his insecurities 100% removed, nor was he able to act perfectly in confidence and faith from the point forward.   At the end of chapter 12 Moroni wrote “And only a few have I written, because of my weakness in writing”.  Even after hearing that God’s grace is sufficient, he still considered his ability to be not good enough and he allowed that belief to limit him from further sharing his talent at that time.

Ether 12 is one of my favorite chapters of scripture, notwithstanding Moroni’s weakness (as he saw it).  I wish that he had kept writing at that time, as I trust that there is more I could have and would have learned from him.  But I’m also glad that Moroni modeled his continued insecurity, as I can relate to it.  And my wishing that he would have kept writing helps me to motivate myself to share talents that I feel are not sufficiently developed, because perhaps someone can learn from me in my weakness just as I could learn from Moroni in his.

Moroni did learn to accept the Lord’s message.  He waxed strong in his faith and in the development of his talents and abilities.  He provided additional abridgement of the Jaredite history, and he included his own writings and testimony in the Book of Moroni.  If you, like me and like Moroni, find yourself “buffeted by a false sense of insecurity”, or find that you know the answers but have a hard time enacting them, have hope, be patient, and take courage.  You’re in good company and growth is possible.  Through the exercise of courage and agency, and enabled by grace, growth is possible.

My studies on Moroni

There are several of my former Athens Stake YCLs who are now serving as full-time missionaries.  I think about them often, I pray for them, and sometimes I write them letters.  But for some reason, I rarely send those letters.  I need to be better about that.  I recently rediscovered this letter that I wrote to one of them a few months ago but have not yet sent.  But I will soon!  In light of the #LightTheWorld initiative focusing on studying the scriptures today, I thought that my reporting on my scripture studies about Moroni in this letter was worth sharing.  So here it is.  Enjoy!

02 October 2016

Dear Sisters,

Oh, hey sister missionary!  I am smiling so big right just thinking of you serving the Lord as a full-time missionary!  You are so amazing!  I hope that you don’t mind my writing you.  I asked your mom for your address, and she was kind enough to oblige—and we exchanged a few facebook messages about how awesome you are!

Now, I’m a little out of letter-writing practice, so I apologize if this comes off as disorganized or preachy.  I used to write a lot of letters to missionaries when my sisters and cousins were serving several years back, and I followed a bit of a pattern:  I would greet them, provide a small update on happenings in my life, respond to any questions (if there was back-and-forth correspondence), and then I would share a story from the scriptures and apply it to life or missionary work.  I want to try bringing that pattern to play in this and any future letters I may send to you.

So the first paragraph was my greeting, so now for an update on me.  I am still living in Arizona, still in love with the Gospel and the scriptures, and I currently work full-time as a therapist as well as teach an online class on The Family Proclamation for BYU-Idaho.  I probably need to more actively work on being sociable, but life is good overall and I feel very blessed by my Heavenly Father.

Okay, let’s jump into the scriptures.  Oh how I love the scriptures, especially the Book of Mormon!  I want to share some insights from a recent study.  Last Sunday I gave a fireside to Single Adults on the topic The Family: A Proclamation to the World and the Non-traditional Family.  Since my audience was composed of people who were single, divorced or widowed/widowered, I wanted to focus on the significance of the Proclamation to those whose lives don’t reflect the ideal family situation.  And I wanted to invite them to still hold up the Proclamation like the Title of Liberty and be an advocate for it and the doctrines, principles and standards it contains.  I spent a few weeks studying various family types in the scriptures and ended up deciding to use Moroni, son of Mormon as an example of a powerful Single Adult who understood the divine importance of the family and who was instrumental in advocating for eternal families in some pretty special ways.

So…some interesting information from the scriptures about Moroni.  (P.S. Sorry if this isn’t the most relevant topic for your stage of life, but perhaps it can be of value to many of those who you teach as a missionary.) 

Now, I suppose I can’t say it definitively, but it is my interpretation that Moroni spent much of his life as a single man.  He told us in Mormon 8 that “I even remain alone…for I am alone.  My father hath been slain in battle, and all my kinsfolk, and I have not friends nor whither to go…”  We don’t know if being left alone makes him a widower, or if he was a bachelor, but he was single and he knows loneliness.

Sometimes, when I get lonely, I like to study Moroni.  It is reasonable to assume that he was left alone, wandering with the plates for several decades.  In Moroni 1 he noted that the Lamanites “put to death every Nephite that will not deny the Christ.  And I, Moroni, will not deny the Christ; wherefore, I wander whithersoever I can for the safety of mine own life.”  He wandered alone for a long time, and largely felt directioness: “whither I go it mattereth not”. 

I think that a lot of people, especially singles in the church, can relate to this experience of feeling alone, lonely, and unsure of where to go or what to do.  Moroni had hope and a sense of eternal purpose, but the day to day was probably much more difficult.

So, what did Moroni do when he felt alone?  When his dad had been killed in battle?  When he had no friends or relatives to turn to?  We don’t know entirely.  But, we can discern a few things than he may have done, and that it would seem that he didn’t do.

We first know that Moroni didn’t give up.  In Moroni 9:6 we read advice Moroni received from his dad in a letter: “And now, my son, notwithstanding their hardnesss, let us labor diligently; for if we should cease to labor, we should be brought under condemnation; for we have a labor to perform whilst in this tabernacle of clay, that we may conquer the enemy of all righteousness, and rest our souls in the kingdom of God.”

From that verse we can also surmise that he labored diligently, and that he held on to hope that someday he would be able to rest his soul in the kingdom of God with his family.  That verse, which is part of a letter Mormon wrote to Moroni, also makes me think that Moroni probably often turned to both the scriptures and the letters from his dad that he held on to over all those years.   It probably brought him a lot of comfort to see the 17 times he was referred to as “son” and to remember that he was part of an eternal family.  I think that reading a sermon from his dad (contained now in Moroni 7) helped influence the development of his character and faith.

Moroni 7 is the powerful sermon on faith, hope and charity.  I believe that Moroni epitomized all three of those attributes in ways that few others on earth have because of the circumstances he was in and how he chose to respond in those circumstances.

Consider this as it relates to charity.  When Moroni first writes in the Book of Mormon, it is in Mormon 8.  In reading that chapter, there are some subtle indications that Moroni viewed the Lamanites in a “them” versus “us” way (see verses 3 and 7).  Which makes sense seeing as how he was a leader in the military fighting them, and how they were responsible for the death of his family, friends and people.  However, by the time he writes in Ether 12, something has changed in his heart.  In verse 38 he refers to them as “my brethren whom I love”.  This comes only a few verses after he wrote about faith, hope and charity himself.  And in verse 34 he acknowledges before the Lord, “except men shall have charity they cannot inherit that place which though hast prepared in the mansions of thy Father”.  He then references the consequences for not having charity.

We again see evidence of Moroni’s charity in Moroni 1 when he again refers to the posterity of the Lamanites as “my brethren”, and states that his purpose for having created additional plates and writing on them is solely for their benefit.  He hasn’t forgotten what the Lamanites did.  Two verse before stating his purpose and view of them as brethren, he stated that “because of their hatred they put to death every Nephite…”  But he loves them anyway.

Moroni remains humble enough to love.  This has to be hard.  Understanding what I do about human nature and defense mechanisms, it must have been so tempting for him to try to numb out, to harden his heart, to hate or to blame.  And perhaps he did for a while, I don’t know.  But ultimately, he was able to love those who persecuted him, and do good to those who would have killed him if they could.

Moroni is such a stud!  Wow…this is turning out really long.  I’m going to skip most of the other things I could write about Moroni the powerhouse single adult and just mention one or two more things that I think are super significant.  And these relate to making the blessings of eternal families available to everyone.

In D&C section 2, we are able to read the worlds of Moroni to Joseph Smith.  Consider that Moroni was selected to be instrumental in ushering in the restoration!  One of the things he taught Joseph, and that is the first section recorded after “The Lord’s Preface” in section 1, is about promises related to the family, the Priesthood and the sealing power: “Behold, I will reveal unto you the Priesthood, by the hand of Elijah the prophet, before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord.  And he shall plant in the hearts of the children the promises made to the fathers, and the hearts of the children shall turn to their fathers.  If it were not so, the whole earth would be utterly wasted at his coming.”  

Elijah held the keys to the sealing power.  In understanding the purpose of the earth in Heavenly Father’s plan, we know that it is a place prepared for us to be born into families, and make and keep covenants that bring us back to the presence of God in families.  That chapter/section is about the importance of eternal families made possible through Priesthood ordinances in holy temples.

And Moroni’s image tops almost all of the Lord’s temples built in this dispensation.  I think that it is really cool that Moroni was able to be an advocate for the family even though he spent most of mortality without his own.  I think that it is significant that the Lord trusted him with responsibilities and power.  And I consider him to be a great example of being faithful in lonely and perilous circumstances.  I am so grateful for his example, for his writings, and for the role he played in the compiling of the scriptures and the ushering in of the restoration.  

If you read this entire letter, bravo.  I promise to make the next one at least a little bit shorter.  I guess I have a hard time containing my excitement when thinking and writing about the scriptures.  Like Nephi, "my soul delighteth in the scriptures" (2 Nephi 4:15).  They are amazing and they are true!

I am so proud of who you are and the decisions that you are making!  I anticipate that as you serve you will experience a roller coast of emotions as you love and have your heart broken by those you serve and teach.  I hope that you will turn to the Savior in both your joy and sorrow so that he can consecrate those experiences for your sake.

Know that you are missed, thought of, prayed for, admired and loved.  You are a very special person with so much love and light to give to others.  I am grateful for your example to me and for the love and optimism and faith that you have shared.

Oh, and if you do have any interest in corresponding, I’d love to keep in touch.  I’d love to hear about the tender mercies you experience, the trials you face that have the potential to refine you, stories about the people you serve and serve with, insights from your studies, and/or the fun and funny experiences that you have if you ever feel like sharing.  But I know your time is limited, so don’t feel as though you need to.  Just know that I am interested and I care.  Also, know that you are loved.

Onward, ever onward,

Sister Allison Ellsworth

My Reaction to Election Reactions

Disclaimer: I wrote this late at night and it might not be especially coherent.  You've been warned. :)

As I have observed reactions to the outcome of the recent Presidential election, I have noticed a trend that is somewhat unsettling to me.   I am noticing a tendency to “other” people based on a singular difference, and I am noticing people caricaturize others based on their worst features.

This isn’t some new phenomenon.  Throughout the election it has been one of the major concerns and fears I have held regarding our now-President-elect.  The media has shone a spotlight on various comments in which Mr. Trump associates individuals of Mexican origin with druggies and rapists, associates refugees with terrorists, objectifies women, and suggests that various groups of people (often from vulnerable populations) should be feared or viewed with contempt. 

I am a believer that people are people, not the personification of their problems.  And certainly not the personifications of an exaggerated, atypical, stereotyped problem that is unjustly assigned to them.  Accordingly I do not approve of such dangerous overgeneralizations. 

I continue to hold concerns that Mr. Trump may make decisions that are not informed by an understanding of who individuals are, but rather by fears based on a few individuals’ worst qualities or actions.  I fear that he will think only of those few, unrepresentative outliers, and then overgeneralize their threat to a group of innocent individuals just because they share a racial, cultural or identity-based commonality.  I also have hope that these fears won’t be realized.  I hope that Mr. Trump’s potential as a leaders is not defined by some of the worst things that he has said and done.

But again, I am not writing this post to react to the election results or a particular candidate.  I am reacting to election reactions.  I am noticing that the response of many to Mr. Trump’s victory has been to other and negatively caricaturize him, the Republican Party, and any individuals who cast a vote for Mr. Trump, or who failed to cast a vote for Secretary Clinton.

I have read various facebook posts and comments that suggest that anyone who voted for Donald Trump is evil, hateful, bigoted, ignorant, and has a disregard for others.  I have seen comparisons of Donald Trump to Hitler.  I have seen individuals petition facebook friends who cast their ballots for Mr. Trump to unfriend them.  And I have seen a great deal of labeling: defining a person’s universal personhood with minimizing negative labels.  And seeing this makes me a little sad.

I recall an experience from a few years ago in which someone with whom I am associated made me aware of their disapproval of me and who felt inclined to unload seven years’ worth of criticisms on me.  I remember at one point interrupting and responding, “Yes, I have said some of those things and shouldn’t have, but you need to realize that that isn’t who I am”.  To which the response was, “No, that is exactly who you are.”  I remember how painful it was to be defined in someone else’s eyes based on a few past thoughtless and insensitive comments that are inconsistent with my character.  I remember driving home in tears and thinking about how out of all the things that define who I am and make up my character, that this individual had seemingly trained themselves to look for and remember the few things that re-enforced the negative story about me that they decided on after I had made a flippant comment years before.

Now, I know full well that my lifetime of cumulative offensive and insensitive comments is probably lesser that the offensive or insensitive things that Donald Trump says on a typical day.  And I have no interest in defending the indefensible or excusing the inexcusable.  But I still think that there is a principle in my story that is relevant.  Because this post isn’t meant to be about Trump.  It is meant to be about the natural tendency to other others, to define othered others by their worst parts, and to turn them into shallow caricatures rather than rich, complex, glorious individuals who can be understood and connected to. 

People are not two-dimensional cartoons.  Not all Republicans are the same.  Not all Democrats are the same.  Not all supporters of a given candidate are the same.  Not all people who voted for a particular candidate did so for the same reason.  Not all members of a particular ethnic or racial group are the same.  Not all women are the same.  Not all men are the same.  There is diversity within every demographic whether it be racial, religious, political or social.  And that diversity is beautiful.  And the stories each person carries are worth hearing.  But the beauty remains unseen and the stories remain unheard when individuals are grouped together, judged and deemed deplorable.  And from my vantage point, this othering and judgement and fear-mongering has occurred among some individuals from all major parties.

I do want to acknowledge that people's reactions makes sense.  When people try to make sense of things that don’t seem to make sense, it is natural for the mind to create categories and simplify things.  It is easy to look for someone or something to blame.  It is easy to want to try to make things black and white.  And a lot of people are reacting to genuinely felt fear and pain.  They are acting in defense of others they know who feel fear and pain.  I don’t wish to fault anyone for reacting to their feelings and experience.

Still, I believe that ultimately it will be easier to understand and build bridges as people are able to truly see one another.  To understand one another.  To hear a person’s story rather than see a single unflattering moment.  To find out why a person acted the way they did rather than jump to worst case assumptions.  Perpetuating the problem of characterizing people based on an action or characteristic that we disagree with and then using it to justify judgement, meanness and rejection does not serve the world.

I hope and pray that President Trump will seek to see and hear and understand those that he fears and those that he does not understand or agree with.  And I similarly hope that we all can similarly seek to understand and find points of connection and commonality, rather than define others by the way they are different than us.  To look at one action (such as a vote) or one belief (such as a position on a social issue) of any person and then feel justified in cutting that person out of our lives, or judging them as unworthy or corrupted is a tragedy in my eyes.  People and problems are complex.  People are in need of and worthy of understanding, love and connection.  In this time of political divisiveness and fear, I hope that we can see each other more fully, and turn to one another rather than against each other.

Election Thoughts: Trying to Articulate the Struggle

The election is less than a month away.  And I, like many others, have found myself dissatisfied with and resistant to considering either of the major parties’ nominees for president.  I perceive both as having said and done various things that cause me to neither respect them nor trust them to be in a position of power, leadership or influence over this country.  I went through a lengthy stage in which I told myself that I could not in good conscience cast a vote for either of them, and have been seriously considering third party or write-in alternatives.  For a while I was determined to support a third-party candidate.  But my conscience remained unsatisfied.  Voting for a third-party candidate does not soothe my conscience because I associate voting for a third-party candidate with surrendering greater influence by not voting for and/or against one of the two candidates who is most likely to end up appointed to the highest office in the land.  I fear that I will be abdicating my power to make a difference.  And I want to make a difference.

I have not yet determined for whom I am going to vote.  But I have narrowed it down to two.   And that short list includes one of the candidates that I previously told myself that I would not and could not vote for in good conscience.  Below I hope to explain why I am now possibly open to voting for a candidate I do not support despite my dislike of that candidate’s character and fear of damage that could be incurred under this person’s leadership.

The issues that matter most to me politically are social issues.  I care about society.  I love social science.  I am particularly interested in the moral development of individuals and of society.  This investment in society’s social and moral development repels me from both major parties’ candidates as individuals, but it also draws me toward the party and platform that best represents and supports the issues I most value. 

When I think of the potential of the next president to realistically appoint up to five Supreme Court Justices, it feels socially negligent to not advocate for someone who would likely appoint individuals who would justly advocate for the issues that I deem to be of the greatest value to the well-being of the nation.

I feel as though I am stuck in a moral dilemma.  Do I vote against individuals I don’t like, trust or have confidence in with a conscience-soothing third party vote but in doing so not have a say in who will realistically have influence?  Do I vote for a party and platform my values and interests more fully align with, knowing that my vote could contribute to a raise to power of someone that would easily abuse that power and do damage to the nation, its people and its foreign policy and relations? I feel stuck in a lose-lose situation.  I don’t know whether to prioritize supporting the party that I perceive as offering the most potential benefit or withholding support from the candidate that I anticipate would bring about the most immediate collateral damage.

In seeing how I wrote that last paragraph, I recognize that I am seeing a third-party candidate vote as being more about appeasing my conscience by not voting for people I don’t believe in rather than it being about voting for someone I do believe in.  Which is interesting.  Because I have found things I align with and admire in third party candidates.  And I have read and considered arguments for possible (but improbable) pathways to presidency or other gains from voting third-party and I find value and merit in those ideas.  But I also know that if I personally voted third party, it wouldn’t be with any expectation of that candidate winning, even if I want them to.

What’s more, I also wonder if I’m putting too much pressure on myself and on my individual vote.  Does my single vote really make a difference or have power and/or influence?  Honestly, probably not.  But I decided to ask myself, if I knew that my vote would be a tie-breaking vote, for whom would I vote?  And my honest answer to myself was: it depends.  If I knew that my vote would be a tie-breaker nationally and allow a preferred third-party candidate to win, I would vote for that person.  If I knew that my vote would be a tie-breaker at only the state level and most likely draw electoral votes away from the party I identify with, leaving the overall outcome of the election more likely to fall to the candidate of the opposing platform, then I would vote for the party’s candidate (despite the repugnance of that candidate).  

I also wonder, is my catastrophizing (assuming that either major candidate winning equates to abuse of power and irreparable damage) realistic and founded, or am I simply being overly influenced by a fear-mongering media?  Because I legitimately feel fearful of a presidency led by either major party candidate.  And I don't want to feel accountable for it or know that I supported it.  Is the damage that I can envision a likely outcome?  And is the threat of such outcomes sufficiently dangerous that I should not risk such an appointment despite the value of their alleged loyalty to promoting a specific platform?

I want to stand up for something.  I want to vote for what I believe.  But I also don’t want to vote for someone that I don’t believe in or that I want to stand up against.  How do I reconcile those?  Will a vote for someone who is likely to defend those things (despite potentially being despicable in other ways) be a way to cast my vote and voice for something that matters?  And is it worth the perceived risk?  Can a vote for a third party have influence in the areas that matter most to me?  These questions and others will be in my thoughts and prayers in the coming weeks as I seek to act consistent with the personal integrity, respect for this nation’s political processes, and a sense of responsibility to future generations that I feel should characterize my actions as I seek to fulfill my civic duty.

Hard Decisions and Defining Plan A

Today I received an email that reminded me of an email exchange I had back in November with an old friend.  She had asked me about my decision to leave my PhD program and today she followed up with me on her decision.  Also, yesterday another old friend reached out and made reference to my decision to leave my PhD program in a kind voicemail.

I remember hearing once that, oftentimes, repetition isn't redundancy, but revelation.  To have two friends from BYU days reach out within two days and make mention of the same event makes it seem like more than a coincidence to me.  Perhaps there is something I need to remember or reflect on.  And/or share.  Accordingly, I plan on doing some reflecting.  But for the sake of this blog post, I'm just going to share my email exchange, lest it be meaningful or interesting to anyone else.  Enjoy.

The initial email I received:

Hey, Allison,

I hope this finds you well. I'm emailing because I find myself in somewhat of an existential crisis and I thought you might have some advice. I'm in the first semester of my doc program. It's great so far. I enjoy my classes and research. But, I'm also expecting a baby... I'm trying to reconcile my plan A with my plan B and am considering not finishing my degree. I haven't decided anything yet, but am gathering information. I wanted to ask you what your reasons were for dropping out of your doc program. Are you happy with your decision? Would you make the same choice again, given the chance? Do you have any regrets? What have been the advantages and the disadvantages?

Thanks for your insight. I think you're pretty awesome. :-)

My Response:

Hey friend!

I was just thinking about you...and how I never responded to your text from forever ago.  Sorry!  I'm happy to hear from you.  Congratulations about expecting!

As one that has been through my version of that existential crisis, I am happy to share my experiences and process with you.  I'll tackle your questions one by one and then add a few extra thoughts at the end.

1. What were my reasons for dropping out of my doctoral program?

I had a few reasons for dropping out of my doctoral program.  The one I generally tell people (and myself) is that I decided that continuing in a doctoral program wasn't aligned with my professional goals.  I learned in the course of my program that I wasn't passionate enough about research.  I realized that I didn't want to end up in academia, but rather wanted to be a therapist who did some adjunct teaching on the side.  I know that both of those things were possible with the Masters degree I already had.  In my mind, it didn't make sense to incur more debt and invest more time to achieve a degree that I didn't really need.  My other reasons related to a self-perceived lack of proficiency in statistics and in what I like to call "inertia problems", ie, I had some mild depression that made it very difficult for me to motivate myself to do the work I needed and to do at a caliber that I was satisfied with... 

2. Am I happy with my decision?

I am at peace with my decision.  For me, it was a considerable process to make the decision that I did.  I did not want to quit.  I felt a sense of duty to complete what I started and didn't want to be casual about it.  I spent a long time pondering, praying, counseling with family and attending the temple before feeling that I'd received revelation to know how to proceed.  Because I felt assured that it was the right decision at that time for me, I have always felt at peace.

3. Would I make the same choice again, given the chance?

Yes.  However, if not for the assurance I found through personal revelation, I would likely feel differently.

4. Do I have any regrets?

No, not really.  There have been a few moments here and there where I wonder what it would have been like, or I feel slightly envious of friends who completed their doctorates.  And because I'm currently in a rather lame job, I sometimes wonder if it might have been better to stay for the free supervision.  But I feel good that my decision was the right decision for me to make.

5. What have been the advantages and the disadvantages?

The advantages have included avoiding further debt (I actually paid off all my student loans this year!), and moving into my desired profession a few years earlier than I would have otherwise.  Because I decided to move back to my hometown, I have also enjoyed being closer to family and being around nieces and nephews.  I can also make jokes about having dropped out of school. :)  Disadvantages are the feeling of being left behind and/or having wasted time.  On the one hand I feel like I wasted time professionally by spending two years in the program and not having anything to show for it when I otherwise could be licensed by now.  And, on the other hand, I see my classmates who do now have PhDs and think that it could have been me.  I have fewer skills than I likely would have if I had stayed in my program.  And I do miss having access to academic journals and attending and presenting at conferences.

You mentioned Plan A vs. Plan B.  Something that I learned a while back is that what I had labeled as my Plan A (marriage and family) and Plan B (profession in teaching and counseling) were mislabeled.  Now when I think of Plan A, I think of it as Heavenly Father's plan for me.  I would rather live by His plan and His timing than have things work out the way that I think I want.  So I just try to do my best to align my will to His, act in faith and do the best I can and trust that things will work out.

I am very grateful for my time in Georgia.  I learned a lot and grew a lot.  But I also feel confident that it was right for me to leave earlier than I anticipated.  I trust that I could have finished, but I don't think it would have helped me progress towards my immediate professional or personal goals.  That was the right decision for me.

My advice?  Figure out what Heavenly Father's plan is for you and allow that to inform your choices.  I strongly believe that there is no calling or role more influential and powerful than that of motherhood.  But I also know that the Lord often uses women as healers, teachers, leaders and in other roles.  I don't know His plan for you except that I trust that your contributions to the world, whether in your home or outside it, will make the world a better place.

Good luck in your decision-making.  I trust your ability to study things out by study and by faith and to make good choices.

I'd love to hear more about how things are going for you and your growing family!

Your friend,

Allison Ellsworth  

Remembering

I love my Grandpa Ellsworth.  I spent most of my childhood living next door to him.  I used to race home from the school bus, do my chores and then run next door to visit my grandparents.  I was motivated by both the graham crackers with chocolate frosting and the opportunity to be with my grandparents.  I love spending time with them because I always felt wanted and loved.  When I think of my grandpa, I think of the many times that he told me, "Al, know that you are loved."  I knew it then and I know it now, and that knowledge has been such a blessing in my life.

When I was three, my grandpa and I were photographed (see above) for a newspaper advertisement.  It was my first job.  We were paid $50, or so I was told.  It was put into my savings account and went towards my education.  I love that picture.  It is a favorite of mine and is one that I have up on the mirror in my room.

One of my favorite stories from about my grandpa is one that he told about his days at Mesa High.  The class was assigned to write a submission for a school-wide essay contest on the topic, "What I would leave the world".  As he told it, he talked to a friend for most of the hour, and then, a few minutes before the end of class when the teacher warned them that they would get a zero, he hurriedly wrote down a few words and handed it in.  When the school assembly came around and they announced the winners, he was named as winning second prize.  He reported that all he recalled having written was a single sentence indicating that he would leave a good name.  And he has.

I am so grateful to be an Ellsworth.  It means something to me because it makes me think of him.  I think of his faith, his obedience, his goodness, his leadership and his love.  It helps me want to be a person of character.  There have been times where my choices have been guided by my desire to not dishonor the good name I was given, and to create a name and legacy that my future posterity can take pride in.

I have been blessed with a lifetime of wonderful memories with my Grandpa.  Earlier this evening he passed away.  I am happy to think of him reunited with his mother and many others.  I am grateful for the legacy of faith he left that allows me to know of the reality and divinity of Jesus Christ and of His Atonement and Resurrection.  I am grateful for sacred ordinances made in holy temples that allow our family to be united eternally.  I am inexpressibly grateful for a grandfather who served me, taught me, supported me and loves me.

New tradition?

I was rather sick yesterday.  I don't typically get sick; it usually only happens once or twice a year, and symptoms are generally rather mild.  I'm grateful for the blessing of good health and my body's ability to heal.  Yesterday consisted of a lot of not-sleeping, followed by a lot of sleeping, followed being awake and alert, but still achy and lacking in energy.  So, I decided that have an Anne of Green Gables/Anne of Avonlea movie marathon.  I had forgotten how much I love those movies!  Just for the record, my amount of love for them: a lot.  I laughed, I may or may not have cried, I smiled, I quoted along, I whistled along to the music.  It was great!  This may have to become a new sick day tradition.

Some people count sheep...

The other night, after saying my prayers, turning off my lights, and climbing under my covers, ready to drift away to sleep.  While waiting for sleep to come, I started to think back over the day.  Then I thought a bit about a television show I had watched, and then, the last thing I remember thinking about, is research articles.

I remember imagining that I was at some sort of training meeting and that the presenter asked, "Who here likes reading academic articles?", said with some distain, as though the anticipated response would be a dearth of sound and movement.  But I imagined myself sharply and enthusiastically raising my hand high.  And then I extended this hypothetical situation, by imagining that I was then asked to explain what it was that I liked about academic research articles.  And then, in my mind, I started going through the various reasons that I enjoy a good research article.  And then I fell asleep.

Some people count sheep to fall asleep.  Apparently I count ways that I like research.  :)

My reaction to the Mormon Gender Issues Survey

Okay, I wanted to vent about something, and get y'all's response.  I'm trying to figure out if I am finding problems because I am looking for them, or if you see/sense the same thing.

It is about a survey that I've seen posted by several friends on facebook over the past two days.  It is called the Mormon Gender Issues Survey.  You can read about it on their website, and you can also read one negative response to it here.  I also read this news article about it.

When I was first exposed to the survey, I didn't have a reason to feel negatively biased.  Most of my friends who shared it on their walls are intelligent, highly-educated, faithful women and they were promoting it as a good thing.  But I was immediately skeptical and cautious, likely due to the subject matter.  (I've tried to keep educated on the Ordain Women movement ever since it became prominent on social media and in the news, and have noticed their celebration of "agitating" and of using social media to, at times, misrepresent and even villainize the church and its leaders.  Because of what I have read, I have become wary of conversations involving the church and gender issues.  Which is really too bad.  Because I love being a member of the Church and I love being a proponent of women.  I should be excited about the intersection of those topics!)  Anyway, I was cautious and curious as I began to complete the survey.

Well, perhaps it was because I was looking for it, or perhaps it was just because it was there, but I found example after example of questions that felt biased and misleading.  Here are a few examples:

Example 1:

In this example, there is clear leading/biasing.  Before the question is asked, there is a sentence about disciplinary courts.  According to my understanding, there is no direct link between expressing support for something and church discipline.  It is as though the authors of the survey want to create an association between the two.  Such a narrative is inconsistent with how the church operates and feels manipulative.  And the responses seem more consistent with the bias toward establishing a correlation between church discipline and responding to others' views than what to me would seem like reasonable responses to the situation.  (I marked "other" and indicated that, if I had a relationship with the person, I may have a private conversation with them to better understand their views and to express my own.)

Example 2:

In this example, only two options are provided.  There is not a fill-in option or a "prefer not to respond" option.  The question itself doesn't seem biased, but in asking with "comes closer" to one's view, it does seem to suggest that these answer options should be part of the same bipolar continuum.  Or, in other words, one answer should be somewhere on one side of a scale, with the other somewhere on the opposite side.  And the question is asking which side you lean towards.

Here's the problem, these questions don't belong on the same scale.  One is asking about timing ("seek first"), while the other does not suggest a time table.  It seems that a whole process was divided in two, and then we are asked to choose between two incomplete things.  The complete pattern is to receive counsel (I'm not sure if this term refers to advice or revelation) from priesthood leaders, to seek personal revelation, and then to act in faith even if you don't end up learning 'the why'.    Other nit-picky complaints: I feel that "good Latter-day Saint" is ambiguous and subjective.  And, as previously mentioned, the term "counsel" could be interpreted a few ways.  Oh, and the use of "should" statements makes me think of psychological control, which I don't like to naturally associate myself or the church with.

My biggest concern about the construction of the items in this survey is the potential for responses being misrepresented.  Here's an example of what I mean.

Example 3:

In and of itself, this isn't a bad research question.  But, here is the thing, when I answer this question, I am intending to say, "In faith, I will accept God's word as it is revealed to and announced through the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles".  But I worry that the headline of the news article covering the research article will end up reading, "90% of Active Mormons Support Allowing Women to Hold the Priesthood".  And, if this were to happen, either on account of the researchers' bias or the media's, it would completely misrepresent my response.

And I know that there is bias.  I have seen how media coverage oversimplifies and sensationalizes research.  And I know that there is bias among at least some of the researchers responsible for this survey.  According the the news article I linked earlier, one of the researchers is the spokeswoman for Ordain Women.  And I have noticed occasions when their organization's news coverage has employed contentious rhetoric and distorted narratives that, at times, have misrepresented the church, its teachings and its leaders.

Now, maybe I'm being ridiculous and extreme and overly pessimistic.  It's possible.  Maybe it is just a survey.  Maybe it is well-intentioned.  And maybe it can and will provide a way for many who feel unrepresented to have a voice.  That would be great.  But...it seems to me that it is a deceptive and biased survey created by individuals with an agenda, and that the data could ultimately be presented in a way that misrepresents my voice and others' as these individuals try to forward an agenda that I do not support.

My Niece is Pretty Cute

Ruby's baby blessing was earlier this evening.  She's a good one.  I anticipate greatness.

My Response to the Cosmo article "I'm Fighting BYU's Ban on Sex"

The September issue of Cosmopolitan magazine will feature an article titled, “I’m Fighting BYU’s Ban on Sex”, an article that already appears online on their website.  The article is authored by a BYU student, who states that she wants “to start a discussion about changing an honor code that hurts women”. 

I am a big fan of having discussions about important social issues, especially women’s issues.  So I want to open up some discussion on this blog.  However, I’ll be upfront about my position: I do not consider the honor code to be a weapon against women.  I agreed with the author on a few points, but much of my contribution to the discussion will be to present dissenting perspectives.  I also hope that you readers will join in the discussion by sharing your perspectives and experiences in the comment section. 

To begin, I want to highlight a few issues that the article brings up that I agree with and feel are important and deserving of attention.  I want to make both of these points the subject of their own individual blog posts in the near future, and for that reason I won’t spend time addressing them today.  But I do want to acknowledge them:

-The use of shaming analogies (i.e. chewed gum) is an unhealthy and harmful method of sexuality education that needs to be abandoned

-A victim of sexual assault is NOT at fault for what happened and is not deserving of blame, judgment, or punishment

Okay, now I’m going to address some points that were made in the article in which the author and I had differing perspectives.

Why Are We Asked to Save Sex for Marriage?

The author of the article started by sharing a teaching that I anticipate is familiar to all Latter-day Saints: “I was told to save sex for marriage”.  Then, in the next sentence she referenced an analogy her teachers used in teaching this concept: The dreaded chewing gum analogy.  For those of you who are unfamiliar (and I really hope that is most of you), it likens someone who has broken the law of chastity to chewed gum.  In insinuates that such a person is no longer desirable and that they can’t return to the state they were in previously.  Gah.   Please.  Never use that analogy. 

The way the first paragraph of the article is written makes me wonder if that BYU student assumes that abstinence is just about remaining socially desirable (not turning into chewed gum or having to wear a scarlet letter).  If your rationale to wait until marriage for sex is so that you are a fresh piece of gum rather than a gross chewed one, then that is a problem.  It communicates a big misunderstanding of the “why” of the commandment that we remain chaste, and it shows that compliance to the commandment is motivated by fear rather than by a desire to act in accordance with truth.  That can lead to all sorts of misconceptions, to a fear of sexuality, and to shame even when sex happens within the marriage relationships.  Clearly, this is problematic.

So let’s review a few truths about sex.  

#1. Sex is good.  President Kimball taught that, in the right context, “The intimacy of sexual relations is right and divinely approved.” God created our bodies to be able to have and enjoy sex.    

#2. Sex is sacred.  Sex holds the potential for creation of life.  That is a divine power.  It also holds the potential to help two to become one and to be intimately united as husband and wife.  It is a context that allows genuine vulnerability and thus opportunities for real intimacy and connection.

#3. Sex is intended to be used within the context of marriage.  Prophets and apostles have declared, “…The sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife”.

So, yes, sex is to be reserved for marriage.  BUT…we aren’t supposed to be abstinent before marriage to avoid being seen negatively.  We aren’t supposed to be abstinent before marriage in order to avoid STIs.  And we aren’t abstinent before marriage to avoid getting pregnant out of wedlock.  We ARE asked and commanded by a loving Father to be chaste before marriage because sex is wonderful and holy and is created to be used within a marital relationship for divine purposes. 

So, keep that in mind.  And as you think back to the title of the Cosmo article, “I’m Fighting BYU’s Ban on Sex”, realize that it isn’t BYU’s ban.  Think of 1 Nephi 3:5.

“…Thy brothers murmur, saying it is a hard thing which I have required of them; but behold I have not required it of them, but it is a commandment of the Lord”.

Abstinence before marriage and fidelity within marriage is the Lord’s standard for all His children, regardless of their gender or the school they attend.  It isn’t an institution trying to the restrict freedom of women, it is a commandment of God instituted to allow the greatest freedom and happiness for both His sons and daughters.

Let’s look at a few more things in the article.

Is BYU Slut-Shaming?

The author mentions her involvement with a group that talked about “how the Church doesn’t see women as equal to men and how BYU is slut-shaming”.   For the sake of time, I am going to forgo addressing the equality issue today, but will address the slut-shaming accusation.  But first, a disclaimer:

I am not sure if the article's references to “BYU” and “the Church” is in reference to majority perspectives, the perspectives of administrators, or simply some individuals she has encountered.  And I am not in a position to speak for either school or church leadership or the majority of individuals in either body.  But I do wish to raise my own voice in defense of what I believe and what I have experienced when I was a BYU student and presently as a faithful member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

I have never experienced “BYU”--either its policies or the majority of its students--as being “slut-shaming”.  I myself, as a BYU alumni, do not believe in shaming anyone.  Shaming others is inconsistent with the gospel of Jesus Christ.  Christ’s interaction with the woman taken in adultery was compassionate and private.   I would hope that all BYU students, faculty, administrators and staff would seek to follow that example.  And, in my optimism, I assume that most do.

Further, I do not believe in using the word “slut” as it is disrespectful to women and is inherently shaming.  I do not recall ever hearing the word used during my seven years at BYU, and hope the word and the attitude associated with it are not common to campus. 

If I were to be aware that an individual’s choices and actions were inconsistent with the honor code and the law of chastity (which is what I assume the author is referencing when using the term “slut”), I would recognize that it would not be my place to judge.

I agree that the honor code does not embrace, promote or condone living contrary to the law of chastity, but that does not constitute “slut-shaming”.

Does the Honor Code Force Us to Wear Knee-Length Clothing?

The article then makes mention of the dress and grooming standards in the honor code, indicating that the honor code “forces” women to wear clothes to the knee, “supposedly to help men control their thoughts”.  I reviewed the honor code to understand where this interpretation may have come from.  But what I found was inconsistent with the author's conclusions.  The “why” of the dress standards are more individual that relational (i.e. for the sake of the individual rather than for the sake of someone else’s thoughts).  The honor code reads, “Modesty and cleanliness are important values that reflect personal dignity and integrity, through which students, staff, and faculty represent the principles and standards of the Church.”  There is NO clause that says, “…and so that male students will more easily avoid lustful thoughts”.  It’s not there.  Trust me.  I checked.

Of course feeling coerced would naturally lead to resistance.  However, we are not “forced” to dress a certain way.  Students at BYU voluntarily agree to abide by honor code standards.  And of course it would be upsetting to feel that standards set for women were for the benefit of men.  But these standards are not for the benefit of others.  They are a reflection of individual dignity and integrity.            

Are Non-Virgins Treated as Inferiors?

I want to address just one more statement found in the Cosmo article.  The author wrote, “Women at BYU who aren’t virgins are treated as inferiors and that’s not fair”. 

I’m going to be painfully honest here. I wouldn’t be surprised if there were many who would see and treat women who they knew were not virgins differently.  But I doubt it is for the reason that that author believes.  At least I hope it isn’t.

Here’s where I’m coming from.  As a BYU student, I had a few roommates who I knew were not keeping the law of chastity, and by extension the honor code.  And it did impact how I saw them.  But it was never about “virginity”.  My judgmental-ness wasn’t about sex.  It was about what commitments and covenants and sacred things meant to them.  Because they mean everything to me. 

When I had roommates who didn’t live consistent with the honor code and the law of chastity, I distanced myself from them.  I wanted my closest friends to be people who valued gospel standards as much as I did.  I didn’t shame them or treat them as of less worth.  But I did see and treat them differently.  I didn’t invest as much in those relationships.  And I made some assumptions about them.  I didn’t consider them to be as trustworthy because I observed their lack of commitment to Honor Code, which is something that I loved and took seriously.  I didn’t respect them as much because of their choices and actions.  Did I think of them as inferior?  Maybe on some level I did think that they were morally inferior.  And that was wrong of me.

Would You Date Someone Who Wasn’t a Virgin?

I want to look at this idea of seeing non-virgins as inferior in the context of serious dating relationships now.  And rather than considering all non-virgins, I want to refer particularly to those who have broken the law of chastity after having first had a knowledge of that law.  

And, of course, as a female, I don’t know how guys feel about girls who are not virgins.  But I’ll be honest about how I’d feel about being in a relationship with a guy who had previously transgressed the law of chastity. 

If I were to learn that a guy that I was seriously dating had not lived the law of chastity previously, then that would be a big yellow flag for me.  And when I was an undergraduate student, it probably would have been a big, flashing red flag. 

If I were to learn that at this point in my personal development (I like to think that I’m a little bit more mature at 30 than I was at 20) that someone that I was dating seriously had previously engaged in sexual acts with someone else outside of marriage, with a knowledge that it was contrary to God’s laws, I would want to have a hard conversation with them.  Because I would wonder about his commitment to his covenants.  And I would want to know his attitudes toward chastity.  I would question if he would be trustworthy to keep the law of chastity within our relationship.  I would question his level of commitment to keeping the commandments.  We’d need to have that discussion because those things matter to me.  A lot. 

However, as I mentioned, it would be a yellow light situation.  It wouldn’t necessarily be a deal-breaker.  If he could engage in that discussion and I could see that we shared a love of God, a commitment to each other and the relationship, and a valuing of covenants, then I would proceed in the relationship.  I do believe that people are not defined by what they have done in the past. 

BUT when I was a young, idealistic, somewhat ignorant and insensitive undergraduate, it might have been different.  Upon learning of a history of breaking the law of chastity, I would likely have made assumptions about him, judged him, and instead of maturely talking about it, I would have been too nervous, insecure or awkward to discuss it.  And I would have likely just ended things. 

And, in all reality, that isn’t fair.  My ignorance and fear would have caused me to act immaturely and insensitively.  And it would not have been fair to who that person may have become.   It wouldn’t have shown the respect merited to someone who exercised the courage to disclose that information.  And it may have sent the message that I thought that he was unclean or inferior.  And that would be wrong of me.  Chances are, I wasn't the only BYU undergrad with the potential to judge others unfairly.  Hopefully I’m not the last to learn to see people as people and not as their past mistakes.

Conclusion

There is a lot more that I could have written, but this is already a ridiculously long blog post.  So I’m going to wrap up.

I do not doubt that there are individuals on campus who are overtly disrespectful and shaming.  And I am confident that others are innocently ignorant and end up inflicting a great deal of hurt.  There is a need for discussion on several issues in order to invite more people to remember both the humanity and the divinity of all people, regardless of the choices they make.  But still, even with all the weakness in the thousands of BYU co-eds walking around campus, I do not believe that BYU, the Church, or the Honor Code is as shaming and oppressive as that article has made it out to be.

I love BYU.  It provided me a wonderful education, incredible friends, and it deepened my discipleship.  The Church has helped me to know the Savior, learn the Gospel, and have access to covenants that protect me, give me strength, and provide me perspective in life.  And I also love the Honor Code.  I chose to continuing follow those same standards while attending a graduate program in Georgia, and I continue to adopt those guidelines now because they help me to keep sacred my covenants.

I hope that those of you who read the Cosmo article found its claims as surprising and shortsighted as I did.  But I can’t help but believe that to its author, these were real concerns based on experiences she has had.  Which means that somewhere there is a need for change.  I don’t think that place is the Honor Code, and I certainly don’t think that the law of chastity needs to be changed.  I do, however, believe that there are people who need to change.  And the way I see it, the kind of change that is needed will grow out of a correct understanding of the principles and doctrines of the Gospel.


*I read this blogpost which indicated that the BYU student attributed to writing the original article didn't write the article, but rather it was based on a phone interview with her.  Apparently several things she said were taken out of context and don't fully represent her perspectives.  Accordingly, I removed her name from my post in an attempt to not misrepresent her further.  Still, my content remains the same since it is written in reaction to what potentially millions of people are reading in the Cosmopolitan article.