Polygamy Essays and Prophetic Revelation

So the new Polygamy Essays went live this morning at LDS.org here, here, and here.
 At first I only read the first one, which seemed general and ambiguous, but after I read the other two it seems a little ground shaking.  I'm in a facebook group that was discussing it quite lively, mostly over whether it's a fair historical representation.  I have my own quibbles about a few lines and presentations (hello coercion of 14 year olds . . . but that's for later) but I started a new thread with this:

So with the whole polygamy essay going live today..... I'm feeling in the minority -- anyone else out there believe our prophets can be a hot mess and still be instruments in God's hands, they can still be divinely inspired -- and even be dead wrong elsewhere? Joseph is still the prophet that Restored the Gospel. My personal opinion is that polygamy and racial bans aren't from God -- but that doesn't invalidate that was who God chose to do that work that needed to be done.

 and

I told my brother the fact that we can have a prophet that incorrectly restricts priesthood on race actually strengthens my testimony: that even a racist prophet can't stop the work of the Lord from progressing. It may slow it down, but God's still in charge.

 One of my friends commented about where we are getting the idea that our prophets are not a hot mess, that the OT is really consistent on that point.  And I'm still involved in that discussion hours later.  It's an interesting conversation of people wanting to hold our leaders to a higher standard, and perhaps the inevitable disappointment that will accompany when truth is revealed (hello, essays).  Even one of my tweets from general conference highlighted the tension between counsel we receive for personal revelation and following blindly that we were subject to in just one General Conference Session.  This challenge we have of sorting out the way forward is not unique to our generation -- every dispensation has had prophets that were imperfect and complex and each group of people had to deal with this tension.

A friend posted a link to Julie Smith's essay  at Times and Seasons that was posted during this online conversation I was having, and it's brilliant.  After highlighting about a dozen ambiguous passages from the essays about how our church leaders (prophets) were walking blind trying to figure the whole thing out . . . . she concludes:

What I see here is–intentional or not–the articulation of a theology of prophetic revelation that runs precisely opposite to the way that many Mormons (mis)read Amos to say that God will do nothing without first revealing his secrets to the prophets (Amos 3:7) and that whether by God’s voice or the voice of church leaders, it is precisely identical (D & C 1:38). Rather, this suggests that God reveals things line by line (a scripture frequently quoted in these essays), does not reveal all details at once, and leaves some matters to be worked out without divine mandate.

I think the odd confluence of 1950s American corporate culture, historical amnesia, and rapid world-wide growth led Mormonism to advance the idea that a CEO-like prophet got regular memos from God, bullet-pointed with precise operating instructions designed to maximize return for the next quarter. Diligent work by historians, now disseminated instantly and internationally, shows that that vision isn’t quite precise. It is understandable that some will mourn that vision–I know I’d feel much safer led by that bespoke-suited CEO, divine memo in hand, than by some guy with a leather belt eating locusts in the wilderness. And yet, we should thank those historians (some of whom sacrificed their careers, if not their very membership in the Church, in order to publish things very similar to what is hosted on the Church’s own website today) for helping us overcome the cultural conditioning that misled us regarding what prophets are and what they do. The glass through which we see today is a little less dark because of their work, not just on historical matters related to polygamy but also regarding what we should–and should not–expect from prophets.

 Beautiful.

for further historical readings on polygamy, Dialogue has a great topic page

I'm tired, too

I feel like I'm just tired. I'm a little battered and bruised. No matter how much time I take off to recuperate from being on the front lines in mormon feminism (in my own way), I get bruised by misogynistic, sexist attitudes in american culture (FYI #Condi4Commish).  So I come back to the mormon community, and no matter how much we try to share that we think modesty will sink deep into our daughters' hearts if we teach the doctrine instead of application via hemlines; we still get that blasted harmful, inaccurate Jessica Rey video repeated in our newsfeeds and hundreds of white shirted young men telling us they NEED our modesty or trendy-wannabe-viral bloggers begging us to consider their husbands! The general response for my plea for doctrine based teachings is, "I can't believe those feminists don't believe in modesty!"

No matter how much I share about the things I have questions about, or that I would like you to try to walk in our pink moccasins (this even applies to women who disagree with my questions, read that plz); nothing ever changes.  Well one thing has changed. We're getting more pep talks! ZD blog has a great post that went up this week, Tired of Pep Talks, Zelophehad's Daughters:

For the last 5 years or so, I think we have seen a definite uptick in the number of pep talks us LDS women have been getting. We’ve been told how incredible (!) we are. How needed we are. How moral we are. How important we are. And it seems to me we can’t go even one General Conference (not to mention a single Sunday) without being told how equal we are 10 times. It is clearly a priority that we be buttered up.

Hoo-rah, sis-boom-bah, goooooo WOMEN! (My mom was a Rigby Trojan Pep Team Girl, in case you're wondering where my mad cheer skilz come from) You know I do think this church values women. It cherishes them. Holds them near and dear.  But there is only so long I can listen to people talking AT me telling me how incredible I am in one sentence and in the next to make sure I don't talk too much in meetings.  Part of the reason I can't just let this slide as the jovial harmless joke of an octogenarian is the paragraph he wrote in last month's ensign:

So Elder Ballard has shown a pattern of consistently saying: women speak up, we need your voice, but ONLY in an advisory capacity.  We are decision makers and we will decide if and when to listen and encourage your participation when we choose to and then we make the decisions.  That was what his joke was about. If men and women really ARE different, our thoughts and experiences and perceptions are different and should be considered as equally as the next.  (remember, I am not an advocate for female ordination. this issue could be remedied in a number of ways).  Men and Women are different.  And we can't have one in an appendage/advisory role without one gender's perception carrying more weight.

So there are women out there like me saying, "um I love this restaurant but I think there's a fly in my soup!"  And the response we get is, "God's purpose is for you to have that fly in your soup.  And oh, by the way women are the best customers at this establishment and we couldn't exist without you!  You play a special equal role in the running of this restaurant, and you are INCREDIBLE!"

Back to the ZD blog:

What I personally don’t think the church office building is aware of is how ineffective their pep talks are to the people they are trying to pep talk– the people who see problems and inequalities. They have a very effective echo chamber up there. Consider the time the church PR counseled with the women behind Mormon Women Stand to “discuss” women’s issues. I picture the PR team asking in concerned voices “Does the new book about women and the priesthood by Sheri Dew alleviate your concerns?! What about our talks in General Conference? Did they make you feel equal?!” Of course those women said yes, they were fine and felt totally equal and we can prove it by putting quotes about womanhood on pastel chevron backgrounds. They are a group that already agreed 100% with the status quo. They didn’t represent those that leave. 

So here’s my point: the clip of Elder Ballard is an absolutely perfect example of the problem. And I hope that church leadership watches it a lot and realizes that all the pep talks have got to stop as long as the follow up message to them is going to be *but not THAT equal!

Amen, amen, and amen.

Faith, Hope, and Love

There have always been disputations about doctrine amongst believers, even back to the New Testament.  That's okay. But let's not elevate ourselves above each other -- what can we learn from this?  How can we stretch and grow?

FAITH
I do know I feel prompted to share and speak.  I have faith that there is a reason I'm being prompted to share (regardless of the outcome).  So what if changes I want to see never happen in this life?  Well, I know God loves me and I also know that God is not a jerk.  I have faith that all will be right in the end.  I have faith in the atonement, to heal all hurt and pain.  I have faith that He knows more than I do.  I know that I don't know everything, I am human.  We all are.   I know that there is no human alive that can comprehend the works and power of knowledge of God.  We earnestly make a lifelong effort to do so, and we are commanded to try to pattern our lives after our Savior.

HOPE
Sure I want to see incremental changes.  I am seriously stoked to receive more light and knowledge regarding women's priestesshood and Heavenly Mother and all that jazz, whenever it comes.   I know that we have very little knowledge about how things work in the next life (other than spread the Gospel, we do have that scripture).  I do know I will be happy, and I need to trust God.  I need to follow His plan for me.  I need to respond to promptings of the Spirit.   And other people need to respond to their promptings, and I have no idea what theirs look like.

I need to bring others to Christ.  Because I hope that's what I'm doing here.  Making a place that is safe to have questions, and leave it in the Lord's hands.  To trust Him.  I hope that's what I'm communicating.  And also to acknowledge that it is HARD.   Hard to live in this culture that tells you not to question, to be silent, to go away.   And also to show: have hope!  Change is trickling down, even if it took years to decide to put up a portrait of women, they did it!  Change is slow, especially in our organization.  So cling to your hope - and if you can't find a space for yourself, make one.  You belong here.

LOVE
It is okay to question, to want things to change, and usually we are brought to these views by something that hurt - that changed our minds and our hearts.  God has a role in these things.  We can feel our sadness and hurt, we can mourn that what we have now is not more - but we must bury our anger and bitterness at that funeral.  We can feel those feelings - but we must let them go.  Don't lose your passion and don't be silenced, but anger and hurt are never good motivations.  Love is.  In all things act in love, and find God's love in your life. 

I know that everyday I find happiness.  I find God's Love for me.  I find it in my expanding group of friends (yes this introvert is making friends).  I find it in tender mercies.  I find it in the budding flowers and the sunshine and the cuddles of my daughter and holding my friends' babies and warm socks.  I find happiness in my green apple carrot juice and my husband's five o'clock shadow and his kisses when he gets home from work.  I feel happy when I study my scriptures, I even feel happy struggling with messy topics and questions.  I feel happiness when I meet a friend online who has questions like mine, and we can strengthen each other and lift each other. 

And we all have a shared goal:  Zion.   We can't have Zion without each other, and we have got to give each other room to exercise our Agency, and work out our salvation before the Lord.  I know how to help people do this:  love them.  Commandment 1:  Love God.  Commandment 2: Love others.....not just those who are easy to love.  Those that are HARD to love. I need to soften my heart to those whom I find hard to love.  This is my challenge. 

 FairMormon, These Are Our Sisters

President Uchtdorf explains, “[W]hen it comes to our own prejudices and grievances, we too often justify our anger as righteous and our judgment as reliable and exclusively appropriate. Though we cannot look into another’s heart, we assume that we know a bad motive or even a bad person when we see one. We make exceptions when it comes to our own bitterness because we feel that, in our case, we have all the information we need to hold someone else in contempt.” The Merciful Shall Obtain Mercy

I think we shouldn't apply this quote to others but to ourselves, I cannot see another person's heart when they say things online to me or stand in line at temple square - I need to let go of anger and bitterness towards others for their actions and words.

Church leadership has provided a number of examples of Christlike approaches, particularly that of Ruth M. Todd (Church Public Affairs) in her interaction with OW last October as they attempted to gain admission to the Priesthood session of General Conference.8  First, Sister Todd was clear in stating the Church’s position. She said, “This meeting is all about strengthening the men of our church, so this is no surprise to you, that we won’t be able to offer you a ticket or a place to see it…Millions of women in this church do not share the views of this small group that has come and organized this
protest today…And some of the members feel this is very divisive as well.”  Sister Todd then reached out with charity, saying, “Even so, these are our sisters, and we want them in our church. And we hope they find the peace and joy we all seek in the gospel of Jesus Christ.” She spoke directly with everyone she could, going down the line and taking them by the hand. She engaged them as individuals rather than as opponents or outsiders with the assurance, “I am so happy to know you…”

Kylee Shields, sister to an Ordain Women member; I Am My Sister's Keeper

I understand having a difference of opinion (I have 5 fiercely opinionated sisters). I understand feeling content as a Mormon woman and not understanding why other Mormon women aren't. I understand being uncomfortable with what the Mormon Feminist women are feeling, doing, talking about, organizing, etc. What I don't understand is the hate.  I am my sister's keeper. It is my responsibility to hold her heart and be aware of her concerns. I may not understand why she decided to wear pants to church or why she wants to go to the Priesthood session, but I can certainly learn about her cause and concerns before I demonize her.

OW & Gender, Part 2: Why I Disagree With Ordain Women

ORDAIN WOMEN

First of all, if you haven't yet, please go read Ordain Women's FAQ page and a handful of their profiles.  Now, whether you agree with these men and women or not, please acknowledge their bravery and courage for taking the risk of putting a profile up.  The consequences these faithful members face is real in their lives.....wowza, right?  Looking at those profiles, I am filled with a confirmation that these are my brothers and sisters sitting next to me in the pews and holding callings with me and leading and loving my children in their callings, etc.  I don't want them to leave!!

One of the reasons I am not an OW member is because I look around and see easy changes that could be made in the church organization via policy changes, I enumerated on some in my first blog post:  equal funding and structure of boys/girls programs, an improved conversation regarding modesty and sexuality in the Church, female representation on decision-making boards in the Church, eliminate gender restrictions on callings that have nothing to do with priesthood rituals: stake auditor, Sunday School presidency, etc.  These are specific issues that are important to me based on my life experiences as a Relief Society and Primary President and as an accountant.  Other women have other issues that are important to them.  To me these things seem like obvious, low-hanging fruit that may take years to change and have NOTHING to do with priesthood ordination, but if no one says anything about them, nothing will continue to be done.

For example, in Elizabeth Smart's advocacy for human trafficking and sexual abuse, "Smart said she "felt so dirty and so filthy" after she was raped by her captor, and she understands why someone wouldn't run because of that alone.  I thought, 'Oh, my gosh, I'm that chewed up piece of gum, nobody re-chews a piece of gum, you throw it away.' And that's how easy it is to feel like you know longer have worth, you know longer have value."  She was referring to the abstinence only object lessons she received in the church (no one wants a licked cupcake, chewed up piece of gum, manhandled flower bud, or any other really poor, awful, objectifying things that equate a woman's value with her virginity).  Many people criticized her for publicly criticizing lessons she received in Church about her abstinence-only education that caused her harm.  But listen, if no one ever stands up and publicly talks about how "chewed up piece of gum" is a bad, harmful way to teach chastity -- we are still going to get people teaching those lessons. 

How Ordain Women sees things is this:  for decades Mormon feminists have been asking for the low-hanging fruit.  And they've been punished and excommunicated and marginalized for publicly advocating for things like: women praying in general conference.  So Mormon feminists can continue to just talk amongst each other -- but nothing will ever change until women are actually in a position to enact the changes.  They also reason that the MoFem community is alive and well on the internets, but if all we do is just talk on the internets nothing will happen - the Church has shown that they can easily ignore FeministMormonHousewives.org and let them have a community where the complain and explain and listen to others mansplain (ha!) and not really acknowledge their existence.  But the internet created tools of advocacy too, in the case of petitioning the Church for an official policy on menstruating women and Baptisms for the Dead (policies were all over the place and haphazardly enforced to the detriment of many women) or to the action of "Let Women Pray."  (How Social Media Revitalized and Enlarged a Movement, www.academia.edu).  Because of the historical precedent established between Mormon feminists and the church organization, Ordain Women strongly believes ordination is the only answer to solving many issues.  What they see is the Church becoming more like Zion.  They sincerely have this belief that it is the only way to move forward, I do not agree with them.  The public affairs letter referred to their end goal as non-negotiable, I think the Church would be surprised how many OW would go along with an alternate solution revealed from God.  And I disagree with the Public Affairs letter that since they have a certain opinion on the way forward, that their voice is damaging to the discussion (and shouldn't be listened to).  ALL voices should be a part of the discussion, yes even these OW ladies. 

TONE AND ACTION

Kate Kelly is the founder of Ordain Women, and I have found her to be a little rough around the edges.  I have seen her easily dismiss opposing opinions and not conduct herself in a . . . well, a way that we teach our women they should act, she's a bit brassy :-)   If I think about it I'm not surprised, a woman with enough chutzpah to start this thing has got to be filled with so much passion and determination and fearlessness that she's probably the only type of woman who could have done such a thing.  Kelly is a human rights lawyer, and she observed that when working towards rights that in Africa, action received a response.  When women had a peaceful protest and quietly asked for a right which they were due -- they ended up being handcuffed and dragged away.  But the thing that began changing minds is that the men having to drag these women away were now their friends, neighbors, and family members looking them in the eyes and seeing their pain: and they could no longer ignore those feelings, they had to be addressed.  So Kate comes from a political activist background which I believe frames what she does and the words she uses (ie Equality, more on that later).

There are many members of the Church who support women's ordination (many, many of them male) who are not members of OW.  They don't agree with how she does things either or how she responds to their suggestions or correction or criticism.   Most people who are in this camp also disagree with the actions the group takes.  For example, the peaceful "action" being held during Priesthood Meeting is a point of a lot disagreement.  I do not believe it is the best foot forward, but I can empathize with them and their pain -- and I do see OW as a group that needs to be included in conversations about women's issues.

On Being Divisive and Becoming One

I've mentioned before that one of my passions is for unity in the Church.  I've posted that's one of the reasons I have real concerns about Ordain Women, is that it seems a breeding ground for contention. I'm going to come out and change my stance.  Because in the last six months I've studied so intently in and out of the temple and had such wonderful spiritual experiences, especially with my husband in the celestial room, that were prompted because of Ordain Women and the questions and discussion they are raising.  I no longer begrudge their existence.  I do think it makes my job harder, as a moderate mormon feminist, advocating for policy changes instead of ordaining women.  But I think they need to be there, even if I don't agree with their actions or their tone. 

And it starts me thinking about our commandment to become one, as the Body of Christ.  I cited that in my newspaper article in the Standard Journal.  Unity does not equal uniformity.  How can we become Zion?  By everyone exercising their free agency in only the way that makes you comfortable?  Is it possible that by having diverse opinions and thoughts and perspectives on how we are to build Zion, that it strengthens the church.  Are people who are different only welcomed in our culture and in our Church, so long as eventually they step in line and act and think and dress like the majority?Elder Uchtdorf says, "Brothers and sisters, dear friends, we need your unique talents and perspectives. The diversity of persons and peoples all around the globe is a strength of this Church." 

As a Mormon Feminist, I often end up sharing my opinions that may be different than others'.   I often am told that I shouldn't care about the things I care about, that I'm looking beyond the mark, that I'm being ungrateful, that I don't value what I've been given, or that I should just focus on loving and serving others (as if my having a different opinion on Mormon culture or church policy makes it so I'm not loving and serving others).  I've also been told I should just keep my questions, experiences, and opinions private - that putting them in public is dangerous and wrong, mostly because it shows that a member of the church doesn't agree with how some things are being done.  That I'm disagreeing.  And we shouldn't disagree in public. 

Rachel Held Evans, an Evangelical Feminist, does the same thing in a much more widespread manner than myself, she has her own post up about how she is accused of being divisive all the time, below I've quoted my favorite part of her response.  Please go read it in its entirety at the link above:

But when I began writing about gender equality in evangelicalism, it became apparent to me that no matter how careful my tone, no matter how reasoned my arguments, no matter how gentle my critique, my work would inevitably be characterized as “divisive.”

“How dare you challenge a man of God?”

“The world can’t see us disagreeing like this; it hurts our witness.”

“We should be talking about more important matters.”

“Let’s just focus on what we agree on and let these minor issues go.”

“Can’t this be settled privately and not publicly?”

"You need to calm down and stop being so emotional."

“Stop being so divisive. Jesus wants us to be unified.”

One of the easiest ways to discredit another Christian is to label their questions, concerns, or calls for justice as too "divisive."  I don’t like being divisive. Believe me. But I don’t like being silenced either.  There has to be a way to discuss controversial, difficult topics—even on social media—without resorting to outright hostility on the one hand or sanctimonious silencing on the other.  And I wonder if it begins with acknowledging that friction doesn't mean division.   We Christians suffer under this rather fanciful notion that no one in the early church ever argued about anything, that the first disciples of Jesus sat around singing hymns and munching on communion bread, nodding along in perfect agreement about how to apply the teachings of Jesus to their lives.  But the epistles would suggest otherwise. 
The epistles would suggest that when you throw together a group of people from vastly different ethnic, religious, socio-economic, and religious backgrounds there is going to be some serious friction. Within the early church raged debates over everything from the application of the Mosaic law, to whether Christians should eat food offered to idols, to how to handle the influx of widows in the church, to disagreements around circumcision, religious festivals, finances, missions, and theology.

So when Paul urged the Ephesian church to “make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace,” he followed this with an acknowledgement of the Church’s diversity, in which there are “apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers…so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.”

This Body is still growing, so there will be growing pains. 

But if we love one another through these growing pains, “then we will no longer be infants…instead, speaking the truth in love, we will grow to become in every respect the mature body of him who is the head, that is, Christ.  From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work.”

I suspect Paul combined this call for the Body’s unity with an acknowledgement of the Body’s diversity because he knew that unity isn’t the same as uniformity.
We’re not called to be alike; we’re called to love.
We’re not called to agree; we’re called to love.
We’re not even called to get along all the time; we’re called to love each other as brothers and sisters, as people united in one baptism, one communion, one adoption.
Maybe we need these differences to be animated, to be alive, to mature. Maybe friction isn’t a sign of decay, but of growth.
The world is certainly watching. But this doesn't mean we hide our dirty laundry, slap on mechanical smiles, and gloss over all the injustices and abuses, conflicts and disagreements, diversity and denominationalism present within the Church;  it means we expose them. It means we talk about them boldly and with integrity, with passion and with love. I suspect that talking about our differences is better for our witness than suppressing them, and I'm sure that exposing corruption and abuse is better for our witness than hiding them.
And when it comes to injustice, a far more important question to me than "What will the world think if they see us disagreeing?" is "What will the world think if they don't?"

I love that last line.  What will the world think of us if we are always of one opinion, thought, perspective, and dress?  It may not reflect our doctrine that free will is our most important gift that we treasure above all else.  If we create circumstances where there is only one way to be a good mormon, to use your free will in only one acceptable way, I believe that is when we may be looking beyond the mark.  This is the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  All are loved and welcomed at the table. 

What is Feminism? Part 2: Modern US & Global Feminism

Modern American Feminism
Feminism doesn't mean women and men are the same and have to be treated exactly the same, it does mean they shouldn't be treated less just because they are female.  Women don't have to be treated equally - but they should be treated equitably.  Studies have proven that men and women are different, but there are more variances within a gender than there is variance between the two genders.  

The image below shows the suggested results in Google when I type "women should" or "women shouldn't".  Google suggestions are items that are frequently searched for. 

Which is why today's feminism is founded on choice, because there is more than one way to be a good woman.  There shouldn't be a set standard of what a woman looks like or does.  A woman can choose her path in life, and there shouldn't be anyone telling her she can't do something. 

Women are able to make their own choices.  She can choose to work or she can choose to stay at home.  She can choose to be an engineer or she can choose to be a stripper.  She can choose to be a mother or to not have children.  She can choose to dress in all skirts and makeup or she can choose to dress in pants and short hair.  She can like gossip mags or she can like comic books.  She can choose to use contraception or not, she can choose abortion or not***.  Where do men fit in?  Wherever they want, the beauty is that feminism seeks to empower expanding choices for men and women, as an acknowledgement that some men are better nurturers than women, because we are individuals first.  He can to choose to be stay-at-home dads or to work.  He can choose to be school teachers or nurses or welders.  He should have more support in custody cases where fathers rarely win.

But, but -- women are choosing bad things, you say?  Like being a stripper or working or not having children?  Or by choosing no-fault divorce just because you fell out of love (when no other abuse is present)?  Sure, by gaining the freedom for women to make choices, some of them will make poor choices.  Some of those poor choices harm families.  But does that mean we should restrict and take their choices away from them?  Go back to the days when women suffering in abuse couldn't escape?  That they weren't considered for employment positions by being female?   I don't think so.  I also don't think that by making choices outside of cultural expectations (short hair, no makeup, pants, working PHd in bio-nuclear engineering) that it precludes me from raising a family in love.  Being a good woman has everything to do with your character and who you are on the inside. 

***p.s. I'm going to save this topic for another post (abortion)


Modern Global Feminism
Has there been and does there continue to exist a systematic oppression of women, a restriction of their choices in life, and ability to empower themselves to succeed?  You know that women still can't drive a car in many countries because it would require them to uncover their face and leave their homes?  Um, have you seen Half the Sky?  Two journalists whose mission is to spread the word about the worldwide, under-reported oppression of women.  You don't have to be feminist to care about the plight and suffering of fellow humans (all statistics taken from their website):

1. Economic Empowerment: Women comprise 70 percent of the world’s poorest people and own only 1 percent of the titled land, according to a U.N. report. They suffer not only from unequal access to education and training, but also from discrimination by their employers. For every dollar a woman earns, she invests 80 cents in her family. Men, on the other hand, invest around 30 cents and are more likely to squander money on alcohol and other vices.
2.  Education:  Today more than 75 million primary school-age children are not in school. More than half of these children are girls and 75 percent of them live in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Of all the primary-school age girls globally, 20 percent are not in school, compared to 16 percent of boys in this age group. That’s 1-in-5 eligible girls worldwide who aren’t going to primary school.
3. Forced Prostitution:  Economic necessity, a lack of employment options, drug addiction or coercion by family, pimps or traffickers are all factors that can force women into sexual slavery. Paradoxically, it’s the countries with the most straitlaced and sexually conservative societies, such as India, Pakistan and Iran, that have disproportionately large numbers of forced prostitutes. Since having sex with girlfriends may not be an option for most men in these cultures, prostitutes have become an acceptable solution.
4. Gender Based Violence:  A leading expert on safety and violence, Gavin de Becker, says, "Men's number one fear is that a woman will reject them.  Women's number one fear is that a man will kill them." In fact, women aged 15 through 45 are more likely to be maimed or die from male violence than from cancer, malaria, traffic accidents and war combined. This violence can take many different forms, and is constantly mutating into new forms, be it acid attacks, bride burnings, rape or domestic violence. Surveys suggest that about one-third of all women globally face beatings in the home. Another major study found that in most countries between 30 and 60 percent of women had experienced physical or sexual violence by a husband or a boyfriend. The figures for female murder by male partners are also astounding: Up to 70 percent of female murder victims are killed by their male partners, according to the World Health Organization. 
5. Maternal Mortality. Around 1,000 women die from pregnancy- or childbirth-related complications globally every day, according to the World Health Organization. That’s one every 90 seconds. Some 99 percent of maternal deaths occur in poor countries, particularly in Africa and Asia.  A majority of these causes are easily preventable with access to basic health care.
6. Sex Trafficking.  Far more women and girls are shipped into brothels annually now, in the early 21st century, than African slaves were shipped into slave plantations each year in the 18th century.  And the problem of sex slavery is getting worse.  Trafficking for sexual exploitation is one of the fastest-growing organized crimes, generating $27.8 billion each year. The collapse of communism in Eastern Europe and Indochina, which opened up markets for commercial sex, and globalization have added to the problem. So has the fear of AIDS, leading some customers to prefer younger girls, whom they think are less likely to be infected. Some men target virgins, believing the girls can cure AIDS.

There are many different kinds of feminists.  Yes some are more radical and militant than others - but that doesn't mean we limit the definition of the term to loud outliers and extremists.  Please, before judging a feminist, try finding out what issues they care about and are passionate about.  It may surprise you that one-on-one, you have more in common with a feminist than you think you do.

Eve and her Honorable Disobedience

The Basics
The Mormon understanding of Eve is one of the reasons our doctrine is inherently feminist.  Other religions have a different understanding of the Fall of Man and Original Sin.  We do not believe she sinned or was cursed, but was blessed for her wisdom and courage!

In Mormon doctrine in premortal life our Father and Mother in Heaven created a plan for us to progress on a path back to God.  By its nature it requires the Three Pillars of God's Plan: The Creation, The Fall, and The Atonement.  It took seven "days" (periods of indeterminate time, since earthly time is not measured to God) for the creation to be completed.  At that time Adam and Eve were living in the garden of Eden.  Our belief is that in the Garden of Eden Adam and Eve had physical lives but unable to have children or be subject to mortal death.
  
2 Nephi 2:22 And now, behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the garden of Eden. And all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end.   23 And they would have had no children; wherefore they would have remained in a state of innocence, having no joy, for they knew no misery; doing no good, for they knew no sin.
 
So for God's plan to progress, Adam and Eve must leave the Garden of Eden.  Since the greatest gift we have been given is freedom to choose, they had to leave the Garden by choice.  God created a choice that had opposition - an opportunity for them to choose to fall.   And thus the commandment not to eat of the fruit of the Tree of Good and Evil is in opposition to the commandment to multiply and replenish the earth. 

We honor Eve.  For it was her wisdom, her thoughtful consideration of partaking of the fruit that caused the plan to progress.  If they had not left the Garden, the Plan would have been frustrated.  We believe that she saw this and chose to disobey, and that she understood this even before Adam understood it.  That the natural consequences of that choice was to be thrust out of God's presence (out of the garden) and into a mortal world where men had to work by the sweat of their brow and women would labor to bring life into this world.  That they would be subject to life and death, sickness and health, joy and sorrow, and the knowledge of good and evil.  We do not believe in Original Sin, but that "men are punished for their own sins and not for Adam [and Eve]'s transgression" and as found in Mosiah 3:19:

For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father.

This is one of the reasons why I believe the doctrine of Mormonism to be feminist.  It honors and empowers women.  The Lord honors and empowers us, not on a pedestal, but for who we are.  Valerie Hudson Cassler, a Catholic Feminist convert to Mormonism, has a beautiful post over at Mormon Scholars, "I Am Mormon Because I am A Feminist":

"After decades of studying LDS doctrine concerning women, I have been liberated as a woman from the erroneous and harmful beliefs about women that haunt those raised in Abrahamic traditions. How remarkable and in some senses ironic it still seems to me to have experienced “women’s lib” by conversion to Mormonism!  I will review the main points of doctrine that make Mormonism the most feminist of all the Christianities"

A quick aside: This post is often used to equate priesthood to motherhood, a concept which I do not believe in (ps fatherhood is equal to motherhood).  But it contains the reason I'm fine with men administering ordinances for salvation, while believing many positions of administration of the church do not require priesthood but stewardship (which is due to policy, not doctrine). 

Digging Deeper
I recently came across a beautiful post over at Rational Faiths about Leaving the Garden.  I don't read over there often, but was researching the Fall and came across this essay by Jared Mooney.  I've always been a little confused about the set-up of the choices in the Garden of Eden and the description of Eve's choice here is one of the most beautiful accounts I've ever read.  So I'm going to go ahead and quote the last portion of his essay here:

"One of the things that the temple narrative has helped to make clear to me, is that good and evil, agency and accountability are almost never clear-cut. Even in Mormonism’s fundamental allegory, choice is established as a complex, rather than a simple reality. What Eve did was decidedly the most important act of disobedience in our canon. Many past leaders who place a high value on the principle of obedience have had to do some significant intellectual parsing of the terms sin and transgression, to try and get around the fact that is plainly manifest in the Eden narrative… that our eternal progression hinges on an act of blatant disobedience to the Gods. Notice that there’s no blaming going on. Both Adam and Eve supply a reason for their act, but plainly admit their fault to the Lord, “and I did eat.”

It’s also vital to distinguish that Eve was not duped. She was beguiled. According to Dr. Nehama Aschenasy, the Hebrew word that King James translators rendered as beguiled “is a rare verb that has rich and connotative meanings, indicating an intense multilevel experience evoking great emotional, psychological, and/or spiritual trauma.” He suggests it was a catalyst for Eve to undergo a deep internal process, wherein she pondered at length the consequences of her prospective choice and its relation to her ultimate purpose in the garden. That sounds like a faith crisis to me.

It’s also important to note that the tree is never identified as a symbol of evil or wrongdoing. The language surrounding the tree is overwhelmingly positive. “the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise”. Furthermore, God told Adam and Eve that it was THEIR tree. “Nevertheless thou mayest choose for thyself, for it is given unto thee.” In the English sentence it appears as if the “it” pronoun refers to “choice”, but in the Hebrew it is clearly referring to the tree. God was, in essence telling them, “I am now commanding you to avoid this particular tree, but like all of them here, it’s YOUR TREE and you can do what you like with it… but remember that I told you no”. This is the equivalent of your mom telling you, “Don’t eat your halloween candy before dinner, because it’ll spoil your appetite… buuuut, it is your candy and you can do whatever you want with it.”

"The world has invented narratives that cast her as the fool, the simpleton, the bystander, and even the whore. Even in the church, we try to have her both as the foresighted heroine and the servile mute. But Eve, the mother of all living is what she always has been: an incredible woman who was brave enough to see that her disobedience was the only way forward. I think we should bear her in mind before we decry the efforts or motives of women who wear pants to church or ask to attend priesthood session… acts that don’t even constitute disobedience.

If life were only about choosing right and wrong, with rewards for correct behavior and punishment for incorrect, I truly think most of us would catch on. Almost all choices, though, upon closer examination are actually a choice between two slightly differentiated possibilities. Often it’s a choice between the greater of two goods, or the lesser of two evils. And by choosing any one reality we, by necessity, omit all others. Eve’s courageous choice brought both tremendous positive AND negative consequences into being. Obtaining a knowledge of good and evil necessarily brings the understanding that good and evil are actually abstract concepts, as are choice and accountability. Sometimes we DO ask for bread and receive stones, and sometimes our loaves come with serpents instead of fishes. Those who seek God with a pure heart sometimes live in crushing poverty their whole lives, while those who exploit the meek and lowly sometimes prosper phenomenally. Sometimes good women with no greater desire in the wide world, miscarry their babies or fail to conceive them at all. Sometimes children (the only innocents among us) are raised in situations of almost constant abuse or neglect. Sometimes the just are imprisoned and the evil go free. That is the true nature of our world. That is the substance of a knowledge of good and evil. One cannot simply go and do, like Nephi, without eventually coming up against a Laban moment, where good is now evil and evil is good, and the sword is in the last place we would want it… in our hand. One of the realities we have to wake up to is that just like life, the scriptures are positively brimming with contradiction. I personally think that’s one of the things that make them beautiful and useful. Prayers aren’t always answered. Faith isn’t always rewarded with knowledge. Sometimes people ask and do not receive. Sometimes they knock on doors always closed, and yet….

I still believe in a loving and perfect God. I believe I am capable of love because he first loved us. I have a family here on earth and I want to share my life with them through all eternity. I believe that a wildly imperfect young man received revelations from God and tried to offer them to the world in his wildly imperfect way, and I love those revelations. I love the wildly imperfect kingdom of God we have established on Earth with our meaty hands, and I want nothing more than for it to become a Zion. I have covenanted literally everything I have and will ever obtain to making that happen. I believe that’s the most wildly irresponsible promise I’ve ever made, and I’m deeply grateful that I was given the opportunity to make it."