Gary Stevenson criticized

I think it's only fair that we take a look a the words of our newly called apostles. We all deserve to know just what exactly they can testify of. What witness can they give? Elder Stevenson's recent General Conference talk with my comments.

Dear brothers and sisters, it has been many decades since a general conference has been convened that President Boyd K. Packer and Elders L. Tom Perry and Richard G. Scott were not seated immediately behind the podium and speaking at one of these sessions. It's also been many decades that people have been hoping and praying that Boyd just fucking die already. That man was a monster. Our memories of them are poignant, and I add my tribute to honor them, each so uniquely different yet so harmonized in their witness and testimony of Jesus Christ and His Atonement. It's not too hard to harmonize when both their witnesses and the Atonement are complete mysteries. None of them ever claimed to have seen Jesus and none of them ever gave a satisfactory explanation of the Atonement.

Furthermore, I, like you, find strength in and sustain President Thomas S. Monson as prophet, seer, and revelator, and I marvel at his faithful and dutiful apostolic service spanning over 50 remarkable years. Like me? Never in my life have I been impressed with Monson's record as a prophet, seer or revelator (but it was rumored in the mission that he had a photographic memory and that impressed me).

And so it was on Tuesday morning of this week, just after 9:00 a.m. as the Bishopric was beginning a meeting with the Asia Area Presidency, who are here for conference, that I was called to meet with President Monson, along with his counselors. "And so it was"? Where did that come from? You weren't telling a story or any kind of narrative that calls for a "and so it was". Moments later, as I walked into the boardroom adjacent to his office, I must have looked nervous sitting across the table, as he kindly spoke to calm my nerves. It's nice to know Tommy remembered his manners considering he can remember so little these days. He commented, noting my age, that I seemed quite young and even looked younger than my age. This sentence is both horribly redundant and hardly information worthy of your audience. I hope you get better at telling stories real fast.

Then, within a few moments, President Monson described that acting on the will of the Lord, he was extending a call to the Quorum of the Twelve to me. How do we know he was acting on the will of the Lord? Was Jesus to busy to call his own "special witness"? He asked me if I would accept this call, to which, following what I am sure was a very undignified audible gasp, in complete shock, I responded affirmatively. "Guh! Wha? Really? You want me to back the Porche out of the garage? Wow! OK, sure!" Dude, Gary, where was your wife in all this? And then, before I could even verbalize a tsunami of indescribable emotion, most of which were feelings of inadequacy, President Monson kindly reached out to me, describing how he was called many years ago as an Apostle by President David O. McKay, at which time he too felt inadequate. But don't worry, you'll learn to fake the shit out of this whole apostle thing! And the pain of being a fraud fades fast. He calmly instructed me, “Bishop Stevenson, the Lord will qualify those whom He calls.” You'll soon find justifications for why your "special witness" consists of nothing more then the same happy feelings that make a Mia Maid cry at girl's camp. It's your position, bro! It's the cumulative faith of everyone who believes you have a particularly special relationship with Jesus not unlike the one the original apostles had 2000 years ago. These soothing words of a prophet have been a source of peace, a calm in a storm of painful self-examination and tender feelings in the ensuing agonizing hours which have passed day and night since then. Monson the soothsayer. I don't think Mormons are supposed to like soothsayers. Flattering people is a no no.

I rehearsed what I have just described to you to my sweet companion, Lesa, later that day, seated in a quiet corner on Temple Square, with a serene view of the temple and the historic Tabernacle lying before us. Oh, here she is! Isn't it beautiful how Tommy and his crew took no consideration of her in this whole process and left it entirely up to you? I'm sure she was thrilled to have this new popped on her like an unexpected wedding engagement! :S As we tried to comprehend and process the events of the day, we found our anchor to be our faith in Jesus Christ and our knowledge of the great plan of happiness. In other words you sat around confessing that you had no idea what the fuck was going on, but it's all good because Jesus is rad and his plan is the best? Whatever works for you, man. This leads to an expression of my deepest love for Lesa. She is the sunshine in and of my life and a remarkable daughter of God. Sounds... condescending... Hers is a life punctuated by selfless service and unconditional love of all. So she's the perfect Mormon woman who has given up everything to bear children and watch her husband move up the ladder of success. How 1950s of you two. I will strive to remain worthy of the blessing of our eternal union. It's time to close your Ashley Madison account.

I express my deepest love to our four sons and their families, three of whom are here with their beautiful wives, the mothers of our six grandchildren; the fourth, a missionary, has special permission to stay up past missionary curfew and is viewing these proceedings live with his mission president and the mission president’s wife from their mission home in Taiwan. Oh, the mandatory pater familias creds. No thanks. I love each of them and love how they love the Savior and the gospel. Chances are one of those grandkids is going to up and leave the Church one day. I hope you still love him or her then.

I express my love to each member of my family: to my dear mother and to my father, who passed away last year, who instilled in me a testimony which seemed to dwell in me from my earliest memories. That's called childhood indoctrination. Had you been born in another part of the world, just imagine what you might have known from the earliest age. I further extend this gratitude to my brother, sisters, and their faithful spouses, as well as Lesa’s family, many of whom are actually here today. They didn't fucking nominate you for an award, man. This isn't the Oscars. I cast this net of gratitude to numerous extended family, friends, missionaries, leaders, and teachers along the way. Now thank Jesus for looking favorably upon your whiteness and delightsomeness.

I have been blessed with a close association with the members of the First Presidency, the Twelve, the Seventy, and the general auxiliary presidencies. I express my love and esteem to each of you sisters and brothers and will strive to be worthy of our continued association. This sounds like a business promotion speech. The Presiding Bishopric enjoys an almost heavenly unity. Sounds sexual. I will miss my association each day with Bishop Gérald Caussé, Bishop Dean M. Davies, and the staff. Especially the hot young staffers (you know who you are!).

I stand before you as evidence of the words of the Lord recorded in the first section of the Doctrine and Covenants: “That the fulness of [the] gospel might be proclaimed by the weak and the simple unto the ends of the [earth], and before kings and rulers.” Enough with the false humility bullshit. You and Ronny are probably going to get into fights over who's the most humble about your new calling. These words are preceded by the Lord’s declaration which demonstrates the love of a Father for His children: “Wherefore, I the Lord, knowing the calamity which should come upon the inhabitants of the earth, called upon my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., and spake unto him from heaven, and gave him commandments.” Right, because fathers who love their kids a ton call up one of them - and only one (who happens to live in an extremely remote part of the world) - to give emergency preparedness instructions. Contacting each child individually is too time consuming for a father. By the way, is this the same father who called a council in heaven? He obviously regretted calling it.

Our loving Heavenly Father and His Son, Jehovah, with a knowledge of the end from the beginning, opened the heavens and a new dispensation to offset the calamities that They knew would come. Oh, Mormon polytheism, how the rest of the Christian world deplores it! The Apostle Paul described the forthcoming calamities as “perilous times.” Fear mongering. For me, this suggests that Heavenly Father’s generous compensation for living in perilous times is that we also live in the fulness of times. Yes! It's so wonderful living in a day and age when polygamy and abstinence from coffee have been restored! It totally makes up for all the killing going on around us constantly. :S

As I agonized over my inadequacies this week, I received a distinct impression which both chastened and comforted me: to focus not on what I can’t do but rather on what I can do. Whoa! This almost sounds like a spiritual experience! It's not quite a visitation from Jesus, but we'll be damned if we don't take it! I can testify of the plain and precious truths of the gospel. Which are what? I'm only asking because nothing in Mormonism seems very clear or precious to me these days.

These are the words which I have shared hundreds of times with both those who belong to the Church and many who are not members: “God is our [loving] Heavenly Father. I seriously doubt that. We are His children. I so doubt that. … He weeps with us when we suffer and rejoices when we do what is right. I can't see how that's even possible. He wants to communicate with us, and we can communicate with Him through sincere prayer. I've tried it often. It never worked. …

“Heavenly Father has provided us, His children, with a way to … return to live in His presence. He's got an awesome TV, a huge Blue Ray collection, tons of tasty treats, cozy furniture and is a generous cuddler. … Central to our [Heavenly] Father’s plan is Jesus Christ’s Atonement.” Ah, yes. The Atonement! That nonsensical act in which torture and bloodshed satiated the demands of some powerful law that God himself couldn't disregard or build around. 

Heavenly Father sent His Son to the earth to atone for the sins of all mankind. Because he was powerless to forgive. He absolutely had to have payment for every last sin. Of these plain and precious truths I bear my testimony, and I do so in the name of Jesus Christ, amen. Oh, shit! These were the "plain and precious truths"? I'm not better off in understanding this stuff than I was before.

Sex changes - The Family Is of God

General authorities have a lot to say about the innate qualities of women and their divinely appointed role here on earth. What happens if we flip the sexes in what they have to say about the topic? Do we have a nonsensical statement because the logic is gender dependent, or do we end up with a statement that still agrees with LDS thought because gender is irrelevant?

Let's look at the special musical number from last night's General Women's Conference that opened up the session. It's called "The Family Is of God" and it came out in 2008 as an anti-Proposition 8 propaganda tool to be applied in LDS primaries across the United States (and now the world). It picks up on the gender assignments found in "The Family: A Proclamation to the World", so predictably switching the gender references in the song will look a bit like my previous post. Here it is:

1. Our Mother has a family. It’s me!

It’s you, all others too: we are Her children.

She sent each one of us to earth, through birth,

To live and learn here in fam’lies.

[Chorus]

God gave us families to help us become what She wants us to be—

This is how She shares Her love, for the fam’ly is of God.

2. A mother’s place is to preside, provide,

To love and teach the gospel to her children.

A mother leads in fam’ly prayer to share

Their love for Mother in Heaven.

[Chorus]

3. A father’s purpose is to care, prepare,

To nurture and to strengthen all his children.

He teaches children to obey, to pray,

To love and serve in the fam’ly.

[Chorus]

4. I’ll love and serve my family and be

A good example to each fam’ly member.

And when I am a dad or mom, so glad,

I’ll help my fam’ly remember:

[Chorus]

First off, changing "Our Father" to "Our Mother" gives LDS Mormons a big headache because the Church teaches next to nothing about Her. In fact, we don't know if it's a "Her" or a "Them" (every orthodox Mormon has to admit that Heavenly Father might be a polygamist). This possibility - that God has at one or more wives who are banished from showing their faces around their children - already screams sexism. On the positive side, changing "Our Father" to "Our Mother" somehow renders the song just that much more poignant and pleasing. I honestly prefer it.

As for the second verse, I say why the fuck not? Mothers can be just as good as managing people and earning money as father can. If that's where a mother's skill set lies, why not let her use and develop those skills? Denying women that opportunity based on their having a vagina is sexist and culturally damaging.

The third verse makes just as much sense as it did when it addressed mothers. What does that mean? That the gender reference is poorly conceived. There is no truth to be learned from it. What is should say instead is that the purpose of a "parent" is to care, etc. Then again, aren't we all supposed to be caring about and strengthening each other?

The only problem with the fourth verse is that it assumes every child will become a parent one day. That's not how it works. Some people never find a partner, some couples are infertile, other couples don't want children and other couples are simply too irresponsible to properly look after children (I have several relatives who fit this last category). The amazing thing about all of this is that the rest of the session was spent pointing out many of these very exceptions.

Where is the wisdom in memorizing and singing this song? Why should we bother teaching it to children when it's sexist and not logically sound? Why be part of the Church's knee-jerk reaction to homosexual marriage being legalized in California? We can think for ourselves.

Sex changes - "divine design"

General authorities have a lot to say about the innate qualities of women and their divinely appointed role here on earth. What happens if we flip the sexes in what they have to say about the topic? Do we have a nonsensical statement because the logic is gender dependent, or do we end up with a statement that still agrees with LDS thought because gender is irrelevant?

"By divine design, mothers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Fathers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children. In these sacred responsibilities, mothers and fathers are obligated to help one another as equal partners." From "The Family: A Proclamation to the World," 1995.

Restricting an individual's participation in work and family according to his or her sex is sexism. You cannot subscribe heart and soul to "The Family" and also claim you are not sexist. Either embrace the fact that you are a sexist or the fact that you disagree with this proclamation.

Sex changes - "none more beautiful"

General authorities have a lot to say about the innate qualities of women and their divinely appointed role here on earth. What happens if we flip the sexes in what they have to say about the topic? Do we have a nonsensical statement because the logic is gender dependent, or do we end up with a statement that still agrees with LDS thought because gender is irrelevant?

"Of all the creations of the Almighty there is none more beautiful, none more inspiring than a lovely son of God who walks in virtue with an understanding of why he should do so, who honors and respects his body as a thing sacred and divine, who cultivates his mind and constantly enlarges the horizon of his understanding, who nurtures his spirit with everlasting truth." Gordon B. Hinckley, "Youth Is the Season," New Era, Sep. 1988, 44.

Which is more beautiful, a lovely son of God or a lovely daughter of God? If you pick one or the other, you're an asshole. Don't doubt that you are.

Sex changes - a force for good

General authorities have a lot to say about the innate qualities of women and their divinely appointed role here on earth. What happens if we flip the sexes in what they have to say about the topic? Do we have a nonsensical statement because the logic is gender dependent, or do we end up with a statement that still agrees with LDS thought because gender is irrelevant?

"Every young man is a child of destiny and every adult man a powerful force for good." Jeffrey Holland, "To Young Women," Ensign, Nov. 2005, 28.

In this quote gender is entirely irrelevant. There is nothing in what Jeff has to say that relates exclusively to women. No doubt about it.

Sex changes - Heavenly Mother's husband

General authorities have a lot to say about the innate qualities of women and their divinely appointed role here on earth. What happens if we flip the sexes in what they have to say about the topic? Do we have a nonsensical statement because the logic is gender dependent, or do we end up with a statement that still agrees with LDS thought because gender is irrelevant?

"A three-year-old had wandered off on an adventure, shedding her clothing as she went. When she realized she was lost as well as cold, she knocked at the home of this young man. He saw a little girl standing on the step; she was wearing only soiled underwear and was crying her heart out. He took her in, and while they waited for the police to find her father, he wrapped her in a blanket and held her on his lap and sang songs to her. He made her clown faces on home-dipped ice cream cones and drew pictures with her so she could surprise her mother. He made her feel marvelous.

"When at last the girl's father arrived, she started for the front door. Then suddenly she stopped, maybe remembering what a special time she had had with the young man.

"'Hey!' she asked. 'Are you Heavenly Mother's husband?'

The young man was startled - and sobered. At last he replied, 'No, but I am her son.'"
Elaine A. Cannon, "Voices," New Era, Jul. 1980, 13.

Besides being a sappy, poorly told story, there's nothing in this modified version that should offend LDS sensitivities. We might be caught off guard at first by a story about a naked little girl spending an afternoon with a young man, but I think that's mostly because American culture - disgustingly - has hyper-sexualized children. The most offensive aspect of this story is found in the original, where Heavenly Mother is called "Heavenly Father's wife". You know there's a problem with gender inequality when a woman's identity relies entirely on a reference to a man.

Sex changes - handsome and chaste

General authorities have a lot to say about the innate qualities of women and their divinely appointed role here on earth. What happens if we flip the sexes in what they have to say about the topic? Do we have a nonsensical statement because the logic is gender dependent, or do we end up with a statement that still agrees with LDS thought because gender is irrelevant?

"The true spirit of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints gives to man the highest place of honor in human life. To maintain and to merit this high dignity he must possess those virtues which have always, and which will ever demand the respect and love of mankind... [because] 'a handsome and chaste man is the perfect workmanship of God.'" First Presidency of Heber J. Grant, Improvment Era, May 1935, 276.

 The original quote was already plenty condescending to women, but readdressing it to men makes it feel strangely empowering for sexy men who won't give it up. The message makes just as much doctrinal sense maled so I'm going to have to call bullshit on brother Heber. Men do indeed get the highest place of honor in the LDS Church; Mormons are all about being virtuous, lovely, of good report and praiseworthy; and who's to argue that God really gets off on handsome, chaste men?

Sex changes - blessing others

General authorities have a lot to say about the innate qualities of women and their divinely appointed role here on earth. What happens if we flip the sexes in what they have to say about the topic? Do we have a nonsensical statement because the logic is gender dependent, or do we end up with a statement that still agrees with LDS thought because gender is irrelevant?

"Prepare yourselves to ennoble, to enrich, and to become the heart and soul of the home. You may bless others either as fathers or as legislators; as leaders in the schoolroom or in the laboratory of truth; at the hearth or at the crib side." Russell M. Nelson, "Daughters of Zion," Young Women New Era, Nov. 1985, 5.

This to me sounds exactly like what the LDS Church requires of men. Changing the addressees from women to men is insignificant here. Maybe the Church needs to stop perpetuating this nonsensical gendering. 

Sex changes - "become great men"

General authorities have a lot to say about the innate qualities of women and their divinely appointed role here on earth. What happens if we flip the sexes in what they have to say about the topic? Do we have a nonsensical statement because the logic is gender dependent, or do we end up with a statement that still agrees with LDS thought because gender is irrelevant?

"Cultivate and employ generously your noble, manly instincts of care and mercy, first to your family and then to others. May you always hunger and thirst after righteousness within the framework of the revealed gospel of Jesus Christ. May you have an eternal perspective as you go about your angelic cause of doing good so that it will not only lead you to become great men but ultimately to become kings in the eternities." James E. Faust, "How Near to the Angels," New Era, Mar, 1999, 4.

This quote also seems to work just fine when addressing men instead of women. Talk of being caring and merciful might get us thinking about women but it's more likely to get us thinking about Heavenly Father and Jesus, and just as likely to bring to mind our father or grandfathers or even a friend who's a man. Womanliness or femaleness has little, if anything, to do with care and mercy. The other potential clue that the Faust here is talking about women and not men is his reference to "your angelic cause." I would dare say that we typically associate angels and the adjective "angelic" with women,

and yet all the angels mentioned in scripture (with the exception of two possibly evil stork-winged women bearing a woman representing wickedness off to Babylon) are men. No female angels, isn't that interesting? It would very much appear that angelic causes are male causes.

I'm starting to think James Faust was completely off base addressing these thoughts to women.

Sex changes - "near to divinity"

General authorities have a lot to say about the innate qualities of women and their divinely appointed role here on earth. What happens if we flip the sexes in what they have to say about the topic? Do we have a nonsensical statement because the logic is gender dependent, or do we end up with a statement that still agrees with LDS thought because gender is irrelevant?

"Fatherhood is near to divinity. It is the highest, holiest service to be assume by males. It places him who honors his holy calling and service next to the angels." James R. Clark from Messages of the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 6 Vols. (1965-75), 6:178.


If you ask me, this quote worked out perfectly for men. The fact that Jimmy Reuben here was speaking about women only shows that he had not fully thought through his reasoning.

My beloved brothers

Our dear matriarchs have often offered us men priceless advice on how to best prepare for the blessings and responsibilities the Lord has in store for us. I hope all of us with a penis find it within our hearts to wisely head their indispensable council.

My beloved brothers (and dear, young brothers), men of the Church, today I should like to speak about the role of manhood in this great Church. I would like to pay sincere tribute and give special encouragement to these special gents. I trust that what I say will be helpful and beneficial to you tonight. 

First of all I want you to be proud that you are a man. God made it clear that men are very special, and has also very clearly defined their position, their duties, their destiny. As a man you have been born with many unique endowments that are not common to women. 

Let me remind us all of man's primary responsibilities. One of your most important obligations is to be able to remain clean and pure. Be chaste and do everything in your power to help others to be. You young men must set the proper example. Help our young women stay morally clean. Young men should realize that the women they date will not honor and respect them if they have been involved in moral transgression. Equal Opportunity Promiscuity simply robs men of their moral influence. Always remember that you can go much farther on respect than on popularity.

Another contention raised is that a man is free to choose what he does with his own body. I would enlist the righteous Priestesshood of God to help such misguided young men, because a beautiful, chaste man is the perfect workmanship if God. Respect yourself. Most men naturally want to love and be loved by a good woman. What man could want any greater glory or tribute than that which comes from an appreciative, loving wife? She will largely determine the remainder of his life. You are expected to go with your wife wherever her employment or call may take her. You will even surrender your name to her name. 

The pursuit of a career instead of marriage and the caring for children is an increasing choice for many young men. Some of our brothers indicate that they do not want to consider marriage until after they have completed their degrees or pursued a career. This is not right! It's generally selfishness, cold and self-centered, which leads people to shun the marriage responsibility. Husbands, submit yourselves unto your own wives.

Much is said of the drudgery and confinement of the man's role in the home. You belong there! Some male rights thinkers view homemaking with outright contempt, but as men, the roles of husband and father are at the very center of your souls and cry out to be satisfied! This is the great, irreplaceable work of men; life cannot go on if men cease to make and care for children. Fortunately most men don't have to track a career like a woman does. Of course as a man you can do exceptionally well in the workplace, but is that the best use of your divinely appointed talents and masculine traits? The father who entrusts his child to the care of others that he may do non-fatherly work, whether for gold, for fame or for civic service, should remember that a child left to himself bringeth his father to shame. If you can be a full-time homemaker, be grateful! Do not feel denied and never complain about this unselfish service. Mormon men are the hardest working men in the world, but you do all these things willingly - because you are a man!

So my beloved brothers, please know how much we appreciate you. We love you and respect you. The Priestesshood leadership of this church at all levels gratefully acknowledges the service, sacrifice, commitment and contribution of the brethren. For the women of the Church, I say thank you. Thank you for making our lives so much better! Thank you so much. Never wonder if you have worth in the sight of the Lord and to the leaders of the Church.

In the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

Wasn't that a great message? Don't we feel so loved?

"Whuh the fuh?!?"

The temple - sexism

In addition to the gendered seating and the veils imposed on the female attendees, the Mormon endowment ceremony held yet another shockingly sexist element. At a certain point in the ceremony the men are told that they will become kings and priests to God, but the women are told that they were to become "queens and priestesses to [their] husbands". Why not to God like the men? It seemed a little weird to me and I felt uncomfortable about it. It was clearly creating a hierarchy in which men stand above women.

I shouldn't have been surprised. The emphasis on Church hierarchy was never hidden from me and should be obvious to anyone who happens to run across the portraits of the General Authorities will notice Thomas Monson at the top of the pile, followed by his two wing men, the big 12, and the First Quorum of Seventy. And the sexism is obvious as well. None of the General Authorities is a woman.

I didn't like what I was seeing and doing, but I really didn't want to think I was part of a sexist church. How could Christ's church be sexists? God certainly wasn't sexist (I thought)! Besides, I had been told before attending the temple that the temple was one place where everyone was equal. There were no bishops, no quorum leaders, no stake presidents, no area authorities, no apostles - just brothers and sisters worshiping their Father. It sounded great. 

I never got over my discomfort of the temple sexism and unsurprisingly I learned years later that it used to be much worse when women had to covenant to obey the Law of the Husband. That "law" was removed in 1990 because the Church surveyed its temple-going members and found out that people didn't care for it. Imagine that! Why didn't those surveyed members just doubt their doubts and go along with the overt female subordination?