Sign in to follow this  
carlimac

Did Face to Face answer questions?

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Vort said:

Sincere question (more or less).

No, I undertand. I don't doubt your sincerity at all. And to reiterate what I said, you know I like and respect you.

I think it's easier to assume negative intentions when you disagree with someones views. So, instead of actually getting to know why they think what they think, you (and remember, this applies to all of us. Including me, you, her, and Father Christmas) will only seek out the worst thing because it reinforces your own views. So it makes it easier to misunderstand and misinterpret what they are saying. We also put people in boxes (especially those we disagree with) because it makes it easier for us to understand them. After all, I don't know what it's like to be @Maureen or @Vort. And you both don't know what it's like to be @MormonGator. So, all of us will only see one another from our own eyes. When confronted with someone we disagree with, we need to make an extra effort to communicate our ideas in a clear and concise way. 

Now, I know people don't change. If it was as easy as I described it, then there would be a lot more harmony in the world. So, I don't expect people to put the sword down, shake hands and suddenly see others with great clarity. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Vort said:

@MormonGator, just curious what you think of @Maureen's deliberate misconstruing of what I wrote. Is that on her for refusing to read and understand what's actually written, or is that on me because I didn't pander enough to her tender sensibilities and prejudices? Sincere question (more or less).

 

3 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

No, I undertand. I don't doubt your sincerity at all. And to reiterate what I said, you know I like and respect you.

I think it's easier to assume negative intentions when you disagree with someones views. So, instead of actually getting to know why they think what they think, you (and remember, this applies to all of us. Including me, you, her, and Father Christmas) will only seek out the worst thing because it reinforces your own views. So it makes it easier to misunderstand and misinterpret what they are saying. We also put people in boxes (especially those we disagree with) because it makes it easier for us to understand them. After all, I don't know what it's like to be @Maureen or @Vort. And you both don't know what it's like to be @MormonGator. So, all of us will only see one another from our own eyes. When confronted with someone we disagree with, we need to make an extra effort to communicate our ideas in a clear and concise way. 

Now, I know people don't change. If it was as easy as I described it, then there would be a lot more harmony in the world. So, I don't expect people to put the sword down, shake hands and suddenly see others with great clarity. 

So, then...Maureen's misconstruing was indeed her own fault for not reading what I wrote? Or it was my fault for not making my phraseology sufficiently obsequious to suit her tastes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Vort said:

 

So, then...Maureen's misconstruing was indeed her own fault for not reading what I wrote? Or it was my fault for not making my phraseology sufficiently obsequious to suit her tastes?

:: puts on cardigan, lights a pipe :: 

My son, move beyond fault, and look inward towards understanding. Then you will find the answers you seek. 

:: takes off cardigan, extinguishes pipe.:: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MormonGator said:

:: puts on cardigan, lights a pipe :: 

My son, move beyond fault, and look inward towards understanding. Then you will find the answers you seek. 

:: takes off cardigan, extinguishes pipe.:: 

I can explain it to you.  I can't understand it for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Grunt said:

I can explain it to you.  I can't understand it for you.

A great Ed Koch quote. He was a fascinating guy. Did you know he used to ride the subway and ask people "How am I doing?" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MormonGator said:

A great Ed Koch quote. He was a fascinating guy. Did you know he used to ride the subway and ask people "How am I doing?" 

I did not.  Interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

:: puts on cardigan, lights a pipe :: 

My son, move beyond fault, and look inward towards understanding. Then you will find the answers you seek. 

:: takes off cardigan, extinguishes pipe.:: 

What exactly is in that pipe, Grandpa?  🤨

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

What exactly is in that pipe, Grandpa?  🤨

I was just writing my own snark when I saw that JAG had anticipated me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Grunt-I don't know if you are interested in Koch or the history of NYC, but if you are, check out "Ed Koch and the Rebuilding of New York City" by Jonathon Soffer. It's an amazing book. This poor guy inherited a city under siege with lots of problems. While you and I will not agree with everything he did, the book was just fascinating. If you like history, I strongly endorse it. 

 

@Midwest LDS you would like it too! 

Edited by MormonGator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I still believe/hope that there’s an open-minded middle for whom facts and data may actually change their mind.  But mostly, people who hate the Church don’t need a reason; and people who support it already have their reason. 

Exactly this....  In the minds of some the church is a horrible abusive patriarchy... And they point to things like the YW vs YM budget or the YW activities or some local leader saying something about dancing or wearing dresses as proof.  When those are countered say like the cost of YW camps, or the adult budget or the leadership that plans the activities being female or that men have even more "oppressive" demands on behavior and dress that don't matter.  

The bottom line is if you demand all the benefits and privileges but scream oppression at any hint of obligation or responsibility you are on the path of destroying everything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of the reasons for the disparity in the past, now that the Church is leaving BSA, I'm glad to see they are equalizing the budget.

Quote

The ward budget for youth activities will be divided equitably between the young men and young women according to the number of youth in each organization. A sufficient amount will be provided for Primary activities.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2019/10/25cook?lang=eng

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, dprh said:

Regardless of the reasons for the disparity in the past, now that the Church is leaving BSA, I'm glad to see they are equalizing the budget.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2019/10/25cook?lang=eng

Yup, YW will get the same amount as always and the savings in YM budget will finally go to the EQ.

:devil:  :evilsmile:  :smokindevil: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/18/2019 at 5:01 PM, Just_A_Guy said:

It is a fair point, until you remember that the Church also pays for dozens (hundreds?) of camp facilities that the YW are free to use but that the YM are largely banned from.  

I have a dim recollection of the Church owning something like 130 camps.  Assume each camp costs an average of $250,000 per year to own and maintain.  Assume 30% of members-of-record are active, and 25% of those are YW-age (and that’s probably WAY too high).  That’s $32.5 million divvied up amongst 1.1 million girls, or $29.50 per girl.  Assume 30 YW in your average ward, and that’s almost $900 extra value that the YW program gets and that the AP program doesn’t.

We didn’t get to go to those camps for free. I recall having to pay every year. And my girls had to pay to go, too. They now use “missionary” couples to act as hosts and to do maintenance. I don’t think the church paid anywhere near that much to maintain them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, mordorbund said:

Yup, YW will get the same amount as always and the savings in YM budget will finally go to the EQ.

:devil:  :evilsmile:  :smokindevil: 

Two chances: Slim and fat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, carlimac said:

We didn’t get to go to those camps for free. I recall having to pay every year. And my girls had to pay to go, too. They now use “missionary” couples to act as hosts and to do maintenance. I don’t think the church paid anywhere near that much to maintain them.

The Boy Scouts also pay extra to go to camp, and a fair amount of scout camp labor is also donated.  

And note that I described the costs as being to “own and maintain”, which includes amortized costs of purchase.  Some of these camps are likely worth tens of millions of dollars (The Heber Valley Camp, being perhaps the most extreme example; it covers 13 square miles of forest and sits at the top of a five-mile-long private access road and has enough cabins - nice cabins, with electricity and bunk beds - for at least 5,000 people at any given time.  That’s 60,000 girls in a three-month summer period—and only a fraction of the total number of LDS girls who go to camp each year.  And compare Heber Valley Camp to BSA’s Philmont Scout Ranch, which covers over 15 times the area but services only 22,000 kids in a four-month summer period.)

Until last year, the Church provided each YW a value of between $29 (my estimate) and $75 ( @Vort‘s estimate) by building and maintaining a network of camps for their exclusive use.  The Church provided each YM a value of maybe $60 ($33 in BSA registration fees as of last year, and maybe another $30 in award/badge allowances) by securing their access to a separate network of camps run by a third-party nonprofit.  And remember, BSA registration fees have skyrocketed from $10 in 2010 to $33 this year (and $60 next year).  So depending on whose numbers you use, until very recently there has  either been rough gender parity for camp access funding (my figures) or a disparity that favors the YW to a frankly ridiculous extent (Vort’s figures).

Edited by Just_A_Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/18/2019 at 10:20 AM, Fether said:

Ya, there are a lot of tools and opportunities that I’m sure the church has dumped lots of money and preparation in to allow the best opportunity for the youth to grow... but with every one of them, they leaned on some variation of “if they want to use this they can. They dont have to.”

That may be true to a certain extent but it isn’t a message that is very clear.In many wards there has been enormous leader pressure to accomplish the goal or project. Our last YW President put a huge emphasis on completing Personal Progress and devoted at least one activity a month towards it. There was absolutely no “this is optional” message there. I don’t know how the girls who just didn’t respond to the checklist approach to progressing personally could not feel like losers. Especially when the ones who finished it all in their first year of Beehives were praised and honored copiously!

 

On 11/18/2019 at 3:29 PM, MormonGator said:

I agree. That clearly means that every woman who shows an interest in sports will behave in the exact same way as the girl in your wifes group did, so we shouldn't allow them that option.

The truth is that it's an issue. We've already had three experiences in this thread with women having a hard time fitting in if they like/don't like certain activities. For all we know, there might be even more women who feel that way but "go with the program" just because they don't want to rock the boat. 

 

My oldest daughter who is Primary President in her ward already predicts that the activities on the Primary level will be based on the “noise” of several squeaky wheel parents in her ward. The quieter families will just have to go with the flow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, carlimac said:

That may be true to a certain extent but it isn’t a message that is very clear.In many wards there has been enormous leader pressure to accomplish the goal or project. Our last YW President put a huge emphasis on completing Personal Progress and devoted at least one activity a month towards it. There was absolutely no “this is optional” message there. I don’t know how the girls who just didn’t respond to the checklist approach to progressing personally could not feel like losers. Especially when the ones who finished it all in their first year of Beehives were praised and honored copiously!

 

My oldest daughter who is Primary President in her ward already predicts that the activities on the Primary level will be based on the “noise” of several squeaky wheel parents in her ward. The quieter families will just have to go with the flow.

I didn’t think Personal Progress was “optional”.  Oh, I suppose you could choose not to do it; but I understood it to be The Church’s Program and if you wanted to get in line, you did it.  (Same as scouting.)

I share your concern about squeaky wheels.  I wonder whether some of this talk of late clarifying that women in the Church do minister via priesthood authority will be converted to a sort of “your beehive—err, 13-year-old class President is acting on a priesthood errand and if you pick and choose the activities you go to, you aren’t sustaining your leaders/supporting the priesthood” type of dynamic.  (Heaven knows I got that in deacon’s quorum when “mutual” turned out to be basketball for the umpteenth time.)

Edited by Just_A_Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this