Y’all gone woke?


Recommended Posts

I’ve watched a fascinating cultural shift over the last three decades, regarding the mainstreaming and acceptance of various sexual orientations and the folks who say they have one.

 This morning I did my modern version of reading the morning newspaper over breakfast (which I do without a newspaper, before breakfast, and before leaving my bed.)  I saw this:

I thought of my army Sergeant father, who spent his entire post-WWII life mad at blacks in the military and women in the workplace, and how he managed to die of old age before having to figure out how to appropriately swear at such news.

 I’ve watched various folks at my job, spend on-the-clock effort to get ready for pride month. Yesterday one of my coworkers used company email to send a site wide message to come out of the closet, telling everyone he’s non-binary, explaining what his coworkers may notice from him regarding new clothing styles, and telling everyone his new pronouns (them/he).  He tells me there were many coworkers who reacted positively.  A few awkward silent looks. He says he feels like a weight has been lifted, now that he can live authentically, and he’s expecting better mental health to come from his decision.   Someone is gonna complain to their manager, calling this a misuse of company resources, that lowers everyone’s efficiency.  

 I dunno folks, you think our church will do something in observance of pride month?  Will we add to what’s come before?  We’ve got some robust reading material in the general handbook about such things, heavy emphasis on the love.  We’ve had the RS general presidency introduce a queer speaker at one of their main events last year, pouring on the love and acceptance.  You think we’ll see more?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps.  I don't know.

The common adage is the Church runs about 20-30 years behind popular culture in accepting change. 

That would put us around 1990 to 2000.  We might have a little bit more to go.

I expect that with the old guard in our leadership it won't be until at least Uchtdorf is prophet that we may see some change, though Bednar strikes me as much more traditional.

In that light, it may not be until Gong or Soares that we see really big changes in policies in that regards.

I'm more of a traditionalist myself, so I hope that it would NOT go towards the more liberal slant as far as gospel doctrine goes, but I know some see that changes occur in the church and are forward looking in that manner to see when changes may occur. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

You think we’ll see more?

You answered your own question. 

 

3 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

e’ve had the RS general presidency introduce a queer speaker at one of their main events last year,

That wouldn’t have happened in 1983. 
 

 

Edited by LDSGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Be cautious what you support in this world for God will not hold us blameless for what we allow into our hearts:

Quote

Genesis 19 (JST)

9 And they said unto him, Stand back. And they were angry with him.

10 And they said among themselves, This one man came in to sojourn among us, and he will needs now make himself to be a judge; now we will deal worse with him than with them.

11 Wherefore they said unto the man, We will have the men, and thy daughters also; and we will do with them as seemeth us good.

12 Now this was after the wickedness of Sodom.

13 And Lot said, Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, plead with my brethren that I may not bring them out unto you; and ye shall not do unto them as seemeth good in your eyes;

14 For God will not justify his servant in this thing; wherefore, let me plead with my brethren, this once only, that unto these men ye do nothing, that they may have peace in my house; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.

15 And they were angry with Lot and came near to break the door, but the angels of God, which were holy men, put forth their hand and pulled Lot into the house unto them, and shut the door.

(16) And they smote the men that were at the door of the house with blindness, both small and great: so that they wearied themselves to find the door.

Vice is a monster of so frightful mien

As to be hated needs but to be seen;

Yet seen too oft, familiar with her face,

We first endure, then pity, then embrace.

-Alexander Pope

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

Perhaps.  I don't know.

The common adage is the Church runs about 20-30 years behind popular culture in accepting change. 

That would put us around 1990 to 2000.  We might have a little bit more to go.

I expect that with the old guard in our leadership it won't be until at least Uchtdorf is prophet that we may see some change, though Bednar strikes me as much more traditional.

In that light, it may not be until Gong or Soares that we see really big changes in policies in that regards.

I'm more of a traditionalist myself, so I hope that it would NOT go towards the more liberal slant as far as gospel doctrine goes, but I know some see that changes occur in the church and are forward looking in that manner to see when changes may occur. 

Elder Uchtdorf comes across as very “warm fuzzy” in his discourses, but everything I’ve heard suggests that when counseling people in-person he is very rigidly “by the book”.  Assuming he re-enters the First Presidency, I don’t think he’ll be the pushover that the progmos are expecting.  (And of course, he was in the First Presidency when the November 2015 policy was announced.  He doesn’t get a lot of blame for that policy, but by then President Monson was in steep decline and President Eyring doesn’t seem the type to ram through sweeping controversial policy changes on his own initiative over a colleague’s objection.)  Elder Gong, as a 70, appeared in some of those leaked videos of Q12 meetings a few years back and wasn’t exactly an advocate for social change; and my own (increasingly dated) experience with church leaders from Brazil (Elder Soared’s homeland) that they tend to be a pretty hard-nosed bunch—they grew up in a deeply profligate society, dealt with the fallout on a daily basis, and generally had little patience for impenitent sexual libertines.  

On the broader issue here:  Elder Bednar’s recent talk to the National Press Club openly touted the church’s work with the LGBTQ lobby on housing and other non discrimination issues.    For PR purposes, at least, the church seems to be trying to surf the wave—to a point.

The more interesting question to me is whether, in broader society, the LGBTQ lobby has overplayed its hand in its outreach efforts to children—particularly to children in school, and behind the backs of these children’s parents.  It’s still early, but I note a lot fewer rainbows on my Facebook feed this month than I did last year; and a lot more people openly and fearlessly mocking corporate wokeist hypocrisy.    I don’t think the battle is over—not by a long shot—but given this country’s other issues, I think a lot of people are (at least momentarily) torqued off that the LGBTQ lobby seems more interested in making sure that kids are gettin’ it on, than in making sure that those same kids actually have food on their tables.  Time will tell what the long-term ramifications of this discontent may be.  But for the present, my sense is that a lot of “allies” are lying low, plotting their next move, and waiting for November to pass.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said:

Vice is a monster of so frightful mien
As to be hated needs but to be seen;
Yet seen too oft, familiar with her face,
We first endure, then pity, then embrace.

I get it.  But I wonder, is all social change born of monstrous vice?  Or can some of it be good?    Do you see monstrous vice creeping in to our handbook?

Quote

38.6.23
Transgender individuals face complex challenges. Members and nonmembers who identify as transgender—and their family and friends—should be treated with sensitivity, kindness, compassion, and an abundance of Christlike love. All are welcome to attend sacrament meeting, other Sunday meetings, and social events of the Church.

[...]

Some children, youth, and adults are prescribed hormone therapy by a licensed medical professional to ease gender dysphoria or reduce suicidal thoughts. Before a person begins such therapy, it is important that he or she (and the parents of a minor) understands the potential risks and benefits. If these members are not attempting to transition to the opposite gender and are worthy, they may receive Church callings, temple recommends, and temple ordinances.

If a member decides to change his or her preferred name or pronouns of address, the name preference may be noted in the preferred name field on the membership record. The person may be addressed by the preferred name in the ward.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

The common adage is the Church runs about 20-30 years behind popular culture in accepting change. 

That would put us around 1990 to 2000. 

I pretty much agree.  I keep thinking about this chart:

60 Percent: Record Number Of Americans Support Same-Sex Marriage In Poll :  The Two-Way : NPR

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A couple of weeks ago my two youth aged sons went to an LDS homeschoolers' prom.  Many homeschooling groups got together to rent out a venue and invite LDS homeschoolers to this event.  It became much more popular than they had anticipated.  Tickets were selling so well that they didn't know if there would be enough room.  

My sons went on a triple date to this event (one couple came separately).  They were really looking forward to it.  They were laughing and having fun in all the precursor moments to the venue itself.

When they arrived, everything seemed normal. But as soon as they got to the front door, my elder son (Bubba) just froze.  The others didn't exactly freeze.  But they just stopped laughing.  They all looked at Bubba.  He said "There's something wrong here."  The others looked around.  The foyer was empty except for the gatekeepers and security.  But they all felt something.  They knew something wasn't right with this event.

They proceeded with caution.  When they got into the main hall, they noticed about half the population were dressed in a manner absolutely NOT up to FSY standards.  A good 50% of those were clearly of the LGBTQ variety (girls with girls, boys with boys, transgenders that absolutely would not "pass").

They met up with the third couple.  Before the four of them could say anything, the third couple said, "Guys, we don't think we should be here.  There's something wrong." 

Flashback:  When the group went to pick up girl #3, the father of this girl, didn't address boy #3.  He addressed Bubba. "If you get there and there's something wrong.  You're in charge of making sure she gets home safe. Understand?"  My son understood and agreed.

I thought it was odd that her date (boy #3) was not the one in charge of keeping her safe.  But because of this, they all agreed that they'd better leave.  The rules of the event required that the youth had to get parental permission to leave early.  It took about an hour to get permission for all six of them.  But they finally left.

(A fourth couple they knew was also there.  They said they also felt it.  But they weren't going to leave because of it.  They paid a lot of money for these tickets.)

Eventually, they decided to just go around and do something fun.  They didn't go into details.  But they did end up having a good time and they returned home safely.

All of them eventually attended to smaller proms in the weeks that followed.  But they had fun.  Girl #3 had to go to three more.  Prom #2 and #3 also had a similar phenomenon.  Prom #4 was the charm. And she got to remain and have fun.

We can try to be tolerant all we want, just as we're tolerant of all God's children.  And guess what?  All of God's children sin.  But this was different.  To hear my sons describe it, it almost felt like they were watching pornography.  They had to get themselves out lest they be consumed.

The biggest issue here is not whether someone sins (of any variety).  It was that the sin was "accepted" as righteous behavior. 

No.  Sin is sin. 

We all sin.  But the thing that separates the righteous vs the wicked is whether we're striving to overcome sin vs accepting it (either giving up or believing there is nothing wrong with it).  This was a room where half the people had apparently believed there was not only nothing wrong with it.  But that it was actually "preferred" behavior.

Yes, there was something very wrong there.

Edited by Carborendum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

But I wonder, is all social change born of monstrous vice?  Or can some of it be good?

Of course some of it is good. Kids with learning disabilities are no longer called “stupid” or “unteachable”. That’s good. A black man can date a white woman without nasty comments. That’s good. People with crippling depression are no longer told to “suck it up”. That’s good. My niece can become a CEO, a doctor, a housewife…that’s good. Men can now be more “in touch” with their emotions and don’t have to just suffer in silence. That’s good. 
 

I could go on. 

Edited by LDSGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

We can try to be tolerant all we want, just as we're tolerant of all God's children.  And guess what?  All of God's children sin.  But this was different.  To hear my sons describe it, it almost felt like they were watching pornography.  They had to get themselves out lest they be consumed.

I think of a similar work party my wife and I attended in Denver a long time ago.  I'm shocked to this day to see how my co-workers behaved and dressed.  The sight of my tipsy female co-worker, full of loud laughter and literally falling out of her, well, I don't know what to call it.  Bodysuit?  Slutty formal wear?

My cousin once had a similar experience with a work trip in another city.  It was like the energy of all the people was apathetically, drowsily low, until 4pm when work was done, and everyone disappeared into their hotel rooms, emerging dressed in the skimpiest sluttiest stuff they had in their closets.  The "what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas" mindset was in full swing.

Yeah, it doesn't take gays and transgender folks to have such things happen.  It's as old as time - not a single new thing here.   It's not even the first time a loosely LDS organization has experienced such a colossal failure of upholding standards.  My old buddy lost his virginity at a mutual swimming activity in the late '80's.  I wonder if heads will roll?  If not, now you know about that particular "LDS homeschooling group". 

 

Edited by NeuroTypical
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NeuroTypical said:

It's not even the first time a loosely LDS organization has experienced such a colossal failure of upholding standards My old buddy lost his virginity at a mutual swimming activity in the late '80's.  I wonder if heads will roll? 

To be fair, it’s not an LDS thing. My devoutly Catholic high school had a joke. The moment a virgin graduates the statue of the schools mascot will get up and dance. Grim humor? Yup. Accurate? Yup. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking as an MBA with marketing training?

Any group, person, or organization can say whatever they want one month of the year. 

It's what they *do* the other 11 that you have to keep an eye out on. 

For example, right now there's a to-do on Twitter because the Saudi Arabian branches of several global businesses are *not* displaying the "Pride" images and statements on the official global accounts, and people are grilling these companies as to why. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ironhold said:

Speaking as an MBA with marketing training?

Any group, person, or organization can say whatever they want one month of the year. 

It's what they *do* the other 11 that you have to keep an eye out on. 

For example, right now there's a to-do on Twitter because the Saudi Arabian branches of several global businesses are *not* displaying the "Pride" images and statements on the official global accounts, and people are grilling these companies as to why. 

 

A42540FB-EBDD-413D-ACF6-8B5730BC8062.jpeg
 

BMW is the same. It’s not because they are weak. It’s because that behavior helps them make money. So, they’ll do whatever they need to. 
 

If you aren’t pragmatic in some areas, then running a company isn’t for you. 

Edited by LDSGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

A couple of weeks ago my two youth aged sons went to an LDS homeschoolers' prom. . . The rules of the event required that the youth had to get parental permission to leave early.  It took about an hour to get permission for all six of them.  But they finally left.

Yes, there was something very wrong there.

This was a trap and there is no way I would allow my kids to go to another one of these, ever again. I have told my son that he is free to leave, even if the adults tell him he cannot leave. He has asked, "but what if they won't allow me to leave?" I said, "you leave and if they touch you then you can defend yourself."

What these kids had to witness is disgusting. 😠

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LDSGator said:

Of course some of it is good. Kids with learning disabilities are no longer called “stupid” or “unteachable”. That’s good. A black man can date a white woman without nasty comments. That’s good. People with crippling depression are no longer told to “suck it up”. That’s good. My niece can become a CEO, a doctor, a housewife…that’s good. Men can now be more “in touch” with their emotions and don’t have to just suffer in silence. That’s good. 
 

I could go on. 

Feels like some gaslighting going on here. 😑

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Yeah, it doesn't take gays and transgender folks to have such things happen.  It's as old as time - not a single new thing here.

Totally agree.  And if they came across some of that "Las Vegas" behavior there, they would have had the same reaction. 

But in this case, the objectionable behavior was as I descried above.  I only point this out because simply "dating" for the LGBTQ people automatically chases the Spirit away.  They REALLY felt it leave.

There is a reason that father (described in the previous post) put his daughter's safety into my son's charge.  All who know him, know he's somewhat special that way.  He is very sensitive to the Spirit.  Always has been.  And he protects people.

Quote

It's not even the first time a loosely LDS organization has experienced such a colossal failure of upholding standards.... If not, now you know about that particular "LDS homeschooling group". 

2 hours ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said:

This was a trap and there is no way I would allow my kids to go to another one of these, ever again. I have told my son that he is free to leave, even if the adults tell him he cannot leave. He has asked, "but what if they won't allow me to leave?" I said, "you leave and if they touch you then you can defend yourself."

What these kids had to witness is disgusting. 😠

As you can imagine, my kids are well connected to the extensive homeschooling community in the area.  They did not recognize most of the people there.  The theory is that since it was published by word-of-mouth, some people who most certainly didn't qualify as "LDS Homeschoolers" caught wind of it and went to the website to sign up.  They clicked all the agreements as if it were a software disclaimer form (as if anyone actually reads them).

So, most of them were NOT LDS, and probably not homeschoolers.

My problem with it was -- why didn't they have screeners at the doors saying that their clothing did not pass the dress code?  That would have taken out about 95% of the "crashers" (if we can call them that.

Edited by Carborendum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/2/2022 at 4:09 AM, NeuroTypical said:

I dunno folks, you think our church will do something in observance of pride month?  Will we add to what’s come before?  We’ve got some robust reading material in the general handbook about such things, heavy emphasis on the love.  We’ve had the RS general presidency introduce a queer speaker at one of their main events last year, pouring on the love and acceptance.  You think we’ll see more?

There's a fine line the Church has to walk in these matters. While they may be very direct in saying we love everyone regardless of their sexual orientation and support them in ways that don't promote sin, perception is still an issue. For many members that line between accepting the sinner but not the sin is not very definite and therefore promoting something that is not distinctly tied to a specific cause, such as equal housing/employment rights and mental health, it can get tricky real fast. Clearly pride month includes accepting gay sexual activity which is something the Church can't do. So unless the Church can make a very clear distinction between what it does and does not support I wouldn't expect it to get involved. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe in the agency of man.  I believe that anyone can think and believe anything they will to think and believe.  I also believe in the privacy of individuals.  Whatever one want to keep private and unto themself is their concern and theirs alone.  I believe that consenting adults can do what they will in private.  But whatever one does to or with another adult person that is contrary to that person's will or whatever one chooses to make public - should be open to public scrutiny, argument, comment and even punishments.   I do not believe a person to value something that they will not or cannot defend in open scrutiny - or be willing to suffer public ridicule and punishments.  Like anything of value - the value is never more to any particular person that is more than they are willing to "pay" for it

The attempt to silence criticism is neither intelligent nor a display of one's values - only the display of shame and fear by those uncertain about their values.

With all this said - I do realize that some lack the skills to logically defend any idea.  In such cases I believe it best to just say you agree or disagree according to your values.  It is not a requirement to explain one's self to have values - but it is a requirement to display one's values.  Generally, if a person keeps something a secret it is because it is not a value.  Or at least not that important of a value - which I personally think should not be called a value - perhaps it could be called a hope or desire but certainly not something by which a person can define themself openly.

For the record I do have some friends that are part of the LGT community.  For now I respect their values and opinions even though such are not my own and I am uncertain if in eternity if they will have a change of heart are not.  I will support anyone's agency to makes of themself as they will.  I expect that they support my agency to seek out my path as will and I suspect that we can love each other through the eternities despite the differences of our values, agency and chosen paths.  I also find it difficult to love and respect anyone that attempts to force me to choose the values, path or way they approve that is contrary to my own - and I am growing to disapprove of anyone being forced to anything against their agency.  I am somewhat conflicted as what to do and how to behave around those that assume for themselves, the value of forcing others' agency - unless they are creatures (beings) without accountability. 

I am concerned, as I think Mormon and Moroni were in the final epochs of the Nephite civilization, that many are seeking a path of their own destruction as well as that of freedoms and liberties of this once great nation.  And unlike many political pundits - I do not think I or any other person nor society of persons can restore, keep, or maintain freedoms and liberties - only G-d and then only among those willing to covenant with him.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the answer was given in the 2022 General Conference by Elder Dallin Oaks on woke doctrine.

----------------------------------------------------------

Fundamental to us is God’s revelation that exaltation can be attained only through faithfulness to the covenants of an eternal marriage between a man and a woman.  That divine doctrine is why we teach that “gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.”

That is also why the Lord has required His restored Church to oppose social and legal pressures to retreat from His doctrine of marriage between a man and a woman, to oppose changes that homogenize the differences between men and women or confuse or alter gender.

The restored Church’s positions on these fundamentals frequently provoke opposition. We understand that. Our Heavenly Father’s plan allows for “opposition in all things,” and Satan’s most strenuous opposition is directed at whatever is most important to that plan. Consequently, he seeks to oppose progress toward exaltation by distorting marriage, discouraging childbearing, or confusing gender. However, we know that in the long run, the divine purpose and plan of our loving Heavenly Father will not be changed . . .

A uniquely valuable teaching to help us prepare for eternal life, “the greatest of all the gifts of God,” is the 1995 proclamation on the family.  Its declarations are, of course, different from some current laws, practices, and advocacy, such as cohabitation and same-sex marriage. Those who do not fully understand the Father’s loving plan for His children may consider this family proclamation no more than a changeable statement of policy.  In contrast, we affirm that the family proclamation, founded on irrevocable doctrine, defines the kind of family relationships where the most important part of our eternal development can occur.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share