“I can’t be a feminist. I’m raising boys.”

I’ve heard it many times. A woman explains that she can’t support feminism because she is a mother of sons. If my feminist goals for equity within our faith community were realized, opportunities that would have been automatically awarded to her sons could go to women. Without the unique role of serving in a male-only priesthood, what would give her sons purpose and spiritual direction? What would make men special? Would her sons advance within the church hierarchy? Or would their ambitions be thwarted by a new demographic of competition? Would the church even need men anymore?

These arguments give me pause because I have three sons. As I support feminism, am I working against my own male children?

I remind myself that feminism benefits everyone, including men. Diverse leadership is better leadership. Egalitarian marriages are stronger marriages. Serving in the church will be a better experience for my sons if they have the opportunity to serve under the people best prepared to lead them, regardless of sex. Expanding the leadership pool to include qualified women could save my sons from being trapped in callings that do not suit them, simply because the male talent pool is sparse.

But this kind of logic does not address the underlying feelings that lead mothers to bristle at the concept of a more egalitarian future for the boys they are raising. Both men and the women who raise them are coping with a collective insecurity crisis. Lacking confidence that males are inherently worthy and valuable as human beings, both men and the women who love them seek external validation by comparing men to other people. Men are important because they can do things women can’t; men are important because they outrank other, less important people.

The lay clergy structure of my church (the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS)) creates a mechanism for many men (but not women) to rotate through leadership callings such as bishop and stake president, offering several of them, in turn, the external validation of outranking other people. *

But even with these rotations, some men will never hold these prominent callings. Universally ordaining every male member to a male-only priesthood validates men by ensuring that every single one of them, even if they never serve in a leadership calling, outranks every woman they worship with. We can point to clear examples of things all LDS men can do that women can’t, not because women are incapable, but because, as non-priesthood holders, women aren’t allowed.

Even male-only priesthood isn’t enough to satiate male insecurity, so we encounter the phenomenon of priesthood creep, in which women are barred from activities that do not even require priesthood, such as passing the sacrament, counting tithing and serving on Sunday School presidencies. One blatant example of priesthood creep, barring anyone but men from serving as official witnesses at weddings and baptisms, was only recently rectified.

Like women, men have intrinsic value as human beings. It shouldn’t be necessary to artificially elevate men above women to make them feel important. They simply are important, like we all are.

As women within a patriarchal church and society, we are uniquely qualified to understand how to cultivate self-worth without the reassurance of outranking others in a hierarchy. Collectively placed at the bottom of the hierarchy, we have been forced to forge our identities without external validation. Can we instill the same resilience in our sons? Let’s raise them to understand that they are strong and good and powerful, even if they never become bishops or stake presidents. Let’s assure them that their contributions are valid and appreciated, even if no one else is barred from performing the same functions. Let’s teach them that their unique personhood make them special, even if they do not outrank anyone else.

 

  • Note: Callings such as bishop and stake president are time-intensive and unpaid.  Men do pay a heavy price for this kind of external validation.

April Young Bennett

April Young Bennett is the author of the Ask a Suffragist book series and host of the Religious Feminism Podcast. Learn more about April at aprilyoungb.com.

You may also like...

5 Responses

  1. Abby and Hansen says:

    Yes, I agree with everything! It hurts boys more than it helps them to live in such a system. I think of it as a society where only an upper caste of people are able to become professionals, such as doctors and scientists. You’d *think* that helps the top caste of people in that society, the ones who can have those positions. But what if all the people who have the talent and luck to find the cure to cancer are in the lower castes? And what if one of those “lucky” people in the top caste gets a diagnosis of cancer?

    It helps everyone in a social community to open all positions up to everyone. You aren’t hurting the people on top by extending their privileges to others.

  2. Wendy says:

    Yes, yes. Amen and amen.

  3. Lonicera says:

    I have 3 sons also. I raised them to be feminists.

  4. Mary says:

    I have two sons I raised to be patriarchal until I had a feminist reawakening when they were 15 and 13. Yikes! They are surrounded by patriarchal men in their extended family. More yikes!

    Sometimes I’ll start to rail against toxic masculinity and I stop myself and temper my language. I love them and actually they’re doing pretty well with Mom’s 180. So, I gently point out how people in my ward (that we no longer attend) do service for me even though I explicitly tell them repeatedly not to do it. They still do. My sons recognize the disrespect and I gently push their awareness a little farther by pointing out to them that the ward members would not be overriding my wishes in this way if–all things being equal–it were my ex-husband saying no to the service, rather than me.

    So, they are learning that an important part of supporting a woman being fully human is to support her being fully human. Even if her burden seems heavy, let her develop the fortitude to carry it and provide only the help she asks for after she asks for the help.

  5. Dani Addante says:

    “Like women, men have intrinsic value as human beings. It shouldn’t be necessary to artificially elevate men above women to make them feel important. They simply are important, like we all are.”

    I love this! Thanks for posting this. I remember hearing a few stories in general conference about a husband pulling priesthood rank on his wife, and the speaker saying that men shouldn’t do that. It’s sad that this thing still happens. Since women don’t get priesthood rank, they should not be treated like they’re missing something (in other words, they shouldn’t be treated like they’re of a lower rank).

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.