When I had to give my first talk in Sacrament Meeting when I was nine years old, I remember my dad telling me that a lot of people read definitions from the dictionary as part of their talk. He suggested it might be a good idea and it would burn seconds from my talk that I wouldn't have to fill with meaningful material. I considered it, but ultimately decided against it. At the age of nine I remember feeling like reading a definition from a dictionary seemed so juvenile. Now, I chuckle to myself when I see my peers reading definitions at the pulpit. Really, guys? You think I actually care what Merriam Webster says about the word "testimony"? C'mon! Put a little thought into your talk for goodness sake.
I'm going against my own sound judgment right now, but I really have no choice. I've looked a lot of places for a definition of "misogynist" that actually describes me or anything I've typed. Some of you might think you actually know the definition... which would explain your ignorance in using the word so frequently. "Hatred, dislike, or mistrust of women". That's the definition. Everyone who thinks our blog is embracing, condoning, or encouraging misogynist ideals is an idiot. The only time a misogynist thought has ever even entered my head was when I was reading through the blog comments. I can't even tell you how often I whispered to myself, "How can people be so stupid?"
I found my answer to that question. People just like to be offended. People look for reasons to be pissed. For example, I could have typed a three paragraph disclaimer and then typed the following sentence: Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children. Followed immediately by another paragraph explanation of what that sentence means. But still the majority of people would conveniently skip everything except that one single sentence. And because their defenses are up and they're looking for a reason to be offended, they probably wouldn't notice or even care that the bold sentence is a direct quote from The Family: A Proclamation to the World.
Sure, everyone wants to expound on what they think this sentence means. They want to say, "Oh but what about [blah blah blah]" or "But you skipped the part where it says [blah blah blah]". But I ask you, does any additional explanation or background make that sentence any less true? No it does not. It might help others to understand more fully what our church leaders are trying to say, but the sentence BY ITSELF is still true no matter how much detail you pack around it. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children.
Are there exceptions to this rule? Of course there are. But when God commanded "Thou shalt not kill" he also made a few exceptions to that rule as well, didn't He? "Thou shalt not kill... unless you're defending your family... or maybe if I ask you to lop someone's head off or something."
What saddens me the most is the alarming number of women who think they are an exception to this counsel. They have chosen to live a lifestyle that requires two incomes and they use their current financial situation as an excuse to give their children to a babysitter or daycare center all day long. "Well, I have to work in order to provide for my family." Oh really? Do you have cable? Do you drive new(er) vehicles? Do you buy name-brand cereal? Guess what, sister? Being home with your kids is more important than having the Disney Channel and a flat screen TV. And it ALWAYS WILL BE. How about you move into a cheaper house, sell one of your cars, buy a bus pass, and shop at Deseret Industries so you can raise your own children and not ditch them with someone else.
I'm not going to bother going through all of the exceptions to the Church's policy. I hope things like "single mothers" and "disabled fathers" are situations I don't need to delve into. But I'm sure there will be some morons who try to make that argument in their comment.
So feel free to leave a three paragraph comment (that we actually DO read) and tell me how wrong I am and how right you are. Please. I can't wait.
"You were not created to be the same as men. Your natural attributes, affections, and personalities are entirely different from these of a man. They consist of faithfulness, benevolence, kindness, and charity. They also balance the more aggressive and competitive nature of man. The business world is competitive and sometimes ruthless. We do not doubt that women have both the brain power and the skills to compete with men. But by competing they must of necessity, become aggressive and competitive. Thus their godly attributes are diminished and they acquire a quality of sameness with man. The conventional wisdom of the day would have you be equal with men. We say, we would not have you descend to that level."
-President Ezra Taft Benson