How Idealizing Motherhood Hurts Mormon Women and Why That's Ok

This post is a response to the article, How Idealizing Motherhood Hurts Mormon Women by Julie Hanks. Reading it probably isn't necessary to get the gist from context although it would certainly help.

I know a name a glorious name, greater than any other
Listen I'll whisper that name to you,
It is the name of MOOTHEERR!

I think the LDS church gets mothers exactly right. First off, the article misrepresents what LDS women are taught about motherhood with phrases like "When we talk about motherhood as the defining aspect of a woman, the core of her identity, or the only valuable contribution," I have never heard an LDS speaker much less a church leader say any of these things. In fact, all of the problems she has with things the church says aren't things the church actually says. They're a misinterpretation of them. She says that we overemphasize motherhood and thereby under emphasize fatherhood but I just don't see it. Probably because I go to priesthood where we talk about it all the time. 

We don't say that motherhood is the most important thing a woman can do in this life(the ideal) to hurt women who aren't mothers. We say it because it's true. There are many other valuable things a woman can do in her lifetime and saying that motherhood is the most important does not make them any less important than they are(very important). It just states the priority and truth that one is more important than some others. To say something is the most important thing is not the same thing as saying it is the only important thing.

The fact is that if you declare anything to be ideal then you have set up categories of meeting or being the ideal and not. And some people will feel bad about that. But that isn't a reason to not state the truth about what IS ideal. If it was a valid reason, then it would be reason to not have ideals at all!

It's part of much larger misunderstanding people are having about the church these days. The title says the thesis of the article pretty succinctly, that idealizing motherhood hurts some mormon women. She makes good arguments to support that position and I won't even argue with it. What she doesn't say, but what she really means is that therefore idealizing motherhood is bad and we should stop doing it. People make that connection with other issues as well. The churches doctrines and policies on homosexuality and gay marriage hurt people so they are bad. The churches stance on pornography cause people to feel guilt and shame so they are bad. The thing God asked me to do hurts/is difficult so it must be wrong.

The argument that a standard of behavior or a "should" hurts people is an argument against ALL standards and all declarations of importance. Should we not say theft is bad because saying so may make the thief feel guilty? Should we not say that giving to the poor is good because saying so might make people who don't feel bad? Should we not have the admonition that "All worthy young men should serve a mission" because some people who don't will feel bad?

When you make any declaration of the type: this is right, this is wrong. Some people will inevitably fall into each category. They may feel bad about that, but to argue that that is reason to not make declarations of right and wrong is a recipe for moral relativism.

Let's talk about that connection that is an assumption of this argument. Hurt=Bad. 

The scriptures show about a God who asks people to do hard things to prove themselves. To cross wildernesses, oceans and plains. Joseph Smith taught that "a religion that does not require the sacrifice of all things never has the power sufficient to produce the faith necessary unto life and salvation.”We worship a God whose defining moment was of willingly submission to greater suffering than we can comprehend. Hurt isn't bad. Suffering brings us to the cross-roads where our character is determined. And that's where the LDS church NAILS motherhood. Eve in the Garden had the wisdom to expose herself and all humankind to suffering. Elder Holland's declaration last conference(which I can only assume the author is at least somewhat referring to with her criticism) that "No love in mortality comes closer to approximating the pure love of Jesus Christ than the selfless love a devoted mother has for her child." may leave some people feeling lonely, wishing they weren't single, but that loneliness is an opportunity to share that suffering with the savior and draw closer to him. Willing suffering is the greatest testimony of love there is and the very genesis of love. We love that for which we suffer.

All of this is not to say that there isn't value in acknowledging this suffering. There is great value in it! When people are suffering it is our duty to go to them, comfort them, and share their suffering with them. 

I've heard multiple LDS leaders say to the members, "The greatest work you will ever do will be within the walls of your own home." When they say that, I don't think they're just talking to the rank and file members of the church. They're talking to CEO's, legislators and to each other. I sincerely believe that the greatest work Thomas S Monson, Jeffrey R. Holland, Sherry Dew or Linda K Burton will ever do will be within the walls of his own home and we will never see it. 

So yah, I'm a single 30 year old Mormon and to be honest that sucks. I want to be a husband and father more than anything on earth, but I'm not. It hurts, but that hurt doesn't have to be accompanied by blame. Being a father isn't any less ideal for me not being one and the hurt I experience because of it. The church's unique emphasis on family being the ideal is one of the reason's it's uniquely true and I wouldn't change that for the world.