Eh, hate to be a spoilsport, but between obesity issues and the fact that some of God’s other children are literally starving to death, I think it is completely inappropriate.

Who invited Judgey McJudgerson?

We had an annual Twinkies and milk contest @ scout camp. I remember some epic vomiting. If only we had digital cameras w/video back then.

I don’t think my kids have ever eaten a Twinkie. Maybe jack-o-laterns can wait a day or two and we’ll get out the camping tarp for FHE this evening.

My experience in a lifetime of LDS living is that male oriented activities in the church tend to bring out the critic in some LDS women. Sometimes I chalk it up to not liking specific activities and sometimes I think its just plain old fashion sexism. Not sure here what to describe it as in #1 and #5.

Julie and ESO – while I am a big advocate of equality and many YW/YM lessons make me want to puke given the subjects, I think that letting some YM have some fun overeating is pretty harmless compared to what they could be doing.

As a “hey, let’s get together and do this” kind of activity, I think it’s dumb but sounds like the kind of thing most boys would find fun. (And we all know “the only difference between men and boys is the size of their wallet and the cost of their toys.”)

As an official activity under the aegis of the church, I’m with Julie M. Smith and Eso.

“My experience in a lifetime of LDS living is that male oriented activities in the church tend to bring out the critic in some LDS women.”

“I think it’s dumb but sounds like the kind of thing most boys would find fun.”

IMO, there has been a little too much feminizing of the YM/YW program and adolescence as a whole, now you want to criminalize an eating contest?

bbell–

Tell me exactly how eating donuts is a “male oriented activit[y]” OR tell me how it is an activity that “promotes the growth and development of each young man through quorum instruction, quorum activities…. strengthens the work of the Aaronic Priesthood in the ward and gives support to the parents and the home” or helps “fulfill the purposes of the Aaronic Priesthood” which, according to my reading, is what the YM is supposed to be doing.

In my experience, YM specialize in activities that require little preparation, includes food, and hosts most activities for the sole purpose of “creating a zion community” or “fellowshipping” or “bonding.” Pizza parties, paintball, eating contests, playing Guitar Hero, and the like simply have NOTHING to do with the gospel. They may be fun. They may draw a crowd of kids you don’t normally see. They are not, however, worthy of church sponsorship. [As others have said: do them as casual get-togethers, invite their dads, join in with the local YSA, but DON'T demand 2 hours of my kids time on a school night to make yourselves sick by wasting time, money, and food].

If you, or other men who serve with you, or the YM themselves cannot think of constructive enjoyable activities that do not directly contradict church teachings and general wisdom, well…I don’t know what to say. I guess I feel sorry for you.

ESO,

You completely miss the point of why there are so many male oriented fun activities. If you do not do the type of activities you describe so disdainfully you will not have a functioning YM’s program past age 14. Why you ask? The boys will not come if its not male oriented and fun. So if they don’t come what do you have for a YM’s program? You got nothing. If you got no boys for activities they don’t make LDS friends. If they don’t make LDS friends they are lost to inactivity during this difficult time. The underlying purpose of the YM’s program is to get them thru the rocky teenage years and on a mission. Feminize the program and take the male fun out of it and boom its over for many of them. They have choices and they will choose to stay home. And then they won’t gain a testimony because they simply will not be engaged.

Game over. You are throwing out bad advice. That elder in the Oakland Mission? He was inactive for almost all of YM’s. He came a couple of times for super fun activities. He looks back now on the donut eating victory as one of the reasons he stayed engaged at all during High School. That little engagement he had spurred some serious thinking and led to his re-activation and current mission.

Boys need competition. Whether eating contests, dodgeball, wrestling, girls, etc… it is a natural part of the adolescent process. In my opinion, eating is one competition that equalizes a group. You don’t need to be athletic, good looking or smart, you just need a mouth and a stomach to participate. In fact, most competitve eaters are not obese, but thin – so even the streotype that the “bigger” kids will win is moot. If you don’t win, at least you can feel included by taking merely 1 bite.

As a father of a couple of awkward, non-athletic boys that try to fit in, I would welcome more opportunities to bond around competitions with an equal playing field.

“If you do not do the type of activities you describe so disdainfully you will not have a functioning YM’s program past age 14. Why you ask? The boys will not come if its not male oriented and fun.”

We never had any eating contests in my ward as a YM and I managed to avoid inactivity, as did nearly all my friends. Again, I don’t see anythin “male oriented” about eating contests.

“We never had any eating contests in my ward….”

Lucy Mack Smith never read a copy of the book of Mormon to her kids and they turned out fine. Why do I need to?

Pres. Ucthdorf never attended scouts, why do…

Bill Gates never graduated…

Your having never done something merely proves something is not a perquisite for you. Not necessarily someone else. Extrapolation from your own case works best with principles not with precise details. So if you were to say, “We never did anything that was wasteful, pointless, and fun and I turned out ok.” gives us something. But then we’d need to discuss specifics

“Male oriented?” Yes. Something I’d organize? No.

Checking the records at the Major League Eating Records turns up more males than females. So it seems more male than female oriented. I’d also note that apparently the 105 pound Sonya Thomas is one hell of an eater as she holds multiple records

http://www.ifoce.com/records.php

John M,

My exp in 15 years is that most 14-15 year old boys are only somewhat loosely connected to the church. They tend to be very connected to their friends. Very few are actually converted and most can be lost very easily. You have to find a balancing act between total fun and activities with a purpose. In the end if they are not coming you have probably lost the race with them. Get them to come first and then you can work on the spiritual development

Feminize seems to be synonymous with unfun. Do I have that right?

I fail to see how ANY of the activities on my list are the least bit womanly.

Do you seriously think the YW would hear that list and shout “hurray”? No. They are not creatures from a different planet. But they are useful and educational activities. The key to service projects is this: DON”T call them service projects. Now you know.

Please list, if you will, some “male oriented” activities that do not include electronics, gluttony, or guns. I guess I have NO idea what you are talking about.

John Mansfield–the food production in my area is largely hand-harvested (commercially, by illegal aliens): cabbage, apples, and the like. At the end of the season, our YSA and youth regularly glean and donate to Foodlink. http://www.foodlinkny.org/

bbell, have you tried working with their parents to get them to come? I always make sure my kids attend YM or YW (on pain of losing their phones) but if they were to come to me and say that the activity is an eating contest, then I would tell them to do homework or something more worthwhile instead.

I think service projects can be fun. There’s no reason why you can’t have fun while also engaging in something service oriented. The YM in my ward have recently had an auto-repair night where they learned some basics and also did some oil changes for people in the ward (they had to buy their own oil). The same could go for cooking meals or bike repair or any other worthwhile skill. Even teemagers like to learn how to do something, and while they’re learning, they can usually perform service.

I think if service projects are more frequent, well organized, and if you involve the parents in them and make sure you have their support, then service projects would be well attended. I’m not saying you can’t have some activities that are not just fun, but even then they should not be “eat till you puke” contests.

MCQ,

We do the whole automotive repair thing pretty regularly. Couple of weeks ago we repaired some brakes. You really need to do some male bonding stuff from time to time. Service projects are really tricky with YM with bad attitudes

Did that one last year Ron.

With all this controversy I am shocked that the eating disorders angle hasn’t been brought up yet. Frankly that would be my primary concern with running an activity like this.

Let’s just call it Binge ‘N Purge Night, shall we?

People are being very critical of eating competitions – but there’s no reason that a stake that sponsors activities like this can’t ALSO be doing all these good things that have been suggested.

“feminize” actually means “to make feminine” and I am asking what in the list I made (#15) or any other activity common for LDS youth engages in would cause you to be feminine? This is not needlepoint or dancing. This is work. Is work feminine? Because if it is, we have very different definitions of masculine.

I am absolutely not saying that you MUST do activities like those listed. I just think that learning and serving is more useful than eating. Shoot off rockets, but learn some of the mechanics. It is better than an eating competition. Go see a movie together, and then engage in an academic participation of it. Play lacrosse, but learn about the Iroquois rules in preparation. Go through this book (http://www.amazon.com/Fifty-Dangerous-Things-Should-Children) and LEARN the science behind the activities, for holy schnickeys, but don’t whine about how the women are making you sissies. Be an adult.

And as for “non-feminine” yw activities, my yw president mother became famous for taking the girls through car wash dryers with the windows down. Absolutely stupid? Yes. Meaningless? Those active, loving, temple-going young women would say absolutely not.

rd–and can you not accept that some YM/YW, when faced with fairly idiotic activities week after week, would be turned OFF to the Church? Perhaps he would decide that youth activities were a total waste of time. Obviously we are all talking about a balance, but I don’t think the pendulum needs to swing QUITE to the level of activities that make you violently ill.

Oh, and by the way, I have four daughters and would never let them go to such an activity.

I don’t think it is easy to define what male-oriented activities are. I’m guessing that 1/3 to 1/2 of YM in most wards don’t want anything to do with scouting, for instance. Ditto church basketball, or any other activity you can think of. The best we can do is to offer a range of activities which 1)appeal to a broad spectrum of our youth, and 2)encourage and teach them to become adults who are committed to the gospel.

The other thing we are forgetting here is the question about what happens to them when they turn 18? We have a huge problem with YSA going inactive (I’ve heard that YSA activity in many places is less than 10%), and I believe that a big part of that problem can be attributed to six years of church between 12-18 which gives them the idea that Mormonism is about goofing off, Priest/Laurel water fights and pizza parties, all paid for by somebody else. A mission president in our area said that of every 100 missionaries he gets he will send 15 of them home because they have never figured out how to act like grown-ups and they expect that the two years of their mission will be an extension of their teenage years.

If bbell’s YM are doing this every week, then yes, you might have a problem, but once in a while? Come on, even Joseph Smith took out time from prophesying and church-building to horse around with the neighborhood boys. From my experience (ward YM president twice and stake YM president once) young men need to be ENGAGED before anything else. And at that age (14+) all the nice little things they did in Primary and even in Deacon’s Quorum just don’t cut it anymore. Add to that the fact we require them to come up with the activities (leadership and all that) we need to let them actually do that rather than just shooting down every suggestion that they make. Of course, you need to guide them, but you also need to give a little also.

Annual traditions give a sense of continuity to a program. We have traditions of service (firewood to the widows and needy, spring clean-up, etc.) and also traditions of father-son basketball games, turkey shoots, and Lake Powell-worthy cardboard boats. We are told that every activity should have a priesthood purpose and one of those purposes sometimes is just fellowship, that’s all.

Danithew @ 37

Which scout camp?

YAJ, no one is saying you can’t have fun activities. People have been arguing that this particular activity sounds like it’s over the top of “fun” and into the mud of “wasteful, unhealthy and inappropriate.” The activities you listed sound wonderful.

“I don’t think that the YM having a donut eating contest is any less wasteful or pointlessly indulgent than most Enrichment activities”

Wow. Really? What is it exactly that you think is going on at Enrichment? Your comment sounds bitter. Are you feeling shortchanged somehow? Cause I think the gals would trade you anytime.

Ed–sometimes, that is exactly how it feels, lol.

Is capture the flag too immature for people? Or water-balloon fights?

Kids like to be rambunctious sometimes. In fact, a lot of adults like to be rambunctious sometimes.

Some people felt Joseph Smith was not a prophet because he was willing to wrestle in the mud and have some boisterous fun once in awhile.

danithew, no one is against fun (at least, no one on this thread so far). The issue (to me at least) is whether a Church activity ought to do something that actually (rather than metaphorically, as is more usual) causes people to vomit.

My son is the Teacher’s quorum president in our ward. Last night the YW/YM leaders asked for activity suggestions from all of the youth leadership. The Laurel’s suggested a food fight in the parking lot. So eating and food related waste is not a masculine or feminine issue. For kids, a food fight sounds like fun. So – it is on the schedule and will include messy things like spaghetti, cremes and sauces. They are excited about the actuivity and plan on inviting friends because, while it is messy, it is also clean fun. Not all church activities have to be “spiritual” or uplifting.

They also planned an outing to the temple, a service project and some ideas for firesides. A food eating contest, or a food fight is not the ned of the world and, while it may seem wasteful, it has motivated the kids to invite non-members, has excited them about youth activities, and teaches them that being a “Mormon” isn’t just about things spiritual, but can also be fun.

I don’t see how any of this is a masculine or feminine issue. Fun, donuts, silliness, and being a party-pooper are not gender specific.

The faulty assumption here in the “what do you want to do to entertain the boys” meme is that boys need to attend YM every week.

As far as I’m concerned, when they’ve all earned their Eagles and their DTG certificates, then they can worry about fun.

Nate W, it’s project mayhem that is nihilistic. There’s not actually anything especially nihilistic about the fight club. Learn the difference. When did everyone start pretending to be a literary critic.

(and I’ve read the book twice; the quotes I offer above are from page 50)

DKL:

The point of Fight Club was that it was the precursor to Project Mayhem. It was group therapy focused on self-destruction rather than self-improvement. The function it fulfilled was the same one that the group therapy sessions did: making him feel numb. “Nothing was solved when the fight was over, but nothing mattered.” Later, the narrator finds that Fight Club isn’t working for him anymore, and Tyler explains it’s because he has to hit bottom–”Tyler says I’m nowhere near hitting the bottom, yet. And if I don’t fall all the way, I can’t be saved….I shouldn’t just abandon money and property and knowledge. This isn’t just a weekend retreat. I should run from self-improvement, and I should be running toward disaster. I can’t just play it safe anymore.” Cue Project Mayhem.

@ #48, Mark Brown – That mission president really sends home one out of every 7 missionaries that comes to his mission? I find that hard to believe. If that is true, then I’ll be more grateful for my own mission president who I thought was too harsh.

Nate W, the notion that Fight Club is about nihilism does nothing to unify or explain the plot, but reduces it to some tired, episodic adventures devoid of any significant meaning.

The point of the fight club is to inject an element of chaos and disorder by virtue of the unpredictability of competition. This element offers a man some modicum of fulfillment, and without it, men are doomed to pursue the illusion of order and permanence that is offered by “the real world” (as the protagonist calls it early on) that has resulted from the relentless feminizing.

Before the two quotes offered above, the protagonist states:

It used to be enough that when I came home angry and knowing that my life wasn’t toeing my five-year plan, I could clean my condominium or detail my car. Someday, I’d be dead without a scar and there would be a really nice condo and car. Really, really nice, until the dust settled or the next owner. Nothing is static. Even the Mona Lisa is falling apart. Since fight club, I can wiggle half the teeth in my jaw.

Maybe self-improvement isn’t the answer.

Tyler never knew his father.

Maybe self-destruction is the answer.

And he’s dead on about self-destruction — from the protagonist’s point of view, since he accepts the feminized framework of “the real world.” Look at what’s going on here in this thread: The women here have objected to the donut-eating competition partly because it’s not healthy; i.e., it’s a self destructive activity. What men do, as virtuous and complete men, strikes many women as self-destructive. It’s crazy to watch this feminizing in action, to see a donut eating contest treated as self-destructive, as though it were somehow equivalent to the fight club. So it happens with every other basically wholesome male activity.

Fight Club presupposes a fundamentally Aristotelian ethic — an ethic of communal values that must be shown and cannot be taught. The fight club is Tyler’s and the protagonist’s effort to arrive at a complete and virtuous manhood in spite of the void in society that has robbed them of the models necessary to arrive there. But without an example to follow, their creation ex nihilo inevitably careens off course. The result is the nihilism of project mayhem.

Since project mayhem isn’t a viable alternative to the family-as-franchise model that has become so common since the success of 2nd wave feminism, Palahniuk leaves the reader with no answer to the dilemma of how to effect a restoration of the lost virtue of manhood. Fight Club is not Mormonism, and so it offers us no grand theophany to rescue the world from its apostasy. (In the case of Fight Club, it’s a feminist-induced apostasy.)

Thus, as I said, the fight club is the road to manhood. In the book, its primary problem is the absence of leaders who are already virtuous. It leads to project mayhem for the same reasons that the first two rules of the fight club are “you don’t talk about fight club” — because you must learn manhood by example. And so the words that embody the core of its purpose also ensure its ultimate failure.

Ideally, YM contains some element of the fight club. This, combined with virtuous leaders, results in missionaries, not mayhem.

Nate, isn’t it a bit pedantic of you to inject an interpretation of Fight Club that has nothing to do with the topic at hand — especially when it’s the same sort of interpretation that drooling meatheads everywhere have posted on their blogs because they think it’s cool to use words like “nihilism” — and especially when that boilerplate interpretation is the basis for accusing me of not reading the book?

Patriarchy is not simply seeing things from a man’s point of view, it is also having associated power to enforce that POV. That is why we generally do not complain about a matriarchy in the Church: women do not have power. When bbell complains about the YM program being “feminized” it is ridiculous: no woman at any level of the Church has any say about the YM program. It’s men all the way up.

Actually, ESO, what you see here is a lot of complaining about matriarchy — the influence that women have in distorting discourse, and thereby the priorities of an organization. Are you being purposefully subversive by denying that this is occurring when it obviously is? Or are you just so blinded by feminism that you just blindly assume your own impotence at every turn?

There are many wards where the sort of feedback that we see here would mean the death of the donut-eating contest. You’re right that feminists have a fetish with who’s nominally “in power,” because that gives them a boogie man to hide their agenda behind.

The truth is that feminists won’t be happy until they’ve destroyed every vestige of gender-specific behavior that evidences masculinity. If they have their way, then say goodbye to the days of the “benevolent dictatorship” of patriarchy, and welcome the new heavy-handed dictatorship of assimilation and destruction — political correctness writ large.

no woman at any level of the Church has any say about the YM program.”

This is simply false as pointed out by DKL and others.

you’re all a bunch of doughnut holes!

LDG,

My impression is that many feminist women as demonstrated by this thread and their comments have disdain for males. Most of my LDS female relatives and friends share this same disdain for males to some degree. I even know LDS females who are upset that they are giving birth to little boys who then turn into these unappetizing creatures. I actually think some of the rhetoric we hear from the pulpit in the LDS church reinforces this idea that male=bad.

This did really start out as a light hearted post about teenagers doing silly things that they really want to do and how traditions are important to retention but the Fems can’t really help themselves therefore fulfilling the stereotype.

Since when did anti-donut eating become one of the major staples of feminism? And when did Fight Club becoming something more than an engaging book (or movie) with a tight plot, interesting characters, and some social commentary that could be interpreted differently depending on the reader?

The idea that our church is some kind of sanctuary for radical feminism seems pretty far-fetched. Can’t somebody object to church-sponsored over-eating without being accused of demonizing half of the earth’s population?

ESO, you can’t say (on the one hand) “all men are raised by women” and maintain (on the other hand) “women have no power.”

I, too, have heard that the new YW curriculum was vetoed by dotty old men who liked the references to Johnny Widsoe in the old manuals. But that sort of thing could happen to the YM presidency, too. And it could happen if the Quorum of the Twelve contained women (as I think that it should). This notion that the YW was uniquely put upon by the the Q12 is bunk.

BTW, most bishops are more likely to cancel events based on feedback from mothers than from fathers, for the same reason that society awards custody of children to mothers by default; viz., your sexist presumption that everyone is raised by women.

Ed, the church is not a sanctuary of radical feminism, it simply reflects the predominant, anti-male sexism of our culture.

Maybe I am just blind – The only place I have ever seen a lot of anti-male sexist sentiment in my life has been in the opinion section of the newspaper.

DKL said: ESO, you can’t say (on the one hand) “all men are raised by women” and maintain (on the other hand) “women have no power.”

In fact, I can. I said that women have no power over the YM program within the Church. That has nothing to do with raising most children. Women also have no power over the EQ, HPG, HC, or Seventies.

DKL said: …But that sort of thing could happen to the YM presidency, too. And it could happen if the Quorum of the Twelve contained women (as I think that it should). This notion that the YW was uniquely put upon by the the Q12 is bunk.

You are correct that the higher-ups can rain on anyone’s parade (the only specific examples I know of are YW and RS, but I would not be surprised to hear of others). I am just saying that there are no women who are higher-ups. I am glad you would welcome women into the Q12.

It is human nature, I believe NOT to examine critically activities which we view as normal. If you, for example, participated in winter camp-outs, maybe you would think that a Winter Trek (as was proposed and approved by men in my stake, from the Stake YM Presidency to the HC to the Stake President), but when women were informed, women who had not participated in winter camp-outs, they objected vigorously. Likewise, some Bishops object to Achievement Day girls making Pinewood Derby cars; in THEIR day, after all, girls didn’t do that. Bishops are protecting the integrity of the activity in which they have been personally invested. Having men make up the totality of the leadership means that they will be naturally biased in favor of the kind of activities they themselves have participated in.

DKL said: BTW, most bishops are more likely to cancel events based on feedback from mothers than from fathers….

I wonder if it is possible that mothers give more feedback to Bishops than fathers do? I don’t know. I do know that many of the activities listed that I judge to have been less-than-optimum activities, included the Bishops in attendance. I am guessing those Bishops would then defend that activity. They probably do not feel the same way about the Laurel sleepover or the Beehives getting pedicures. If they have no personal involvement (and no memories about their own twinkie-eating contests at scout camp), they are less likely to protect an organizations’ right to conduct whatever activities they wish.

MCQ, regarding custody, I know plenty of men who would claim otherwise. I don’t know a single woman who would.

Regarding the rest of your comment, the irony is that by trying to frame my position as “eating contests are some sort of sacred male bonding trope,” you have reduced a serious argument to parody. Once again, you come on board with your straw men and pretend to settle the issue by appealing to oversimplifications that simply have nothing to do with the argument. Nevertheless, I like you, so I’ll explain how this works:

There needs to be a space for boys to boys in boyish ways. Specific activities that occur within this space, be they donut-eating contests or paint-ball, are not significant as individual activities. There is this category of activities that fit the bill, and having time to participate in categories from these activities is an essential part of growing up as a man in our society — not rights of passage, but opportunities to teach through recreational modeling. To choose any specific one of them and pretend that someone has implied that it is uniquely significant runs afoul of the fallacy of division.

MCQ, your simplistic appeals to straw men have become more predictable than my own, well-worn opinions.

ESO, when my wife was primary president, the Faith in God girls did pinewood derby. They loved it, and I had a blast working with my girls to make their cars. I have 4 girls, and it’s very important to me that they have quality programs at church. I fear that we lose a lot of girls in the church because so much investment is put into the boys, and the girls feel left behind. Retention needs to be the focus, and I think that’s bbell’s original point.

DKL, I’m enjoying your comments and also think the fact that you have to explain why men like to blow stuff up in educated terms such as “recreational modeling” and “fallacy of division” proves your point. The nature of discussion has become so feminized-and-intellectualized that you practically have the deck stacked against you before you begin. This is why it seems quite silly to be arguing over, in intellectual terms no less, about eating donuts. They’ve already won because the debate is conducted on their terms. I suggest grunting and drooling as an appropriate protest.

DKL, I know that there are lots and lots of men who feel victimized by the divorce courts. Some of them may actually have a point, because the divorce laws have evolved from a position of trying to protect women and children from becoming destitute through divorce. Most state laws have now become more even-handed, but there may be vestiges of problems that still exist. Mostly though, these men are simply bemoaning the inescapable fact that they lost the marital home to their ex wives, the marital estate was split in half, a high percentage of their income now goes to alimony and child support, and they now see their children only every other weekend and one weeknight per week. And this happens even when the divorce was completely the choice of the wife. That’s the reality of divorce and there’s not much anyone can do about it. Of course, the same thing can just as easily happen to the woman if she is the wage earner and the man is the primary care giver who wants a divorce, but that usually isn’t the case.

I certainly agree with you that there needs to be space for boys to be boys in boyish ways. I think everyone on this thread would agree with that. Now who’s creating a straw man? I was just suggesting that eating contests are not a particularly good example of that.

And I still think the idea of a bunch of males in the church being victimized by feminists on the march is incredibly comical. It’s so not a part of any reality I’m familiar with that it’s funny. I mean, when the so-called feminists can’t even consistently get the right to say the opening prayer in some wards, I don’t think we need fear that they’re taking over. The fact that some here are labeling it as “feminizing” when others just want to moderate the stupidity of a given activity shows that they have a problem with maturity and a poor relationship with their wives and mothers (in that they are confused about which is which).

But hey, as I said, it’s all very entertaining, so carry on.

92 – I think letting girls make pinewood derby cars is one of the best ideas I’ve ever heard. I think I might just suggest it in our ward.

MCQ, whether eating contests are an excellent example of a masculine activity is beside the point. It is enough for the discussion at hand that it is designed to occur in this protected space.

And though the proposition, “boys need space to be boys in boyish ways” seems obvious enough, the fact is that when you actually start talking about what occurs in this space, you get an awful lot of pushback. So, no matter how many feminists assent to the proposition “boys need space to be boys in boyish ways,” they’ll always proceed to argue against every measure designed to occur in such a space. Seriously, the feminists on this thread have argued that an annual eating contest — an eating contest — is self destructive.

The admission by feminists that “boys need space to be boys in boyish ways” is token at best. What they really mean is something like “boys need space to be boys in the ways that I, as a woman, deem to be appropriate for them.” See comment #15 for incontrovertible evidence that my argument is no mere straw man.

And whether something is comical depends on how you state it. Thanks for reminding us once again of how good you are at creating straw men.

chris: …the fact that you have to explain why men like to blow stuff up in educated terms such as “recreational modeling” and “fallacy of division” proves your point. The nature of discussion has become so feminized-and-intellectualized that you practically have the deck stacked against you before you begin. This is why it seems quite silly to be arguing over, in intellectual terms no less, about eating donuts.

That’s a brilliant point. Society despises manliness. When I was a kid, I watched cartoons where Tom and Jerry brutalized each other with meat cleavers, anvils, and dynamite. We’ve replaced these images with Barney the dinosaur dancing around and telling kids how special they are. Well guess what? Guys don’t give a crap how special they are, but if you tell them that long enough you end up with middle class white kids shooting up their high school. Cue project mayhem.

Great activity. At a YSA fhe one march, we did a mashed potatoe eating contest. It was much fun.

TMD, Dan Quayle will disagree, but if you check you will find that there is no “e” in potato.

Perhaps I will try not taking life so seriously.
P.S. Being female, I don’t have horns for locking with.

MCQ and DKL–I agree that no one on this thread has suggested that boys ought not be boyish; my only assertion was that an official Church activity is not the best forum for it.

My ward also does a girl’s pinewood derby, and it is a very popular activity (we also do High Adventure activities for the YW every year). For one example of a bishop that nixed girls’ inclusion, read here: http://www.the-exponent.com/2009/02/23/inviting-girls-to-pinewood-derby/

I think its fine to have pinewood derbies for the activity day girls. Along with any other activity they want to do on their nite with their leaders.

I do think though that an official cub scout pinewood derby should be cub scouts only with only cub scouts participating in the actual race and rewards. Like I stated earlier in the thread boys need space to be boys. Otherwise its no longer a cub scount event and it really changes the event. See my comments about feminizing boy activities above. ESO I think thats a good example of trying to do this. Which is what DKL and others have been posting about

For the record I think women and girls need their own events like YW and RS events without males so they remain female activities without changing the whole dynamic of the events.

You could if you wanted have a ward or primary pinewood derby just for fun. I could see how that would be pretty fun for a ward activity. Have one car per family or whatever.

Right, I’m just saying that’s a different beast and would probably not fly in most wards for a variety of reasons, the most important of which, in my mind, is the fact that it can’t be a cub scout event if you include the girls. But I think the girls enjoy having their own derby more anyway. It’s different when the girls do it, and it should be.

In any event, the point was that boys need space to be boys and do boy things, just as girls need space to be girls and do girl things. Sometimes those things are similar things, like pinewood derbies, but that doesn’t mean they have to do those things together, or do them in the same way.

My only point was that there was nothing inherently “boyish” about eating doughnuts until you puke. Girls might want to do that too, and my reaction would be the same: do it on your own time if you must, but it’s not something we want to do for a church activity. I have the same reaction to blue darts, belching contests, wizzing for distance (or accuracy), smoking pixie sticks or shaving funny shapes into each others’ hair. All of these things have been done since time began by groups of adolescents, but that doesn’t mean they would make good church activities.

“between obesity issues and the fact that some of God’s other children are literally starving to death, I think it is completely inappropriate.”

And people could be doing service rather than reading blogs and leaving condemning comments.

But we don’t because we are human beings who seek out others for shared experiences. Just because this activity doesn’t float your spiritual boat, don’t be so quick to dismiss its value to others. There are plenty of things I find indespensible to my spiritual wellbeing and connectedness that others set at naught for themselves, and vice-versa. That is what makes life great, and interesting, and worth living.

Are there more worthwhile activities out there? Probably so, but how about the beams in our own eyes. Do we waste money on expensive processed food, eat out at restaurants, watch television, use multiple cars per family, drive instead of use a bike, heat or cool our homes beyond necessity, have several dozen changes of clothes, pay for excessive cleaning products, make-up, have several thousand feet of living space for relatively small families, etc. etc. etc. We could all be doing a lot more for the welfare of the world but don’t, and that is okay.

We are too quick to be mote spotters in this life.

My reaction to the original post was “I wish I could still eat doughnuts (wheat issues) because I could totally eat more than 19, I think.” Sounds like a fun activity for once a year.

[...] Ron, commenting on bbell’s post “The Teachers Quorum Donut Eating Contest” at Mormon Mentality: I’d rather do Scouting for Food than Scouting for Money. (my pet name for Friends of Scouting) [...]

On the point that there needs to be “a space for boys to boys in boyish ways,” I can’t disagree with that in general, but I do question the use and definition of “boyish,” and what you’re differentiating from what. Is it an emphasis on the male, or the juvenile?

To that point, this article tackles that question on a broad scale, and is very worth reading: http://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/the-opposite-of-man-is-boy-not-woman-gender-maturity-performance/

Nobody probably cared enough to ask church headquarters.

Nah, I think I’ll let this topic go on until we all grow old and die.

To bbell, Just came to this website looking for more teacher quorum ideas for my own quorum. You asked for some, here are some we have done (some are more ‘manly’ than others, but the ‘less manly’ ones are important for missions):

Canoing, mtn biking, hiking, bowling, shotgun shooting, fishing, basketball, volleyball, learn to lead music, learn to make bread, learn to cook a meal, welding, replace brakes on a car, tune a bike, shovel snow from widows driveways, change oil on a car, golfing range, black power guns, clean sacrament trays, model rockets, build your own water bottle rocket shooter, visit robotic company, rake leaves, prune trees, visit engineering firm, visit a taxidermist, pull dyers woad (a noxious weed), learn dining etiquette, swimming, clean up canyon, physical fitness training, board game night, trampolining.
Never had to have a donut or pie eating contest to get their interest— and never will.