In my experience, the only intellectual discussions that many of us partake in are regarding our professions. We do seem to get tunnel vision, while the blinders are completely off for our female counterparts. I think we have so many professionals in LDS culture now (accountants, lawyers, engineers, management, etc.) that the work-life balance for many of them involves sports as opposed to intellectual pursuits. I get my exercise from gardening.

As a single woman in my early 30s, yes. It is a problem.

Sorry for the double post. Strange.

1. NJensen – very good points. Why do you think we have such blinders? I try to engage in conversations about doctrine, etc, with some male friends and they look at me like I am an alien, so I talk about it with their wives.

2. annegb – I agree with SilverRain – I spit upon “men are doers”

4. SilverRain – I tell my wife if I were a woman I would be a lesbian given the dearth of men that I would like… Although that would be a slight problem in our religion, but when I was in college, I was surrounded by guys in my ward who were 6-8 years into their BA/BS program (not including missions) and seemed to have no direction at all…

6. craigw – sounds like a good HP group. Unfortunately, that has not been my experience.

I pity you too.

I cannot explain the Priesthood teaching thing being so widespread–my best guess is that it is just a culture of low expectations. When I know the teacher will bore me, I try to read the lesson ahead, and pick out one thing I am really excited about and start an appropriate discussion with that point. It works better in SS than RS, in my experience.

Socially: I don’t know. You are correct that the only organized male get-togethers I see are active (or eating) ones. I wonder if the idea is that most of the men use their brain at work and would welcome a reprieve while there is often the assumption that the women’s work is not intellectually stimulating, and therefore, they need to create an outlet for that? I was a part of a book club through my local library that had men in it–that was very interesting. You could try starting one.

All I know is that I really like to talk to other women. So a bookclub gives the perfect opportunity to come together and talk about the book and let the conversation go where it may (intellectual or life experience or feelings).

Reading books and thinking about them requires a group much less than playing basketball does. My wife likes book discussion gatherings, but she seems more excited about it when she is able to get Relief Society women to play basketball with her on a regular basis.

I dislike the men are stupid theme that runs thru both the bloggernaccle and the wider church culture.

I think it helps create the wide discrepancy in activity rates between men and women in the Church.

My current HPG is not particularly stimulating. Most of the men are old enough to be my grandfather, almost half are at least twice my age and it includes 3 Stake Presidents and 2 Patriarchs. There is just a lot of repetition. Though I did hear a story a few weeks ago from one of the older brothers that remembered a Aaronic priesthood lesson from their youth where the leader brought in a pack of cigarettes, burned them through a water pipe and then force fed the distilled nicotine to a cat, killing it.

I don’t know about the less-mature comparison. I don’t think that men today are less mature than men of 30 or so years ago as much as these perceptions are a lagging indicator to changes in social attitudes. I think a similar article could be written about women and how the current Oprah-esque, emotional incontinent society has created a huge cohort of women who have unrealistic expectations from both men and other women. To my parents generation, staying up late playing video games is no less indulgent than girls night out to watch the latest iteration of Jane Eyre, the argument that one is more or less mature is unconvincing (puerile is the word the article uses). Anyone who has these ideas that the men of the 50′s or 60′s or 70′s where crowding the women out of the libraries, museums and theaters is probably suffering from overly-romanticized but unfortunately false nostalgia.

I also doubt that the trend of later marriage, as discussed in the article, is more a result of the feminist movement than some anecdotal sentiment of not finding a “mature” man. The problem didn’t arise in a vacuum, women striving for parity in education and careers have effectively doubled the competition to achieve those markers of maturity. There are going to be some unintended consequences. It is hardly fair to expect the roles/responsibleness of women to change dramatically while whining that the men’s roles/responsibleness haven’t remained static.

I have an unmarried 30-something sister who would read the article shaking her head in agreement and she would be justified in many respects, but that doesn’t change the fact that the opposing viewpoint has been ignored and that a lot of the women who are complaining are unsatisfiable because their expectations are unrealistic with respect to current socio-economic realities. I think that the modern divorce rate is probably somewhat analogous to the problem, I don’t imagine that marriages of decades ago were better as much as expectations of what constitutes fulfillment/success have evolved and that carries over into the dating environment.

Dramatic changes to lifestyles brought on by dual-incomes, expanded educational opportunities, disposable incomes, sexual freedoms etc. are rule changing. Why should the women alone be allowed to pick and choose which rules are supposed to change?

I agree, MAC. How dare women expect men to motivate and improve themselves! It was much better before when women didn’t have such high expectations or as many choices.

SilverRain,

How dare women expect men to motivate and improve themselves! It was much better before when women didn’t have such high expectations or as many choices.

I think everyone should motivate and improve themselves, man or women. And as a father of daughters, I have a vested interest in them having high expectations and many choices.

But the idea that the general caliber of men has decreased due to laziness/lack of ambition is ridiculous.

Consider the premise of the article and the OP, that men are not sufficiently interesting to sophisticated women and the women are suffering for it. The whole idea suggests that women’s expectations are out of alignment with reality and puts the complete onus on the men to change. It is a self-gratifying yet entirely self-defeating idea. A perfect recipe for making childless harpies. Combine a pound of self-pity, a huge sense of entitlement, an ounce unrealistic fantasies about a literary career, that perfect $300 belt from Anthropologie and a dash of cat hair. Mix well, let rest in the classical isle of the local Waldenbooks for a few years. Et voila! You have a woman who has been poorly served by the male population?

You might have some argument in the absence of Sex in the City, 5000 sqft cosmetic departments, The Bravo Channel, InTouch Magazine, Mean-girl syndrome and the C Jane-esque blogs, but you would still have to demonstrate the intrinsic added-value of interesing-to-the-high-brow-feminine pursuits over say fishing or paintball.

bbell,

I completely agree. Not only is “men are stupid” the problem, but “men are sinful, not as spiritual” attitudes as well.

I can see ESO’s point of view. Yes, men are in charge (a few men who stand in a pedestal to point down at the rest of the men that don’t have the same caliber of callings). And yes, when it comes to authority in the church, “men are in charge” is simply the rule.

I think the “overcompensation,” occurs through the “men are stupid” mantra. Women’s views, ideas, and opinions are not as influencial as men’s due to the nature of the leadership in the church, therefore, men with authority try to overcompensate for women’s diminished sense of importance in the church’s desicion making by passively telling everyone women are wonderful while men are merely more than pigs. That men would not be able to do anything right without the women, etc etc etc, blah blah blah.

The worst of sins seem to be always commited by men, just listen to the examples of terrible stories of families suffering due to sin, it is most likely always the patriarch of the home who is to blame. Conference is coming up, keep a little journal of heartbreaking stories, you’ll see how evil and depraved men are and how faithful wives have to put with so much.

I am a medical device engineer. No, I don’t read fiction books. I read history books and essays and relic literature such as the Nag Hammadi Library and early Christian codices. I don’t think I would want to go to a book club for a priesthood activity, but I think it is a good idea. I couldn’t tell you if I can carry a more interesting conversation than any other person because what is interesting to some is not to others.

bbell is blaming male inactivity rates on men not liking to hear “men are stupid” at least in part. Of course, no one would want to hear that they are stupid. But it would surprise me if men ever heard that (and the more sinful thing) from someone who was not a man. All I am saying is that actions speak louder than words and if people, LDS leadership specifically, actually though that all men were stupid, the leadership would surely look very different.

Just as Manuels’ example of leadership “compensating” for women’s diminished feelings of importance by putting women on a pedestal is SO grating to women because clearly, if that lip service reflected factual sentiments, women would BE in that leadership, having actual importance.

I never claimed to have been injured by patriarchy, MAC, I was just saying that I don’t think bbell’s point is valid for a very large population (of course I couldn’t say it wouldn’t knock someone out) because the very idea of “men are stupid” is so overtly paradox to the reality of who the decision makers are.

That’s the curse of being a man in primary–you’re isolated from other men in the ward. I did it for one year. Easy calling, but very very lonely.

Our EQ thought of doing an activity like that (going to a shooting range), but decided, given some of the members of our EQ, that it would probably be too dangerous. In any case, I guess I’m lucky right now because: 1. I’m not in primary, and 2. a large percentage of my EQ is capable of and engages in thoughtful discussions. More than half of us are students, so perhaps that has something to do with it. And our lessons are generally pretty good too.

[...] Devyn doesn’t want a little less conversation. [...]

I can’t believe worthwhile righteous men don’t exist, but at the same time, where are they?

Married?

RS Sisters are given a meeting room to call their own. They decorate it, have an organ or piano to play music, special soft chairs, etc… The church gives them ‘special’ physical space and in turn, they feel special and do special things.

The High Priests are usually given the High Council room to meet in. It has a special door to the stake presidents office. It looks like a corporate board room. Pictures of powerful priesthood leaders hang on the walls. The surroundings dictate that meaningful, deep, spiritual discussions take place in there.

The young women have classroom space that they transform into their own personal meeting space. The priests meet in the Bishops office. Primary has their own space that they decorate to create an atmosphere appropriate for their intended audience. Even the nursery has an age appropriate meeting space.

What does the elders quorum get? Whatever left over corner of the building is currently not being used (stage, cultural hall, kitchen, broom closet).

If you treat a group of people as an afterthought long enough, eventually they will treat the offending organization as an afterthought.

17. MAC – wow great comment with a lot of interesting points. My HPG is similar – they are all several decades older than me. Ok, the cat story has to be one of the best of the year… I am guessing the trend to later marriage is a combination of a lot of things and does not have a simple explanation.

18. MAC – well said…

“I can’t believe worthwhile righteous men don’t exist, but at the same time, where are they?”

I like to tell my wife that I’m the reason that people often ask “Why are all the good men taken?” Sometimes I combine that statement with my old stand-by line of, “When you married me, you won the husband lottery.” Oddly, she’s never agreed with me outright on either of those propositions.

24. MCQ – what are you wowing? Yes I should try the experiment, but likely I would invite men who are not in the Church as they seem more willing to engage intellectually. Yes there are men in the ‘nacle, but we are scattered to the 4 winds.

26. JamesM – shooting guns? wow – where do you live?

27. Tim – good for you, but you seem to be an outlier

28. SilverRain – very fair points and I would agree completely…

32. ESO – that is a good book. Foreign films – those tend to be a bit “risque” for the typical Mormon…

33. jm – ok my HPG meets in the High Council room but let me tell you it is not intellectually engaging and usually bores me to tears which is why I am glad to be in Nursery…

34. Natasha – not sure I agree with you – sure many men do get some intellectual output at work but it is not intellectual from a religious perspective which is what I am referring to as well

Devyn-

On the outskirts of Northern VA. Basically a suburban ward…

By the way, if you want me to host a “what is women’s problem” post, I’d be MORE than happy to do it.

Okay SilverRain, I’ll concede one thing. I didn’t understand that you were talking about church activity, I thought you were talking about activity (lack of laziness) in general. Go back and read your comment, put it in context of the discussion which had thus far talked about women being ambitious, intelligent, and thinkers compared to men who . . . aren’t, and try to understand how one could easily have no idea you were talking about church activity with your comment. In fact, now that I know you were talking about church activity, I really don’t know how your comment fits into the discussion which is about men having intellectual discussions instead of playing sports.

That being said, what does “Honestly, who needs to marry a man who is more involved in playing video games or watching sports than in taking care of his household?” have to do with church activity, and how is it not disparaging of men?

By the way, if you want me to host a “what is women’s problem” post, I’d be MORE than happy to do it.

Awesome, I’ll be sure to show up and talk about how spiritually inferior women are, even if it doesn’t have anything to do with the conversation.

Nothing like a good gender feud. Are men fat, lazy, stupid and irreligious or are women childless harpies with unrealistic expectations? Sounds like fertile ground for a fruitful discussion. Carry on.

B. Russ–I cannot say that Mormon women do not criticize Mormon men, but I don’t think men hear it from women AT CHURCH. They won’t hear the female speakers at GC criticizing them, the men do it. They won’t hear women in Sacrament Meeting calling them to repentance, the Bishop does that. SS generally doesn’t go there. It might happen in RS, but men are not there to hear. There are no Church situations in which a man would have to endure being chided by a woman (except maybe a particularly testy ward council, I guess, but that has never been my experience). At home, in the bloggernaccle, and elsewhere, sure, but nowhere official.

IMO, bbell’s objection to men being criticized is at least softened by the practice of it coming from your own team.

Since he was referring to criticism at Church, I thought the context was clear.

I am not saying that men being the leaders is “annoying,” I am saying it directly refutes the notion that “men are stupid.” The fact that they have all the power is proof that any suggestion that people think “men are stupid”/lazy/inferior is wrong. If men were stupid they would not be in charge.

Incidentally, I have not heard men criticized in RS, I only mentioned it as the only conceivable venue in which it might occur. Golly day–these women marry you (and raise you), why are you so paranoid about what they think about you?

B.Russ—I was talking about both Church activity AND activity in general. I can see why it was confusing. I was speaking to that in light of MAC’s comments about women’s expectations being too high.

I suppose I was in a bit of a dudgeon about that, because it hits too close to home. There is always a thread of fear in myself that by desiring to find a man who loves the Lord as I do, who wields Priesthood righteously, and who is willing to roll up his sleeves and participate in life, I am setting my expectations too high. Let alone taking into account some of my more “frivolous” wishes, such as one who finds education and intellectual pursuits important. And if that is the case, if it is true that expecting that is expecting too much, then what benefit is there in marriage for me? And if there is no benefit in marriage, than what is the point? And if there is no point, what does that say of me and my hopes for eternity?

I can see how expressing my frustrations and fears in the way I did came out as a “men are stupid” diatribe. But truly, I don’t think men are stupid or lazy. I’m just afraid they might be. My experiences so far in life have not been encouraging. I can count the men I personally know who have the motivation to serve the Lord, to improve and stretch themselves, on my fingers. And all of them are married. It’s hard to determine the chicken or the egg.

“And if that is the case, if it is true that expecting that is expecting too much, then what benefit is there in marriage for me? And if there is no benefit in marriage, than what is the point? And if there is no point, what does that say of me and my hopes for eternity?”

Hmmm. I think maybe it’s not as bad as all that, SilverRain. No one ever meets all of their spouse’s expectations, ever. If I told you about all the expectations I had about my wife and my marriage that have gone unfulfilled the past 20 years, we’d still be talking about it tomorrow and you’d probably want to kill me. And I know that goes double for my wife. She has unfulfilled expectations I’m still just finding out about.

In some ways, marriage is all about compromise. Whomever you marry is not going to fulfill all your expectations and needs, and without knowing you very well I can still safely say that there is no way you will fulfill all of his, either. But part of the fun is that give and take, that negotiation, where you try to give him something he wants and needs and he tries to do the same for you. During that process, you might find that some of the expectations you have are really not that important, as long as you get to have him, and he will discover the same thing about you. That’s the benefit in marriage, I think. Not finding someone who is perfectly everything you want. You will never find that, for sure, but that doesn’t mean you should give up. More than half the fun is discovering how you can try to be maybe just a part of what it is the other person wants.

True, MCQ. I’ve been married. I know it’s about compromise. Probably more than most, since in my marriage, I compromised myself into being abused.

But I’m not talking about compromise. I’m talking about being a basic, contributing member of a family. I’m talking about being believing enough to go to Church without having to be nagged by me (something I refuse to do.)

MCQ – it depends on what the dealbreakers are for an individual. One person’s “deal with it” is another persons dealbreaker.

SilverRain, I know you’ve been married, and I didn’t mean to suggest that you did anything wrong before, or that you didn’t compromise. I was just talking about what you were saying in #53, where it sounded like you were making a list of things and no one seemed to meet it. I’m trying to suggest that everyone should just throw their lists out the window, because they might prevent you from getting to know someone that could end up being great. But it sounds like you are just asking for some minimal level of brain activity, so I don’t think you’re asking for too much and yes, I’m sure that there are guys out there that are what you’re looking for. I wish you the best of luck.

Devyn, I agree, but I think most dealbreakers should not be dealbreakers. But it depends a lot on what else is going on. There has to be some positives to hold onto, and obviously abuse must never be tolerated, but a lot of things can be overcome.

Thanks, John.

Thanks Bookslinger. You have no idea how happy that makes me.