Go here and either listen to or read (I love transcripts! Thank you!) this episode and then return and report.
As for me and my house:
(1) The beginning of the conversation with the “motherhood is more than giving birth” and “women aren’t missing anything” themes left me cold. I wish I could have had them flesh these ideas out . . . I would have asked, “Why are we calling it ‘motherhood’ if we aren’t talking about ‘motherhood’ as the term is universally used? Wouldn’t it be better to use a different term?” And I’m not sure what the goal is of the “women aren’t missing out on anything” theme. If that is how some women feel, I don’t see how telling them “no, you aren’t” would be helpful. It seems to me that what would be appropriate would be a follow-up question such as “what do you feel that you are missing out on?” and then a response to the answer to that question.
(2) I appreciated and fully agreed with the discussion of “Christian virtues” and thought Fronk Olsen and Millet were rather daring to phrase things the way that they did, given that we could find a veritable boatload of authoritative quotations from important people claiming that those virtues are gender-based.
(3) On the patriarchy discussion (bottom of page 4): I think most any person would find at least a paradox if not an outright conflict between the idea of “equal partnership” and “husband’s leadership,” and so I find it disappointing that Fronk Olsen didn’t explore that paradox/conflict (and said that it seemed “simple” to her). There might be a solution here at the top of page 6, where she refers to Elder Oaks teaching that “patriarchal” priesthood means something not hierarchical but equal. Which bring us back to my issue with using words differently than everyone else does . . .
(4) “Church broken.” Ha. Never heard that one before. Going to use that.
(5) It does make one wonder in what ways our youth might think differently about gender if they spent their zoned-out sacrament meetings staring at a picture of a woman looming over Jesus instead of a blank wall.
(6) I think “Mormon Identity” is a bizarre title. The first and only thing it made me think of was Christian Identity–not good, not good. I heard that the title is being changed to “Mormon Identities” (which I suppose is better but inasmuch as it feeds into the whole new mormon.org look-how-urban-and-hip-and-diverse-we-are scene, I’m not too thrilled with that either, as you perhaps had already guessed).