So. My Relief Society lesson on Sunday was well-meant but rather silly. The woman who taught it (the Stake President's wife) was not silly but was very sweet, even if she did give me the stink-eye when I made a joke during class. Trust me, my joke was awesome. The lesson was on dating--specifically on why the boys aren't doing more of it (she went and asked them, much in the manner of that girl in elementary school who delivered the notes between would-be lovers with the "check yes or no" boxes on them). We learned that young LDS men don't date because they feel pressure, are afraid of rejection, and that they're looking for a nice girl with a sense of humor. It was a pretty ground-breaking hour.
However, I soon found out that it could have been much, much worse. While chatting with a friend later that day, he told me about the RS lesson the ladies in his ward had that day. (One of the girls told him about it, possibly while fire shot from her ears.)
Now, first, let me give some background. We don't have professional ministers or teachers. It's all done by us civilians. We have lesson manuals and training and resources to help people be better teachers and leaders, but still. We're all muddling through to some extent. And sometimes it can take a while to get the word out about teaching methods and analogies that are not very affective.
The teacher (who will have been a single girl in her 20s, most likely) got up there, unwrapped a piece of gum, started chewing it (some of you may already know where we're headed with this), took it out of her mouth, and asked if anyone wanted it.
Of course, no one did.
And why did they not want it? Because it's been used. it's not good anymore. And when we break the law of chastity, see, we become LIKE USED GUM. There was no mention of the Atonement, no shiny new piece of gum to show what we can be like after repentance, none of that. You're just a dirty, used, whore. A couple of girls tried to bring up the whole Atonement thing but the class just could not move on from the gum analogy.
So, so, so bothersome. First off, no one should ever do an object lesson about sin that does not include the Atonement--you need to be able to put things back the way they were before. That is the entire point of having a Savior. Otherwise you end up with a class full of people feeling like they're damned forever because of a mistake, and that they might as well give up now.
Also that analogy is just offensive. Is that what women are, then? These disposable commodities waiting to be picked up and chewed by men? And is that the main reason we're supposed to keep the law of chastity? To protect the flower that is our virginity because nice boys deserve a virgin?
I thought about this and realized that there are loads and loads of analogies like this that get trotted out in Young Women lessons:
- There's the one about the nicely wrapped package that you're supposed to give to your husband but that he won't want if you've let other people paw at the wrapping.
- There's the rose that looks really nasty in the end if you keep giving petals away to people.
- There's the blooming gaudy flower left to get dusty by the wayside as opposed to the pure daisy in the alpine meadow.
There are ALL of these things, and guess what? The guys have never heard any of them. I took a poll. When the guys get the chastity lesson, they do not get any of this "you had better guard your carnal treasure or no nice girl will want you." Also? I don't think these analogies are necessarily in the lesson manuals. (Will be checking on this, of course--I'm sure that gum one isn't, though.)
I'm not saying there aren't good reasons to abstain from sex outside of marriage. I think there are lots of good reasons (hi, otherwise I wouldn't even be writing this because Ioan and I would be off with that pot of Nutella right now). I would rather hear real doctrine than Victorian-era analogies that encourage a sexual double standard. But maybe that's just me
0 comments:
Post a Comment