If you were to look up the word Suffrage in the dictionary, you would see that the word means “the right to vote.” A Suffragist was one who desired to achieve this privilege, and a Suffragette was a negative label put upon those who took things a step further and wanted equal rights.
Mormon women, living in the 19th century, fought for suffrage, and were known as suffragists. Back east there were two groups of women fighting for suffrage. The Suffragists wanted nothing to do with “those polygamist Mormons”, so the Mormon women went to the Suffragettes, the more radical group, to fight for their rights in Utah. However, I would like to clarify, that Mormon women were never striving to be “equal to the men.” This was not their objective.
Eliza R. Snow was a woman with a lot of power, influence, and leadership ability; but she never usurped the power of any man. She was always obedient, and willing to accept the final word of the Brethren. In fact, a group of Relief Society sisters covenanted with one another “that we speak no evil of each other, nor of the authorities of the Church, but endeavor by means in our power to cultivate a spirit of union, humanity, and love.” This idea was prevalent in Mormon society, not because of male dominance, but because of the Patriarchal Order.
It is generally accepted that Emmeline B. Wells got the vote, for the women, singlehandedly. She was fierce in her determination to be heard, yet she, herself, was a polygamist wife.
When Joseph laid out those original mandates in the early Nauvoo Relief Society meetings, he wanted to “instruct the Society and point out the way for them to conduct that they might act according to the will of God.” This is not how the world perceives powerful women, but this is the Lord’s way.
He also said, “You must put down iniquity and by your good examples provoke the Elders to good works.” Belle Spafford, ninth General RS Pres., spoke often about the ability we have as women to “influence for good” those around us; not through manipulation or coercion, but by spiritual insight, and our womanly gifts.
The Lord has given womankind special gifts to fulfill the ends of our creation. Joseph said, “This is according to your natures, it is natural for females to have feelings of charity. You are now placed in a situation where you can act according to those sympathies which God has planted in your bosoms.”
Women didn’t feel so special in the 19th Century. They were practically owned by fathers and husbands and had few rights to call their own. There wasn’t much to look forward to beyond managing a household and having several babies, most of whom would die at a young age. Joseph informed these early sisters that “females if they are pure and innocent, can come into the presence of God.” We take this news for granted, and maybe even scoff at the words “pure” and “innocent”, yet this was precious information not known before. These women were going to be saved and brought back into the presence of God.
Satan has power over the earth. His attractions are meant to blind us, sway us, and cause us to stumble. Joseph Smith said, “The devil has great power. He will so transform things as to make one gape at those who are doing the will of God.” It has never been popular to do the will of God, but this is what Latter-day Saint women must do, by separating themselves from those pesky worldly influences.
The world is full of angry women. And yes, there are many reasons to be angry, but again, Joseph warned us,
“You need not be tearing men for their deeds, but let the weight of innocence be felt, which is more mighty than a millstone hung about the neck. Not war, not jangle, not contradiction, but meekness, love, purity, these are the things that should magnify us.”
Historically, there have been three waves of women fighting for their rights. The first wave was fighting for Women’s Suffrage in the 1800s.
The second wave came in the 1960s when some women called themselves feminists and wanted more than the right to vote. They wanted the right to own their own bodies, which popularized Planned Parenthood, hoping to legally allow the option to abort their unwanted babies. The Equal Rights Amendment was fought for but failed.
The third wave of feminism began in the 1990s. The second wave did not accomplish what it had set out to do, so this third wave was a second try at bringing about change through acceptance of diversity. There are too many societal problems feminists wish to address that they are un-unified, and not as organized as they could be. But, this is changing.
Note that the second and third waves are not the same platform as the first wave. There are different tones and objectives from these voices.
There is no question that women have gone through abuses, over the years, at the hands of men. Women of the world have sought various ways to get even; typically to claim power and bring Man down; not equal, as they proclaim. And there is no question that evil, conspiring men, have lorded over women for centuries, abusing, demeaning, and imprisoning in such a way that causes women to feel weak and helpless, thus angry and resentful. There are heinous crimes being committed against women throughout the world, but that is not the cause or initiative of many of these feminist organizations.
Please recognize that the world’s solutions are not God’s solutions.
Richard Wilkins, a BYU law professor, wrote the book Sacred Duty, about his experience at a UN Conference in Istanbul. Angry women, who were manipulating the conference and presenting actions that would allow women to “be free from tyrants,” surrounded him. He admits that he didn’t know what he was doing there, or what he could possibly say that would make a difference, but with much prayer, he put his faith in the hands of the Lord. One desperate call to his wife led to her suggesting that he base his speech around The Family: A Proclamation to the World. A journey of miracles led him to be able to voice this doctrinal document. Afterward, others, whose voices had been previously silenced by the Women’s Caucus, came to him and said, “Where have you been.” They expressed joy at his claim of the proper role of men and women, working together at their respective duties and responsibilities without fear or shame.
Our RS and YW General Leaders used to be members of the National Council of Women since before the 1900s. There was a time when this council sought for women’s rights, which is a good thing to fight for. Our leaders served as Board members, and even president, of this Council. I believe our membership was discontinued, during the second wave, when the Council changed its platform.
When Barbara Smith was forced to face feminist women in the 1970s, as the Equal Rights Amendment was being presented to our government as a passage of a law, by the spirit, she was able to bring knowledge and truth to the forefront. The Equal Rights Amendment never passed.
The Equal Rights Amendment continues to come up in Congress. Gay marriage and Gender Advocacy is now closely associated with this amendment.
I believe in women; we have power, ability, and purpose. Joseph Smith said, “This Society shall have power to command Queens in their midst. I now deliver it as a prophecy that before ten years shall roll round the queens of the earth shall come and pay their respects to this Society—they shall come with their millions and shall contribute of their abundance for the relief of the poor—If you will be pure, nothing can hinder.”
This prophecy has indeed come true over the years, and we continue in this great blessing of power, ability, and purpose.
I can never call myself a feminist. I choose to align myself with God, not the world. Thus, I am a Woman of God.
The quotes from Joseph Smith are all found in the Female Relief Society of Nauvoo Minute Book.
Love it! Thank you for posting this! I’ve been wanting to read a brief summary of the church and the whole feminist movement. We had our RS b-day party the other day and did short bios on each of the RS presidents — it was interesting following how much the church was involved with women’s rights, then it really stopped that at the time of the ERA. Thanks again! I’m posting this on my blog!
Jan, This was wonderful. It is so beautiful to hear the history from someone who understands it in the right perspective. You put into words so much of what I’ve been thinking that last little while. It seems like there are some LDS women who want to use our “feminist” history to justify their feminist actions. Yet I can’t help but think that the world our early LDS sisters lived in was SO much different than the one we live in now. They lived in a time when the family was the fundamental unit of society… and that changed everything. We live in a time when it isn’t and so we can’t use the same approach.
I loved that story about the man who presented at the UN. It is sad that it is the feminist or women’s voice that silences the family voice. I want that to change.
I think this is a thoughtfully-written piece. At that, I think it is important to remember that just like one woman can’t speak for all women, one feminist can’t speak for all feminists. In the current wave of fourth/post-feminism, it seems like there are so many varied viewpoints amongst feminists. My brand of feminism is typically characterized by what I call international feminism: that is, focusing on the rights (or lack of) of women in developing or 3rd world countries. I’m a feminist because I see the atrocities committed against these women (honor killings, FGM, forced marriages, bride burnings, selective female infanticide and abortion, etc.) at the hands of men and believe they need to be stopped. I’m sure many women agree with that idea but wouldn’t necessarily label themselves as feminists, and that’s fine, simply because “feminist” has become such an abstract and subjective term. Likewise, I think it’s dangerous to characterize all feminists as having the same agenda and worldview by saying that feminism = secular, ungodly philosophies.
But anyway, great article nonetheless.
Jan–I both agree and disagree. Mormon women’s involvement went way beyond voting. The pages of the Exponent (The voice of Mormon women for about 40 years) reads very “feminist” by anyone’s standard. The masthead proclaimed, “For the rights of the women of Zion, and the women of all nations.” I think there are as many brands of “feminists” as there are definitions of “patriots”. I freely call myself a “Faithful. Fearless. Feminist.” and I don’t think “anger” is the hallmark of how I feel or others see me. I also think that anyone would have a hard time claiming I am not “pro-family.”
However, I think it also needs to be said about the second half of the 19th century, that the LDS view of family was as offensive to most Americans as some other views are to us and others today. In those times the Church took a strong stand that the government should stay out of all marriage issues. I think we have a tiger by the tail and I would prefer that same approach today. (All unions would be legally civil unions and then religious ceremonies could be added immediately after. This would truly separate “church and state” and is how it is already done in many places in the world, even by many LDS couples who go to the temple for sealings immediately after.)
I think feminism ultimately fragments us as women. In contrast, the truth of the gospel can unite us if we let it, in part because I believe it encompasses all the good that feminism may have stood for in the past and may stand for now but also avoids the problems that feminism has contributed to. (And, in my view, there are many.)
In that sense, I have never felt comfortable calling myself a feminist, even as I’m passionate about the value of women in God’s eyes and, as you point out, recognize that problems have existed with regard to the treatment of women since probably about the beginning of human history.
I don’t think we want to use Richard Wilkins’ UN speech as an example of spreading Christlike virtues to the world and building correct esteem of women throughout the world. The “others” who came up to him after the speech were (as named by Wilkins himself in a speech at BYU), the delegation of Saudia Arabia and other Arab nations, who were delighted to finally have a Western ally in their fight to maintain their oppressive treatment of women, and do so under the guise of, as your quote says, “proper role of men and women.” Practices such as FGM, stoning of women (but almost never men) for adultery, and denying women basic civic participation such as drivers’ licenses, were all given that much more license to continue thanks in some part to Wilkins’ intervention at the UN.
Not exactly a shining moment for helping spread the light of truth to the world. Our doctrines and the Proclamation of the Family do not endorse such atrocities, of course. We affirm the Divine worth of each individual. But we have to be so careful and realize that when we say “Patriarchal Order,” a lot of really, really bad people in the world hear “male dominance.” This is a case where, in his zeal to protect our own Patriarchal Order from interference by governments, he unintentionally participated in protecting a lot of horrifically ugly male dominance from “interference” that really should be taking place.
This article would be stronger without that unfortunate example.
It is sickening to see the “justified wickedness” of so many people in the world; however, your argument leaves out all of the miracles that unmistakingly took place at that event. The fact is, we cannot fear ourselves into silence. If we are truly to be instruments in the Lord’s hands, we have to trust that whatever happens is still the right course, even though it may get uglier along the way (which it sometimes does). We just don’t know enough to second guess the reasoning behind things.
Thanks for all the information on your website. It’s a good resource and collection about the Relief Society.
As an active member of the Relief Society and a trained historian, I disagree with certain aspects of your post. From long familiarity with the woman, I imagine that Emmeline Wells would as well. One of the things she would object to is the statement, “It is generally accepted that Emmeline B. Wells got the vote, for the women, singlehandedly.” That accomplishment in Utah took the efforts of many men and women, working together in Utah and Washington D.C. It is an amazing story and one that should not be reduced to a single personality.
I am glad to see that Marjorie Conder and Cynthia L have already added something to this discussion.
Let me add that I would not normally identify myself as a feminist. (Not that anyone ever asks!) If pressed, however, I might identify myself as a first-wave feminist. I believe that women should have the right to vote and that women should have equal protection under the law. That is not the case in large portions of the world, and women suffer mightily because of it. They need the light of the gospel, and that includes the glorious principle that women are not second class citizens of the kingdom of God and should not be second class citizens of the world.
I enjoyed reading this article as well. I learned a lot of things that I didn’t know already about LDS women and feminism. There are a lot of “Mormon feminist” blogs out there that are NOT “first-wave” feminist – they are women who are annoyed with the way their Priesthood authorities “run” things. I think they need to go to ward council more often, or talk to their RS president about ward council.
Anyway, I was also very interested to read the discussion in the comments. That was also very enlightening.
Thanks for a good post and good comments, ladies!
I’m so glad you decided to finally comment. Thank you so much!
Here, here for studying the Handbook as a family. I think that’s what the Brethren hope we’ll do, especially those first three sections.
I don’t have an argument good enough to convince any feminist, because I’m just a big chicken, and I get hives when confronted. However, all of this reminds me of the “discussion” Emma had with the men, that first meeting, when she insisted on the word “Relief”, over “Benevolent”, because of the connotation of the word. And I love how Eliza backed her by saying that the benevolent societies of the day “should not be our guide—that as daughters of Zion, we should set an example for all the world.” (See my post, March 2011 VT Message-Under the Priesthood for the complete story.)
And just for the record. I am definitely for women’s rights, women’s voices, and women’s power. Just ask my long suffering husband.
Some truly choice content on this web site , saved to my bookmarks .