One Boob or Two?

I am probably too invested in the recent news of the LDS woman who was denied a temple recommend for breastfeeding uncovered, in the foyer, at church. I originally saw the story on the Exponent-II, a LDS feminism site. The women herself has chosen to remain anonymous to the public, but in a couple groups has identified herself and told her story. Every sentence I read made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. I couldn't believe what I was reading. 

During a temple recommend interview she was told by her Bishop that the way she was breastfeeding was immodest. He referred to the For The Strength of Youth pamphlet, where it lays out the churches standard of modesty to the youth. He told her that any sexual desire a man felt because she was “exposed”, was her fault and was a sin. Upon asking her to cover up she declined his counsel and he denied her a temple recommend, saying she was not sustaining her church leaders. When the Stake President spoke with her husband, he told him that if he supports his wife in this he will not give him a temple recommend either. Impressively, this man stood by his wife and now both of these faithful members cannot fully participate in the church. 

At the end of the articles floating around the internet, we learn the church is refusing to come out and give a statement about the issue. 

When I caught wind of this, I felt like sharing her story on social media would spark an important conversation within the community of my TBM friends. Women and mothers of all ages flocked to comment, just as I had hoped for. However, much to my surprise, all of these LDS mothers were bashing this woman and discrediting her story. I was shocked. Has the cognitive dissonance gotten this bad?

One can look at my social media as of late and assume I am having a faith crisis. I dont have to come out and say it. Many used this as a tactic to argue against this womans injustice. “Surely you're only looking for the bad things. This is something that never happens in our church. Stop feeding into the fake news.”

What?

Why is anything negative about the church automatically false? Why are we so slow to protect the oppressed women within the church but so fast to protect men from the possibility of lust?

Found via facebook

Many have said things like, “Is it so hard to cover up?” or, “I've seen her breastfeed in public. She is always exposing herself.” Or, the best one yet, “I know her! She is a loud person who likes to cause trouble!”

To be honest, I think lots of men and women are completely missing the mark on the whole thing. 

So, lets start from the beginning. 

-It is legal in all 50 states for women to breastfeed with or without a cover. Women do not have to cover when asked to do so. It is between her and her baby. Some babies won’t feed with their heads covered, some will. This is not to be determined by any one besides the mother. If a stranger can't ask someone to cover up because they are uncomfortable, surely priesthood leaders should be held in the same regard. If this is the law publicly, then the church needs to make a stand. There is no policy anywhere regarding breastfeeding women and their meeting houses. Surely they have made statements about fire arms, this is no different. A church claiming to live the law of the land needs to do so even when the laws make one uncomfortable.

 We all know women who have breastfed in the first pew every single Sunday. We all know that some wards and some leaders don't care, therefore they won't be under the same scrutiny that this woman is. We aren't talking about the people who are respectful. We are talking about the ones who abuse their power. It is our job as members of Christ's church to look out for "the one". 

-Breasts are given to women to support her new born baby. While one could argue it's a sexual gland, it's a pretty weak argument. Breasts have become a sexual object thanks to the pornography business. What changes breasts from a food source to a sex toy is the intention. Is a woman going topless, groping herself while looking into the eyes of the men that pass by? Or is she bearing all while she wrestles with a curious baby. We can all take pride in the fact this woman was doing the latter. It should not matter if one breast or both breasts are being used during feeding time. It shouldn't matter how much skin is showing. Not if we are to sustain women in this holy calling.

If we want to stop making breasts sexual objects, we need to normalize open breastfeeding. We need to teach young men (and young women) to simply look away. We need to teach that breastfeeding is given to us by God. It's a miracle. Shaming women by blaming them for the sexual desires of men continues to suppress the voices of women who feel ashamed and objectified. If Christ himself is telling those who lust to pluck their eyes out, then we need to examine that counsel a little more. Jesus knew that breastfeeding openly wasn't a sin. He also knew some might be tempted because of it. Say what you will, but he made it clear who gets punished in this scenario. Spoiler alert: it's not the innocent mother or her baby. Why is the protection of men and their priesthood more important than the women? Claiming she was at fault for the sin of others is false doctrine and that is grounds for questioning at the very least.

-Many have come to the defense of this Bishop and Stake President. We can talk about their human imperfections, or their job as spiritual protectors of their congregations. It is easy to give them the benefit of the doubt, but why not give this woman equal treatment? I've seen her and her husband reach out, expressing agony and sorrow while seeking support because this has been quite the ordeal. Even with their identity being hidden, they are having their character questioned and attacked. This poor Sister has felt shame and guilt surrounding her natural, God given right to breast feed as she pleases. Is protecting the reputation of a couple sensitive men really more important than letting her voice be heard? Even more so, does she not deserve the right to be treated with dignity and respect? I am appalled at how many breastfeeding women used catty gossip as a source to defend modesty. By standing up for her we stand for the many, many women who haven't been brave enough to come forward about their experiences. By degrading her, judging her, and mocking her, we circle the wagon and act as your run of the mill hypocritical Christians. Are we really okay with that being how we represent the women in this church? If her "imperfections and sins" are being questioned we have the right to examine the imperfections and sins of the Men who condemned her. 

Let me be clear. We are not condemning a whole organization for the act of a couple. However they represent the Church and ultimately answer to the First Presidency. If the Bishop and Stake President will not clean up the mess, it is the responsibility of the organization to make things clear. Things will not get better until this happens. Members look to the Brethren for every answer. When the Brethren speak, things change.

-Breast feeding and even the exposure of breasts is really just the blanket over the real issue. In many cultures around the world, breast feeding in public without a cover is accepted without question. Many women do so in the middle of sacrament and even in the temples. People have argued that because it is not culturally accepted here in America (ha lets be real. Its mainly just Utah), then the Bishop has a responsibility to make sure members adhere to the cultural modesty standards. This would explain the pamphlet, right?

If this is true, then members with more than one ear piercing or fresh tattoos should also be denied a temple recommend. There are actually Church teachings on these things, giving a commandment (or at least a suggestion) to avoid them. Since I am not a breastfeeding mother I cant really give a personal experience, but as someone with fresh tats and piercings I can tell you this: You can still go to the temple. As a matter of fact, I have specifically asked my leaders about this very thing and every time I have been reassured that they are not making me unworthy. My husband and I have even seen temple workers with more than one piercing in their ears.

If I can still go to the temple with a fresh tattoo on my arm, why cant this poor couple attend? You could easily argue I am not obeying counsel by getting inked and pierced, but can you really sincerely believe that a woman telling a man "No" is really grounds for a temple ban?  If there is no policy, doctrine or commandment regarding breastfeeding, is it really within the scope of their call to uphold members to cultural standards?  

Is the injustice and sexism a little clearer now? Do you see the irony?

Found on momjunction.com

I would be willing to place a bet (Sinner, I know) that those under the impression this hypocrisy within the church is rare, are those who are openly spreading hateful lies about this family. If I could make an assumption, and you know what they say about assuming... I would even go as far as to say that most haven't taken the time to truly understand what this says to all of the women in the church. 

If you ask me, it says that our bodies are not ours. It tells me that when I am sexually objectified my leaders are not safe men to go to. It screams that the support of my Mormon Sisters is dependent upon policy and here say, not Christ like love and compassion.

I am a Woman. I am (still) a member of the Mormon church. I made covenants to mourn with those that mourn. I will not stand for this injustice. I will not defend the honor of unrighteous men. I will love, support and encourage my Sisters, in or out of this church. One boob or two, I simply don't care.