The Role of Women and Motherhood

This entry focuses on a personal attempt to more fully reconcile aspects of my feminism and my religion, as sometimes they don't clearly see eye-to-eye.

In my last blog post, I discussed how being nice is not the same as being virtuous, and how taken to an extreme, it can disable our authentic selves. To be clear, niceness in that context was not about kindness, it was about vain and pretentious politeness for it's own sake. Sometimes rejecting niceness, even in the name of authenticity, may raise a few eyebrows, lead to misunderstandings, or as a classmate said, it may make a woman seem bitchy. So be it.

For the first time in that post, I was able to share a quote that sings to my soul. I'll share it again!

"Why so hard?" the kitchen coal once said to the diamond. "After all, are we not close kin?"
Why so soft? O my brothers, thus I ask you: are you not after all my brothers?
Why so soft, so pliant and yielding? Why is there so much denial, self-denial, in your hearts? So little destiny in your eyes?
And if you do not want to be destinies and inexorable ones, how can you one day triumph with me?
And if your hardness does not wish to flash and cut through, how can you one day create with me?
For all creators are hard. And it must seem blessedness to you to impress your hand on millennia as on wax.
Blessedness to write on the will of millennia as on bronze -- harder than bronze, nobler than bronze. Only the noblest is altogether hard.
This new tablet, O my brothers, I place over you: Become hard!

I have hesitated before to share it with others because I haven't wanted to seem misguided or disrespectful in contradicting the soft and tender role of womanhood that my religion has encouraged me to cherish. That hesitation betrays my true self. The truth is, I unequivocally feel the need to define my own role in life, but I still find it difficult because I feel like I'm expected to follow a divinely given role instead. Specifically, I have a few issues with The Family: A Proclamation to the World. I feel it is inspired, and serves families well, but I feel that confining myself to the role it outlines for me as a woman limits my Individual Worth. I feel it pronounces my role for eternity on me like the life occupations are pronounced in stories like Anthem and The Giver. Granted, "Nurturer" is a far nobler calling than "Street Sweeper," I still feel it is somewhat arbitrary. My spirit tells me to that my role is not written. It is mine to discover and to create.

Similarly, I also do not overwhelmingly desire motherhood in the way I feel I'm supposed to. Again, this is a noble role, and I have yet to discover and determine how noble it can be, and how fulfilling, but that is not my point. My point is that it seems that motherhood is appointed as the "be all, end all" role and joy for all women, despite their individualism. That idea certainly seems to diminish the role of women who are unable to have children, women who don't desire to, women who are single or past child-bearing years, women who have fewer children than others, women who aren't able to spend as much time with their children, or women who struggle in finding happiness in motherhood.

But part of my confusion with the supreme role of motherhood is that being a mother, in the literal sense, requires the biological capacity to bear children, a biology that is common among all organisms which populate the world with living things. So, what distinguishes the nobility and divinity of motherhood in women from the biology and sociology of it seen in all animals? And why aren't these distinctions of motherhood given greater emphasis than motherhood itself? Furthermore, why are the divine non-biological aspects of motherhood primarily suitable for women rather than men? And why does fatherhood not seem to be emphasized as greatly as motherhood?

I don't really know the answer to these questions and concerns. However, my readings from Paula Gunn Allen this week about Indigenous Feminism has comforted me and helped me feel that being a mother can go beyond child bearing/rearing and being nurturing. The readings focus on Native American culture, and I find it particularly interesting that it was matriarchal rather than patriarchal. Women were the heads of families, and rituals, and were primarily the leaders in Native American societies. Women were also the deities in their creation myths.

From Gunn, I read that creation began with Thought Woman, who was responsible for directing the rest of creation. She first brought to life two twin sisters. She did not bear them in the biological sense, but she sang over a bundle of materials, which organized and gave the women form and vitality. The text claims, "Central to Keres theology is the basic idea of Creatrix as She Who Thinks rather than She Who Bears, of women as creation thinker and female thought as origin of material and nonmaterial reality. In this epistemology, the perception of female power as confined to maternity is a limit on the power inherent in femininity."

Further, Gunn discusses that being a mother is considered one of the highest honors and offices among Native American culture. She states, "But its value signifies something other than the kind of sentimental respect for motherhood that is reflected in American's Mother's Day observations. It is ritually powerful, a condition of being that confers the highest adeptship on whoever bears the title. So central to ritual activities is it in Indian cultures that men are honored by the name mother." She further claims that, "A strong attitude integrally connects the power of Original Thinking or Creation Thinking to the power of mothering. That power is not so much the power to give birth, as we have noted, but the power to make, to create, to transform. Ritual, as noted elsewhere, means transforming something from one state or condition to another, and that ability is inherent in the action of mothering. It is the ability that is sought and treasured by adepts, and it is the ability that male seekers devote years of study and discipline to acquire. Without it, no practice of the sacred is possible..."  

For American Indians, mothering was about utilizing the power of creation. For women, bearing and rearing children was a sacred path of motherhood. But it was also a sacred path of motherhood to build and sustain communities by hunting for food, leading rituals, healing the sick, and enabling spiritual communication.

Likewise, as women in the LDS church, we take great honor in more than our children and our care-taking responsibilities. We take honor in our education, skills, passions, relationships, health, and hobbies. I feel that in learning to recognize and utilize our powers to create something, anything worthwhile, we will find our sacred role and strength as women, and as children of God.

For myself, whenever I hear the joys and role of motherhood mentioned and feel left out, I will think on Native American culture, and a more grand and inclusive meaning for the word mother. I will think on Thought Woman, and her power to create even through song. I will focus on my talents and my abilities to transform myself and the world, making life better and more beautiful. I will ponder on my role in creation. I will be my own Creatrix.