Examining Paradigms

There has recently been much controversy dealing with HBO’s hit show Big Love and the possible depiction of portions of the LDS temple ceremony.

I have a variety of feelings about the issue:

I understand the desire that Mormons have to keep their rituals secret from public scrutiny and discussion.  I feel that a sense of privacy and the sense that they share something of “their own” adds to group cohesion and helps them take their rituals more seriously.  This desire to have secret ceremonies is shared by many other groups, which include religious groups as well as secular and fraternal. However, many Mormons (and people in general) display an enormous double standard about these things.  They are eager to discover other people’s secret things.  They watch tribal ritual on the National Geographic channel like it is perfectly ok to scrutinize others’ religious ceremonies.  They were fascinated about Opus Dei when they were Hollywoodized in The Da Vinci Code, and found their use of the cilice belt intriguing.  Who would not be excited and curious to discover the secret ceremony of the Skull and Bones fraternity, or who chooses to turn off the history channel when it reenacts sacred Egyptian funeral rites or when it speaks about the Hajj?  The issue always arises when a personal secret is revealed.  This is why so many Mormons are angry.  Their secret is being publicly displayed, and they feel like their secret is too sacred for public display.  I think that this sentiment is shared by many.  Humanity finds it painful when personal things are put under the public microscope, but we are quick to look down the eyepiece of the microscope at other people’s personal things.

I personally find Big Loves decision to display Mormon temple ceremony as insensitive, yet I do not think that there is anything inherently wrong with it.

For Mormons who are offended by the public display of temple secrets I have a few points of advice:

1)  Many of your secrets are really borrowed/stolen Masonic secrets, so you shouldn’t feel too possessive of them.

2) Transcripts of the temple ceremony are already available online to whomever wants to look at them.  I find LDSendowment.org most useful.

3) HBO isn’t the first television program to discuss temple topics on air.  I saw a Cold Case episode that displayed a Mormon wearing garments and a Law and Order that showed garment symbols in detail.

4) Do you get equally upset when other people religious rites are put on public display?

I understand why many Mormons are upset about this, but I think that the larger question is, should religious rites in general be fair game for public discussion?  I think that the answer is yes, and that even though it may be uncomfortable for those people being scrutinized that they need to realize that if it offends them; the best solution would be for them not to watch it.

I recently read a biography of Crazy Horse, and learning about Lakota culture gave me pause to think about gender “roles” and the gender wars.

Let me be clear that I whole heartedly applaud the feminist movement and I hope that females continue to fight their way to equal footing in the workplace and society as a whole, but I do wonder if the gender wars are largely a product of wealth and technology.

In a hunter gather society, there are certain tasks that need to be done in order to survive.  Food must be found and hunted, and other efforts must be focused on raising and keeping children alive, preparing food, etc.  Without these tasks being completed, survival would not have been possible.  Children would have died, and families would have starved.

Similar tasks need to be completed within today’s families too, but the imminence of death and failure are not as extreme.  Families today are not facing failure and annihilation around every corner.

I feel that it is possible that within extreme conditions we might naturally assign roles to genders and fall into that role out of survival necessity.  This is not an argument about the validity of these roles, but only an assertion that in hunter gatherer type environments these roles may be a product of practicality and may be needed for survival.

Maybe certain roles are good as long as they are mutually defined and agreed upon by a couple.  Could this create meaning, purpose, and a sense of value?  In scenarios where people have roles forced upon them, I think it devalues people, but if mutually agreed upon, this may do the opposite.