Gender Ratios

They push marriage an awful lot at BYU. You'd think they'd organize the wards a little better. In my FHE group there are 42 men and 16 women. There are three fhe groups, so if they're about the same, the ward ratio is 126:48--strikingly similar to my roommate's estimate, 110:40. Every ward I've been in since freshman year has been similarly disproportionate.

It's a good thing I'm dating someone already, because my chances are not great here.
#theoddsareneverinmyfavor

(Don't take this post too seriously. I'm just making light of the truly terrible gender ratios in Provo singles wards based on my own and others' experiences.)

Victim Blaming

Victim blaming.  It's kind of a buzzword.  People throw it around when talking about things like modesty, rape, and Charlie Hebdo.

Don't tell girls that their dress controls men's thoughts.
Don't tell girls that they were asking for it when they get raped.
Don't tell Charlie Hebdo not to publish things that make people angry.

It is really important to not blame the victim in situations like these.  Individuals have control over their own thoughts and must take responsibility for them.  A rapist is always at fault, regardless of how the victim is dressed or acting.  Murder is wrong, even if those murdered were being unkind.  Victim blaming is wrong.

So is it wrong to say the following?

Your clothing can affect the thoughts of those around you.
The way you present yourself affects the way others think of you.
The things you say affect how others feel about you.

I don't think so.  Though I think victim blaming is wrong, I think the phrase is overused.  I wouldn't classify the above sentences as victim blaming.  Instead, they are counsel intended to prevent bad things from happening.  It is not the victim's fault when bad things happen, but usually there are things people can do to make becoming a victim less likely.

Examples:
Modesty
Growing up in the Church, young men hear a lot about keeping their thoughts in line.  We are taught to view women as daughters of God, and to keep control of our thoughts.  We are taught to replace the temptations of the adversary that assault us with uplifting thoughts.  And it worked, for me.  Though I am far from perfect, I often find myself automatically averting my gaze or using some other avoidance strategy (and even if I mess up, I feel guilty about it--that's important).  So when I first heard the words "victim blaming" thrown around with modesty, I was confused.  The way I saw it, they talked to us young men about what we could control, our thoughts, and to the young women about what they could control, their dress.  That made sense to me.  They weren't blaming the girls, they were just telling them to do what was within their sphere of control.  For me, asking women to be modest has been more "It makes it easier for me when you dress modestly" than "You need to be modest so my thoughts can be clean."  I think that's the way it should be.  But if women are ever taught that they control men's thoughts, I think that is victim blaming.

Celebrity Photo Leak
A few months ago inappropriate photos of several celebrities were leaked to the media.  They had taken these photos privately, and they were intended for a specific audience.  The leaking and publishing of these photos was certainly a very serious breach of privacy.  I remember reading about another celebrity, a comedian, who tweeted his solution for the leak:

“Celebrities, make it harder for hackers to get nude pics of you from your computer by not putting nude pics of yourself on your computer.”

He was immediately attacked by many and accused of victim blaming.  He deleted the tweet and went on to say that he was joking, and not at all condoning the hacker's actions.  Was it victim blaming?  I don't think so.  Was it kind of a tasteless joke?  Probably.  Just because it's easier to make jokes about celebrities doesn't make it okay.  But I think he's right.

Michael Brown
Michael Brown, victim of the police shooting in Ferguson, didn't deserve to die that day.  Victim blaming might sound like "He had it coming after robbing a store and being belligerent with a police officer."  But that simply isn't fair.  Human lives matter, and even when people do things they shouldn't, they usually don't deserve to die for it (and even if we think they deserve to die for it, they deserve a fair trial first).  But is it victim blaming to say that he put himself in a bad position by committing robbery and by his attitude towards the police?  I don't think so.

Charlie Hebdo
I believe in freedom of speech.  I believe it is essential to a free society.  I don't think that means that everything that can be said ought to be.  I haven't seen pictures of the offending cartoons mocking Muhammad published by the magazine.  I haven't read anything from the magazine either.  But if my understanding is correct, they are rude.  I don't think it's right to make fun of others' religions.  That doesn't at all justify the murder of the offending journalists and cartoonists.  Victim blaming says it was their fault because they published that material.  But I don't think it's victim blaming to say "Maybe you shouldn't publish such inflammatory things."  However, I maintain that they have the right to publish it.  It is unfortunate that there are groups who will take advantage of free speech to spread hate (Westboro Baptist Church, KKK, etc.), but freedom to do good is freedom to do evil.

Conclusion
Remember how we got sent to sit on the stairs when we fought with each other?  Remember complaining?  "But he was wrong!"  "But what she did was worse!"  Remember how Mom and Dad would only talk to us about what we did wrong?  about what we could do differently?  That was them teaching us to worry about what we can control.  We don't blame victims, but we do our best to control what we can--ourselves--to avoid becoming victims to the extent possible.

Happy to hear your comments if you have any!

What is a Successful Mission?

Occasionally people tell stories like the following in talks, Sunday school classes, mission prep classes, or conversations:

"Some people think that their missions are not successful because they didn't baptize very many people. John didn't think he was a successful missionary because he only baptized one person.

"Years later, John was approached by Jack, who had joined the church because he met John when John was a missionary.  Jack went on a mission, baptized people, had four thousand kids and grandkids, and now seven bajillion people are members of the Church.

"So John's mission really was a success."

I thought numbers didn't matter?

I'll get my disclaimer out of the way.  I have no problem with stories like this.  They show how important missionary work is even when it doesn't have immediately apparent results.  Stories like this give people like me, who had relatively little success numbers-wise, hope that our efforts will have grander results over time.  But I think people should be careful about how they frame the meaning of this story.

A missionary is not defined by his or her success as determined by statistics.  The final section of chapter one of Preach My Gospel lists what success truly is.  Success is personal commitment, service, and love.  Those are things that each missionary is in control of.  When the story is presented the way I presented it above, it comes out like, "Numbers on your mission don't define success.  They become bigger numbers later on, and that's success."

I'm not mad when I hear this--I didn't even think of this until today.  But now that I'm aware, and I've made you aware, please be careful in how you speak about a missionary's success.  You can ask about baptisms.  I like to get an idea of how many baptisms people get around the world.  It's interesting.  You can tell stories like this and hear stories like this and be uplifted.  However, to the extent that you control it, please try not to equate numbers, whether current or future numbers, with success.