I was raised in the faith in a huge family, and I'm grateful for it in retrospect as an adult, because it modeled good family dynamics, how to do a large family well, and a better way to socialize and form a community.
But I could never stomach the religion myself, and it was a big enough point of contention that I moved out when I turned 17 to get away from being forced into a faith I didn't believe. It took a while, but after years of observation, eventually I came around to the idea that living as a mormon is actually legitimately better than whatever everyone else is doing.
I've always told people that the South Park episode is dead-on. You may think the beliefs are wacky and plainly pants-on-head, but if you look at the actual families and communities they build, they're doing it noticeably better than essentially everyone else, and succeeding on all the fronts you mention.
Sadly, even the mormons are dying out - the fertility crisis has come for them in the end, too, so they won't own the future like the Amish and the Haredi.
Yes to all this. Honestly when I moved here I was straight up anti-Mormon and really did not like them at all and was quite bigoted about it, for almost a decade. I think really I just mostly didn't like the feeling that they were looking down on me, which felt palpable even though they were surface-level polite. Anyway, I got over it (and they also became legitimately much more accepting after getting more used to non-Mormons and realizing we weren't all immoral standard-less satanists), and at this point it is just so blatantly obvious how much more healthy and successful their culture is, especially when compared to all the social ills going on in broader society. So now after 20 years living amongst them, I have shifted from being anti-Mormon to basically almost straight-up jealous that *I* wasn't raised as a Mormon, and also don't want the LDS population percentage to drop too low because they truly are a bulwark and such excellent people. And there are many more things than just what I listed here, I could go on about it for a long time. Though like you I can't get over the supernatural beliefs part, oh well.
> Sadly, even the mormons are dying out - the fertility crisis has come for them in the end, too, so they won't own the future like the Amish and the Haredi.
So why worry about the fertility crisis? Cultures like the Amish and the Haredi will overrun the world and problem solved. No more low fertility, no more social ills, no more freedoms you all here don’t seem to want others to have, and no more of what you consider degeneracy.
> So why worry about the fertility crisis? Cultures like the Amish and the Haredi will overrun the world and problem solved. No more low fertility, no more social ills, no more freedoms you all here don’t seem to want others to have, and no more of what you consider degeneracy.
Well I personally worry about it, because I'm a godless big-city afficionado just like Kryptogal, and think that having the buzzing riot of cities with tens of thousands of restaurant and entertainment options and things going on is nice.
And a lot of my friends are STEM Phd's or founders and businessmen, and have driven a lot of progress on various fronts, and I wish there were more of those people, too. Both today and in the future. The best way to ensure that is for them to have more kids.
But both of those segments are dying out and have the least kids, and our future is going to be materially different because of it.
I'm not sure where you get people like us not wanting other people to have freedoms, we're exactly the godless metropolitan sophisticates that religious people love to rail about? I'm 100% sure most religious people would consider me a godless degenerate, as it sounds Kryptogal's neighbors considered her for a while, too.
Once the Amish get large enough it will come for them too. Low raw numbers enable the norms to remain relatively insulated from outside conformity/influence.
> Well I personally worry about it, because I'm a godless big-city afficionado just like Kryptogal, and think that having the buzzing riot of cities with tens of thousands of restaurant and entertainment options and things going on is nice.
> And a lot of my friends are STEM Phd's or founders and businessmen, and have driven a lot of progress on various fronts, and I wish there were more of those people, too. Both today and in the future. The best way to ensure that is for them to have more kids.
I’ve always wanted to be one of those, too. When I was young, I didn’t specifically think of having children, because I had enough earlier development steps to worry about, being socially isolated and completely dependent on my parents, but I assumed I’d have them one day. Only during the last ten years or so did it dawn on me that I probably would never have a chance. Now I’m desperate and willing to do almost anything to have children, as many as possible, but I don’t seem to be able to do much at all; in addition, we all know desperation is the best repellent for women, and, even if one or more were able and willing to have children with me, I don’t expect society to just let us go ahead and do it.
> I'm not sure where you get people like us not wanting other people to have freedoms, we're exactly the godless metropolitan sophisticates that religious people love to rail about?
I’m going by what I read around here. Don’t this and other posts, as well as many comments, say that, while you enjoy your modern individual freedoms and don’t want a religious lifestyle for yourselves, you do want it for most people around you, and you appreciate having other people seriously pressured from childhood to conform to their traditional communities, and to give up any hope of following a more individual path and other pursuits?
> I'm 100% sure most religious people would consider me a godless degenerate,
I don’t get that impression from these comments; more like you happily join forces against what you consider a dystopia, and sympathize in not tolerating the opinion that the environment Kryptogal describes would be another dystopia to me.
> as it sounds Kryptogal's neighbors considered her for a while, too.
The keyphrase is _for a while_; now they seem to be allies.
> Don’t this and other posts, as well as many comments, say that, while you enjoy your modern individual freedoms and don’t want a religious lifestyle for yourselves, you do want it for most people around you
Ah, gotcha - I think what I actually want is "people pairing up and having kids and bigger families" and "environments where kids are welcome / can do stuff outside without CPS being called."
I'd prefer that to be true for EVERYONE - but the only place it seems to be happening is in heavily religious communities. And I think it's a matter of taking what you can get, more or less - it's nicer to live yourself in them, and it's better for your own kids if you have them.
On the "pressure" and lack of individual paths, I just don't think that's such a big factor. All "strict" religions have really big dropout rates to get out of that pressure and pursue those individual paths. Myself and my other siblings are in fact direct examples of those dropouts! None of us stayed in the faith (although a number of us did end up having big families).
Pregnancy and marriage and kids largely only happens for adults, after all - where they're legally independent from parents and can move to LA or NYC or wherever they want, instead of bowing to pressure.
That dropout is exactly what's driving the lower mormon fertility in recent times, in fact.
I think the power of these communities to create dystopias is extremely limited, to be honest, at least in the developed world. If anything, they seem to be fighting difficult rear-guard actions and dwindling in the face of the Western developed world omniculture. And for yourself, how could it ever be a dystopia? You're free to move to LA or NYC, or other non-religious places, aren't you?
The story is probably different in the Middle East, I'll agree.
> Now I’m desperate and willing to do almost anything to have children, as many as possible, but I don’t seem to be able to do much at all; in addition, we all know desperation is the best repellent for women
I wrote an article on dating and marriage overseas that might interest you, in direct response to a Bryan Caplan article (he tweeted my article to give it a bump among his readers).
More traditional cultures are still more about having kids and the big family dynamic, and the downsides are pretty limited, as I go over in the article - hopefully at least worth a read.
Loved this. I was raised LDS - though not in Utah - and left the church for reasons that'll be obvious to those who read me. However, being a parent has made me yearn for many of the religious social structures you mention. There's also a pull to live in a high-fertility "kid culture." Where I live now, the community and social structures don't allow me to be as free range as I like. Plus, alas, I lack the Relief Society wife and handful of kids to entertain and babysit each other.
My social structures don’t permit me to be as free range as I would like, but it’s not that inhibiting. You just have to be willing to deal with a few stares or unpleasant looks from busybodies.
I find that men are generally much more willing to withstand this type of social disapproval though, it is very hard for women to tolerate people thinking they're bad moms (even if they think they're all idiots...I just think we tend to be hurt/more upset by social disapproval).
You should try telling a woman to parent her kids in front of a bunch of other moms. You will see the meanest most feeble group rise up to drive you out of an establishment while their kids dutifully stab a waiter or throw something at a flight attendant.
I wonder if it’s partly because (but a lot of it is innate I’m sure) many of us have been burned by social violence as kids. I was a bit of an uppity show off as a girl and my entire friend group ganged up at me and dedicated an entire blog just to hate on me. When you’ve been punished like that once or twice, you just don’t step out of line anymore. Like yes I’m pretty sure I was annoying but god damn.
I don’t think most men ever end up targets for systematic social destruction unless they are divorcing a vindictive and unscrupulous wife. Which, most divorcees are not even that sociopathic. Not as much as 13 year old girls anyway. I know some people going through divorces and honestly the wife just wants things to get better and to move on from the whole thing. So most men will never know what it’s like.
Honestly it’s probably the same reason most women have no idea about male violence and what it’s like to be punched. Unless they get involved with a sociopathic abuser, they never get punched by a man (or by a woman, because we don’t punch, by and large)
Yeah, but this was before Facebook haha. Things didn’t go viral the same way. But like their blog didn’t have any substantive accusations. Just a list of people they hate and spewed formless vitriol about. It wasn’t until the admins forced us to sit down and talk it out did I even understand what I did wrong. So to me, it was kind of random and terrifying. So I admit I am pretty self conscious at all times about whether I am conforming to majority opinion and what the unspoken codes are. Nothing quite like waking up one day and realizing everyone hates you
Well, they were just jealous haters, I'm sure you know that. The most cruelty I ever saw from girls in middle school was generally when they were ganging up on a girl they were envious of and trying to take down a few pegs. Still, that really sucks that that happened to you.
Interesting to read as an ex-Mormon who could not get out of Utah quick enough, but reading through your post and comments you do have a super good grasp on Mormon and ex-Mormon culture. I’m thankful for how I grew up- super thankful I learned to have fun without alcohol and i can see how my parenting has benefitted from my free range roots. I mostly agree with your take on Mormon men - I think the church offers a really healthy alternative to unhealthy masculinity norms. That said - the patriarchal hierarchy of men above women is so so stringent in the church which makes for horrible marital dynamics and puts many women in very vulnerable positions to be taken advantage/become shells of humans who just serve everyone while their husbands get to be fully fledged humans. And the fact that Mormon men are so much nicer than other men makes it so much harder for men to detect the hierarchy at all. Anyway- interesting thoughts
Hi Celeste! I get it...frankly I very likely would have done the exact same thing in your position. I am trying to figure out how much my coming to respect and admire the LDS culture is a result of their having become legitimately much more tolerant and accepting of others vs my own priorities/values changing vs it just being a reaction to much of the social ills going on elsewhere in our culture and a more wholesome and traditional/stable one starting to seem much more appealing in comparison. I think likely all three.
There are certainly downsides for women and it is not going to work for some of them, nor other people eg most obviously gay people who want to be able to fully participate in all levels of a culture/religion. Otoh I think at the very least they are quite demanding of their boys/men as well. It is somewhat interesting to consider that probably one of the most dangerous possible things for an LDS mother/wife, or circumstance that would make her extremely vulnerable anyway, is if her husband loses his faith and decides to leave the church, after they've had a few kids and especially if she's been a stay at home mom. I have seen a few couples manage to stay married in this circumstance, or the wife eventually follows him out, but for the most part, what really is likely to occur after this happens is a divorce. Even if that's not what he initially wants, after deciding he's no longer going to be active, the next item on the agenda is almost always going to be that he wants to experiment with and find out what else he might have missed in life, including other sexual partners, and I have in fact seen several wives with multiple children end up basically ditched by a no-longer-Mormon husband and now they're a single mother with no work history and extremely vulnerable. This doesn't happen that often, but it does happen now and then, and it's sort of interesting to consider that once a woman puts her trust in her husband to live this type of LDS faithful life, the biggest danger to her is that one day he decides he doesn't want to, anymore.
I don't think you can have a society that works for everyone. I'm serious--you can't build a society where everyone gets to live a fulfilling life. (The Scandinavians probably came closest, but they have a level of social cohesion we never had and are moving further away from.) If you raise the ease of divorce and mandate support for the wife (preventing your single mother with no work history situation), more men figure the marriage is too risky and opt out. If you give women more ability to earn money, many men have nothing to offer, because as you well know, 'being more sensitive and supportive' isn't attractive to most women without having 'masculinity points' from money or brawn or courage.
Similarly if you build life around family formation it's bad for gay people, people who don't want kids, etc.
It's a lucky thing, at least for those of us in the US, that we are able to freely move anywhere in the nation, (without having to learn a new language or other major barriers) and it's big enough and has the federal system, such that there should be basically a place for everyone. The different states and regions honestly are practically like different countries, that's how different they can be culturally. Like I lived for a few years in Vermont...which on the one hand is a lot like Utah, in that it's filled with tons of white people and very outdoors oriented and mountain recreation focused with abundant scenic beauty. But then otoh, Vermont has almost no children (I swear there's like ten kids in the whole state lol) and also no religious people, of any faith, at all (again, I think there might be about ten in the whole state).
That was my thought as well; let Utah be Utah, let San Francisco be San Francisco. But enough people in Utah think San Francisco's evil and vice versa that never happens.
Conservative argument for federalism? Sure, I agree. But good luck convincing the super-wokies and hardcore trads.
Scandinavians don't come the closest tbh. They're annoying to non-wokes.
But yes I agree with this.
Moreover even if you can build such society, such society will have huge coordination problems - All society post Dunbar's number is "religious" for a reason (I'm counting ideologies as religion here).
Humans are weak rationalist (Rationalism exist but doesn't displace larger irrationality) and inherently wants a "religion". Giving them a vacuum just gets them filled.
Hit the nail on the head. You organize society for raising children; cases where this is atenpted and doesn't work out are, unfortunately, collateral damage. Christian charity comes in to try and heal but ultimately things must continue forward
Totally. I know quite a few women in this situation- not only if her husband leaves but if they decide they don’t want to be married anymore for any reason whatsoever- her decision or his- she is screwed with no career. I know so many women who stay in unhealthy marriages because they didn’t finish college and have never had a full time job so its incredibly daunting even considering how to provide for yourself and your kids after never imagining you’d have to. (Sidenote- your commentary on ex-Mormons sowing their wild oats when they first leave, acting like teenagers and then eventually getting it out of their system is SPOT ON. Your takes on Mormon and ex-Mormon culture are the most astute I’ve ever seen from someone never in the church).
This happened to my family growing up. My father read Dawkins and Hitch and pivoted entirely to becoming a militant antitheist (he used to deliberately keep “The God Delusion” on his bedside table in full view of my mother during this time).
This immediately coincided with him not going to work, falling into a depression, sleeping in, disappearing for days at a time. He took up alcohol and found he liked it, quite a bit. My mother desperately continued to raise us within the church and my dad drifted out of our lives.
When they got divorced, my dad kept the house and we moved across the country to live with extended family with almost nothing in the way of possessions.
Now, 15 years later, my mother is living an economically stable lifestyle and is happy within the church. Her faith sustained her throughout the hardest period of her life, and she had a built-in community wherever she moved. My stepfather is one of the nicest people I have ever met. I visit them frequently.
My father got into harder drugs, and became a heavy alcoholic. The last I heard, a few months ago, he was in the ER getting his stomach pumped after breaking up with the latest in a long line of girlfriends. I talk to him once every blue moon. He tries to maintain a facade of contentment, most of the time. I pity him. He is alone.
Interesting you mention that. I don't really think you're going to have a form of masculinity that appeals to most men that doesn't involve some kind of leadership, whether it be of a family or of the relationship, at some point--the Mormon men have traded macho swagger for leadership of their family. That's why boys under feminism rebel and become redpill. I hate BAP's writing style but his argument about 'control over space' I think is true.
“That said - the patriarchal hierarchy of men above women is so so stringent in the church which makes for horrible marital dynamics and puts many women in very vulnerable positions to be taken advantage/become shells of humans who just serve everyone while their husbands get to be fully fledged humans.”
This sounds like an absurd caricature. To be honest, if that’s what it takes to have a functional culture, I support it. So far, the alternative is a barren, soulless culture of meaningless material acquisition and status competition. Progressive/feminist cultures with poor birth rates will simply be outbred by more patriarchal ones unless they can figure out how to get “empowered” women to breed.
I think her point is that they become family men instead of beating up their wives and acting macho. But I suspect if you didn't give them the chance to be first in the home they'd be a lot less interested in doing that.
It is extremely creepy. I only went to that area once, and the women all stare at the ground and speak in whispers and basically act like terrified livestock. And they also treat their boys horribly because they end up with excess males when the resident 60 year old patriarch decides to marry his eleventh 15 year old bride, so they basically just kick them out as teenagers and force them to live on their own with no ability to function in society...most become homeless or even have to turn to selling their bodies for sex to other males, to survive.
You mean the fundamentalist LDS where they still do polygamy? This is a good description but I think it got disconnected from something else; most Mormons don't do that anymore (and in fact they kick you out if you do I think).
Yes, they are a spin-off sect from long ago when the religion prohibited polygamy. They are not recognized by the LDS and they all live in the very rural desert down by Lake Powell on quasi-legal compounds scamming the federal government. These are also the people who still wear Little House on the Prairie dresses and long french braids, they have almost no contact with the outside world at all.
To be fair, some of them don’t live down by Lake Powell. Some of them live in the desert around Monticello and Blanding, and are otherwise the same. I have family members who knew them for quite a while.
This article is bittersweet because while it's nice to hear that there's places like this left, it's depressing to hear that it's slowly getting absorbed into the prevailing American monoculture.
I truly believe that it never will entirely! We consider it almost a responsibility to be a "peculiar people," so we're never going to absorb entirely. It may be hard to find such homogenous pockets of it as Utah becomes increasingly California-fied, but this culture exists throughout the US (and world) and these communities are desperate to include anyone who wants to be a part of them. They/we WILL be hoping you convert, of course, but you definitely don't have to. We have folks in my church we fondly refer to as "dry members"---never joined the church, but a big part of our community.
Here's a practical thing you could try: if you're a parent, find the local congregation and get on the mom group chat---boom, you'll have a little mini community just like this. Everywhere I move in country it's like this. Seriously, try it and tell me if I'm wrong!
I agree with Jordan, I was being a bit pessimistic, it is never going to truly die, I just think it will become a bit more like Colorado (hopefully we will not get to the point that the whole state smells like marijuana smoke though...hard to imagine it ever being legalized here other than for medical). And also I think some of the opening up to the world, at least in Utah, was a good thing for them. They're still going plenty strong, they just tolerate others more now.
I also agree with Jordan that you do not actually have to join to be included in their community. As I said, my neighborhood is majority active Mormon (probably 70-80%). And they do all kinds of events and involve us, even though they know we are not interested in joining the actual church. For example, once a month my neighborhood has a "walkabout" on Sunday evenings. This is when a few families are selected to put out treats or beverages in their yard, and everyone in the neighborhood walks around from 6-8 pm with their dogs and kids and just visits with each other. It's really, really nice and an enjoyable way to meet your neighbors and they invite all of us, it's not just for church members.
I moved to Alpine, Utah not ever hearing the word Mormon. I lived there for a year and the community was kind and welcoming to me even knowing I was never going to become Mormon. I stocked up on beer, wine, and pot and loved the time I spent there. Without question, they are the most Christian of all the branches of Christianity I’ve seen. Very good humans.
Worked with a bunch in Idaho. Every single one of them carried a concealed Glock at all times and if you asked them about it they would talk about how they had a social responsibility to keep everyone safe.
How can you tell? I do think most families here have a gun. But I've never actually seen one. And I don't think they carry them around with them, but maybe I just have no idea what to look for? The only time my husband ever brings his gun anywhere is if we are in wilderness, in case of a bear or angry bull or something, lol.
I was helping a bunch of them move a piano through tight confines where we were all pressed up against walls and everyone stopped and said “hold on, I need to move my gun.” Then all them took out their guns and set them on the kitchen table. And later told me they were always packing.
This is always funny to me, because living my whole life in CA, more than half the people I know are carrying at any given time (usually illegally), they just don’t give a fuck, and fear crime more than cops. This is also why pistol charges are dropped so much, cops and prosecutors know that’s how it is, and the jails are overflowing as it is without piling on needless weapons charges to routine traffic stops. With the Supreme Court issuing Bruen vs NYPRA, “May issue” concealed carry weapon (CCW) permit policy is banned, “shall issue “ (assuming background check clears) is now the most unconstitutional policy allowed. 17 states adopted constitutional carry, meaning no permit required for concealed carry.
I grew up in the church in Idaho, its a little different experience there with the presence of so much farming, work ethic, responsibility, and particularly not being afraid of manual labor are emphasized a little more.
I don't go anymore, mostly out of laziness if I'm being honest. It was refreshing to hear many of the things my wife and I still very much like about the culture. Its why our kids still go with their grandparents. We haven't found a better substitute for the culture, and morality that it teaches.
One of the things that is often overlooked about the patriarchal structure of the church is that the men are taught early on and often, if you are not treating the people in your life well, you have no authority, you have no respect, you have no priesthood.
It’s nice to finally stumble onto an article talking about LDS culture!
I’m a recent convert to the church, and one of the things that felt so right was its cultural stability. It’s a very family-centric institution that in my experience cultivates incredibly mature young adults, particularly among the missionaries.
I’m traveling across the world by bicycle right now and I’ve attended probably twenty LDS congregations in four countries. Almost all of them were served by one or more pairs of missionaries—90% of them young men. I used to think that the main purpose of a mission was to proselytize and gain new converts, but I’m convinced the larger reason is to actually build up the testimonies of its young adults—those stepping into the world away from their families for the first time and who are at risk of, well, a multitude of temptations.
Men typically join a mission between the ages of 18 and 25 and serve two years; women join (I think) between age 19 and 24 and serve 18 months. They’re paired up with companions who rotate every six weeks or so, if I remember right. They’re not completely cut off from technology, but there’s pretty strict rules. They have access to smartphones, but they’re only used for church-affiliated purposes. They have one day a week when they’re allowed to reach out to their families and friends, but the other six days are for serving the community. Missions are by no means obligatory for church members, but it’s a hallmark of the most religious families, particularly among men.
I’ve been around young adults for most of my professional life, and I’ve never met such a mature bunch of people who are genuinely eager to get married and start families, it’s crazy. Most twenty-somethings I knew before joining the church just wanted to party, smoke pot, get laid, and basically run away from commitment. But these missionaries… I mean, when’s the last time you met a 19-year-old who talked about how excited he was to meet his future wife and start a family? Spending two years denying yourself and serving something other than your ego really prepares you for the mindset of being a good father, in my opinion.
Yes I agree with all this. You know it's funny, but when I first came here I honestly just didn't even believe them for a few years, I thought they were all faking. That's how completely alien and shocking it was to me to meet young people, particularly young men, who actually WANTED to get married and not, as you say, just party and rack up notches on their bedpost and avoid commitment. I was so used to that as basically a "natural" state that I assumed they must be lying or faking it!! But eventually it became clear that they were not.
I’ve lived here for almost 15 years, and it’s one of the best places I’ve ever lived; And I’ve lived in 10-12 states, and 15-18 different cities.
Mormons (LDS as they now prefer) are great neighbors, good citizens, good people, and make great families.
Not only do they always come and introduce themselves and welcome me to the neighborhood, but they have never bugged me about “coming to church”, ever!
They mow their yards, have their kids inside by dark, mind their own business, but always wave “hello”!
The family across the street has given me a bottle of sparkling cider and cookies, every Christmas since I’ve lived here. They never asked me for a single thing, ever.
I’m sure they know I’m not LDS, but they never do anything to show it.
They’re all just super nice, friendly, neighborly, polite, quiet, perfect.
I’ve lived in this house for almost 6 years, and I’ve never had a single issue with any of them, nor them with me.
I’d take a neighborhood of Mormons over pretty much anybody!
(They also store food, as do I, so they are preppers too, so if the SHTF, I think they will be delighted that I’m even crazier than them about it)
I’m even tempted to attend some of their services, just to see what it’s all about; I’m a Christian, so I doubt it will be too shocking.
Plus, let’s just be honest, the women are beautiful! The men are generally pretty good looking and fit too. They’re just a healthy, well bred lot, and I respect that a lot!
Yes, this is my experience. The neighbor Christmas gifts is another thing I could've mentioned! If we ever accidentally leave the garage door open at night, an LDS neighbor will text to let us know. They are about the most friendly and ideal neighbors you could ask for, children are all extremely polite, I could go on and on about it...
You kinda toss in at the end of yeah this is maintained through crushing sexism and general self deception and all the pathologies that brings (even moreso than the older religions because there's no fog of time you have to do all these mental gymnastics to orient your whole life around laughably preposterous, obviously invented BS). I fully agree there are some big advantages to the group solidarity and aid that Mormons maintain. I am very aware of missing a lot of that in my own life. But it's weird to write a while paean to the positives while just waiving away what it takes to maintain that. We shouldn't be lamenting, we should be envisioning new ways to create the good parts without the crushing negatives.
Well it may just be bc I live here and therefore also know plenty of ex-Mormons, but I figured that the negatives are plentiful and easy to find (ex-Mormons tend to have quite a lot to say about it lol), and also I feel they're exaggerated. Or maybe not exaggerated so much as that the positives become much more salient and obvious when the rest of society becomes more alienated, negatively polarized, chaotic, indulgent etc.
FWIW I would not agree that LDS culture is "crushingly sexist". Yes there are clear gender roles, and you are expected to get married (hetero married). The gender roles are kind of inherent when so many kids are encouraged, bc one of you is going to be pregnant or breastfeeding quite a lot and the other is not! But as far as sexism ... Idk, on the one hand, yes men are the "head" of the family and can be priests. But otoh, the religion asks/demands quite a lot of them as well, far more than basically any other subculture in America other than maybe Amish. Going on a mission is quite a big ask! And having sex with only one woman your whole life. Also nowadays it really is not unusual to see LDS women who are doctors or own their own businesses, and they never discouraged women from education like some faiths did. I mean look, they have a polygamist history in their origins, there is obviously some funky stuff here and yes the beliefs regarding Joseph Smith finding golden plates in upstate NY just a couple hundred years ago is going to be tough for many to swallow. Regardless, I can't much argue with results, and what I see around me is people who seem healthier, more stable, more successful, and happier than what I can see in most other places.
I've only ever had good experiences with Mormons I've known, though I've never been more than colleagues. So to be fair I'm extrapolating based on what I know about LDS from the outside and my wife's experience growing up in a conservative church (in coastal SoCal, so mainstream evangelical, not fringe).
She had the built in solidarity and community. If you hang it with her extended family it feels exactly like you're talking about.
It's taken her decades of work and some of her challenges still stem from the crushing awfulness that growing up in that environment wraught. She has a sister and a brother. Guess which sibling still goes to church?
I don't have personal knowledge to that degree into LDS but I have enough knowledge to be pretty confident it's not better there.
You should visit one of our services and see for yourself! I used to think a lot of the optimism, cheerfulness, etc. was forced and fake, but I’ve visited enough congregations and met enough members that I’ve come to the opposite conclusion—it’s mostly genuine in a way that simply isn’t allowed in the secular world. I was the one who was deeply cynical, lol.
Yes, the church endorses traditional gender roles, but everyone is expected to step up and be responsible stewards of the community: members are required to avoid certain substances (alcohol, tobacco, coffee, and tea), practice the law of chastity, and tithe 10% of income, among other things. Everyone—men and women—surrenders some autonomy to keep the faith.
I can’t speak authoritatively on the role of women in the church, but I’ve heard it said that men and women are equals, but we just have different roles. For what it’s worth, roughly half the speakers on any given Sunday are women. The church is also kinda unique in that we have one day a month in which the floor is open to anyone to address the congregation, usually for personal testimony or to provide an update on trying circumstances (death in the family, member struggling with faith, etc.)
I don’t want anything I said to come across as hostile or combative. I’m a new member (baptized six months ago) and I’ve just found the basic pillars of the faith to be incredibly rewarding. It provides a structure that the modern world simply refuses to entertain, but one that I suspect works for the vast majority of both men and women.
“even moreso than the older religions because there's no fog of time you have to do all these mental gymnastics to orient your whole life around laughably preposterous, obviously invented BS”
This is how myself and many others view progressivism tbh. The difference between Mormon bullshit and progressive bullshit is Mormon bs works . Not every single time, but for the group overall. The misfits, eccentrics and outliers are always going to have a bad time, it’s not worth restructuring society around them. I don’t think there’s a way to socially select for only the good outcomes without the sacrifice of dark side. I think society is stuck with tradeoffs .
Obviously there's always tradeoffs. Crushing oppression for half the population and forcing everyone to structure their lives and psychology around laughable lies isn't something I'd call a good tradeoff for anything. Are you saying only silly progressives think it's good for everyone to have equal rights and be allowed to not believe in obvious lies?
This is Mormonism/christianity we’re talking about, not Islam. There is no “crushing oppression” of women in the west, and never was. Women being expected to prioritize families and childbearing isn’t “oppression” it’s normal for the vast majority of human history. Your expectation otherwise is what’s weird. You progressives have your own “laughable lies” regarding transgenderism, among other absurdist identity politics.
“You think it’s only progressives who want everyone to have equal rights?”
Actually no, I don’t. I think western Christian Universalism is a baseline western value, but wasn’t conceived of in the modern way until very recently. That very well could be the logical end point ir western civilization , but if that’s true, I think the west is doomed. I don’t think universalism works, and think feminism lead to cratering birth rates that will end progressive/western societies via not being able to replace populations. The religious “extremists” (read: people who take faith seriously) will simply outbreed secular societies.
So yes, you think equal rights for women is only for progressives. Honestly I appreciate you at least being forthright.
Also, you honestly should think a bit harder comparing thinking we should take transgender folks at their word about their experience of life with buying into bullshit some grifter made up 200 years ago. Or for that matter with a bunch of stories built up around an arbitrary member of the Mesopotamian pantheon (yahweh) over the past few millenia.
There is no way to continue this exchange without it devolving into another trans debacle. The reality is most people don’t buy into it at all, whether it’s true or not. You progressives aren’t some “silent majority” you think you are, and the systems you forced on the west are actively failing. Time will tell what the future holds, but it belongs to those who breed. Your kind don’t.
The trans thing is a distraction. They're a tiny percent of society. It's 50% of society Christians and LDS want to oppress and 100% they want to force into a life of self hate and twisted psychology trying to pretend they believe obvious bullshit is true.
I never would have discovered your voice without Substack. This was really great and I've forwarded it to a couple of people with whom I was just having this kind of "kids today" discussion. As you say I do wish this culture could be implemented without the special underpants.
No wine, no beer, and no coffee, ever, are also hard sells. Honestly though I don't see any reason that the kid culture itself couldn't be implemented without the supernatural beliefs, given that the whole country basically did things this way 30-40 years ago. It's more of a collective action and organizational problem, no one wants to make those moves unless everyone does, and it doesn't work as well on an individual level with the supporting culture.
I'm still kind of miffed at her for the punching article, but I have to admit she's well-spoken (written), has an unusual combination of right-wing and left-wing traits (something I sympathize with), and usually defends her position well even if I don't like it.
I had a more free-range early childhood than normal for millenials because we lived in a rural subdivision where there were enough kids to create a pack. One kid can get into really dangerous trouble, but a group usually won’t.
On Mormons: I think its one of the last medium-high control religions in the US that isn’t an actual cult and people find it uncomfortable. But I think their high-control lifestyle works for a substantial set of people—probably a straight-up majority. When it doesn’t work you get ex-mormons or scammers.
Tracingwoodgrains is a gay ex-Mormon and he’s written about his complicated feelings for the culture, which you might find interesting.
Sounds good, but…if Mormonism is so much better than the rest of America, why are Mormons becoming more like everyone else rather than vice versa? (Not a rhetorical question, genuinely curious about how and why Utah is changing.)
The ones who remain Mormon haven't changed much. What has happened is that lots of them have left the faith or are no longer active, and the reason why is the internet. Pre-2000s, things were extremely sheltered here and they just literally did not have much exposure to anything else...reading anything that wasn't affirmatively Mormon was basically considered "anti Mormon" and they shielded themselves from a lot of outside stuff, didn't watch R rated movies, that kind of thing. With the internet and increased exposure to the rest of the world, I think a bunch just stopped believing in it. The LDS faith *does* make a lot of demands..no alcohol, no coffee, no sex before or outside marriage, no porn.
The exodus from active membership has primarily been driven by young men. Bc those demands are more of a burden/sacrifice to them...they want to have sex and watch porn and party. Also they might be more likely to have a rationalist type personality that can't abide by the religious doctrine. Some young women leave too, but not as many. Also there was a large exodus of young people around the Obama era because they were upset at the LDS Church's stance on LGB and not allowing same sex couples to marry.
All that said, it was mostly the past two decades that saw almost entirely young people leaving. I wonder if it's possible that a lot of them make their way back now, once they're older and the pull of sex/partying/etc is not so important to them. Also there may be a factor where 20 years ago, outsiders sort of looked down on Mormons or thought they were weirdos or maybe still polygamists or something, and I think now that's no longer the case...there are a ton of Mormon influencers and people that admire them, so who knows.
Bottom line is that the Mormons haven't changed much, just a bunch of younger people stopped being active in the church or believers, which I think is mostly bc of the internet. As far as Utah goes, tons of businesses from Silicon Valley and NYC have opened offices here and imported workers and tons of people have moved here for the mountains/weather, so there are just more non-natives. though I don't think the outside of Utah immigrants are a huge factor bc most of us like the Mormons and don't try to or want to degrade their culture...lots of young couples for example affirmatively like it here for the good Mormon influence. It is more the former Mormons...a lot of them end up being basically emotionally traumatized when they leave. For real, they often have mental breakdowns, it is very destabilizing to lose such a strong social culture and support network. So then they often tend to swing hard in the opposite direction...get really hard into partying and experimenting with everything that was previously off limits. That tends to be a phase they eventually work through, but there is definitely a big thing here where someone leaves the church and then goes off the deep end into drugs, partying, extreme sexual depravity etc for a few years. I have really seen a few of them basically permanently fuck up their lives this way, though most eventually work through it and come out the other side being normal...though it can take a decade to get there. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if there's an uptick in coming years of some of their wayward flock returning.
I agree so much with these parenting ideas. I more or less did this as a Christian (non Mormon) homeschooling parent. Kind of free range, lots of outdoor time, all had jobs in the house, six kids crammed into a small house but with a big yard. Boys did Boy Scouts( prior to girls being allowed) and finished as Eagle Scouts. Boys need dedicated boy time to learn responsibility and skills.
It's really quite incredible that the Boy Scouts just decided to self-destruct like that. You have to wonder who was on their governing board when they made that decision or what they were thinking?! They lost 60% of their membership numbers in just five years.
I didn't follow the boy scout drama in tremendous depth, but my understanding is that they felt backed into a corner with no good option (pressure about gay scouts, falling non-morman enrollment, sex abuse scandals), so they Just Did Something. Their options were to tie their fate closer and closer to their morman demographic, or to risk losing that demographic but trying again for a wider population.
It isn't clear to me that this was a bad decision for Scouts, and I certainly think it was beneficial for the girls who can join now. From every account I've heard, the modern Boy Scout and Girl Scout programs are in no way interchangeable. I'm sure there are girls who were entirely happy with their Girl Scouting experience, but the ones I've heard from were mostly dissatisfied, and deeply envious of the boys who could do more real activities.
Disclaimer: I am a former boy scout who mostly had a mediocre to bad experience with the program.
See this is crazy to me because I did Girl Scouts as a kid and I looooved it. I can't even imagine why any girl would want to be in boy scouts or unhappy with the girl scouting program. We did "real" things all the time! Girls Scouts owned wilderness properties and we went camping and slept in lean-tos. There was a lake that had the girl scout camp on one side and the boy scout camp on the other, etc. We took field trips to NYC too so it wasn't always wilderness stuff. I wonder if this maybe just varies a lot by state, or perhaps it changed recently. Or maybe in Utah girl scouts got short shrift bc here they wanted girls in Relief Society or something (I did girl scouts in the northeast in the 80s). This really surprises me...I recall reading something like that 80% of women in state or federal elected congressional positions had done Girl Scouts, I just assumed both were popular.
It seems likely that it's a regional thing, as well as a generational thing. My mother was very involved in girl scouts, and did camping. She and her mother both did some amount of adult participation in girl scouts at a bureaucratic level, and feel that the organization "sold its soul to cookies".
I had a good friend in highschool who did Girl Scouts, while her brothers did Boy Scouts, and her experience was dominated by jealousy; evidently her Girl Scout troop was very arts and crafts and cookies focussed. I also know a family with children born 4-5 years after me. Their eldest daughter did Girl Scouts, then switched over to Boy Scouts the moment it opened up, and made Eagle.
So, maybe it's a matter of timing, maybe it's a matter of region/troop, or maybe I just have unrepresentative anecdotes. But that's what I've got.
Your experiences sound like mine from the 90s in California. I was a Boy Scout, my sister was a Girl Scout. GS was very cookie sale focused, almost abusively so. It was also a magnet for social climbing queen bees. Boy Scouts had different problems, mainly that there were 2 main scout types with some overlap: overachieving college application kids, and awkward/autistic boys who’s parents attempted to socialize them into normal, which doesn’t work when it’s all kids like that lol. My friends and I had fun being shitty little Bart Simpson wannabes until our patrol was officially broken up and I was informally asked to leave lol. Good times
Yes, Girl Scout troops have huge variation and it’s a problem. In Illinois we actually hiked and camped, in California we made lip gloss. The girls in the lip gloss troops that want to camp, should be allowed to form another Girl Scout troop (in the same area) that goes after different badges, but they weren’t allowing them to do that… so now we have girls in the Boy Scouts
That's just crazy. I'm astonished that Girl Scouts would allow its own organization to become so lame/degraded that it would even have to worry about losing girls to Boy Scouts. I mean honestly, how embarrassing!
It is, and an unnecessary loss for the Girl Scouts. They have a huge variety of available badges, they just needed to allow for smaller troops, even if they compete in the same areas... Maybe a balance would have been struck between the homemade lip gloss badges and the camping badges. A lot of it depended on who the troop moms were, too. Another manifestation of weird cliqueyness unfortunately. I made it up to first year of Cadettes, and then couldn’t take the California troop anymore. Total culture clash from my old troop
A thousand times yes.
I was raised in the faith in a huge family, and I'm grateful for it in retrospect as an adult, because it modeled good family dynamics, how to do a large family well, and a better way to socialize and form a community.
But I could never stomach the religion myself, and it was a big enough point of contention that I moved out when I turned 17 to get away from being forced into a faith I didn't believe. It took a while, but after years of observation, eventually I came around to the idea that living as a mormon is actually legitimately better than whatever everyone else is doing.
I've always told people that the South Park episode is dead-on. You may think the beliefs are wacky and plainly pants-on-head, but if you look at the actual families and communities they build, they're doing it noticeably better than essentially everyone else, and succeeding on all the fronts you mention.
Sadly, even the mormons are dying out - the fertility crisis has come for them in the end, too, so they won't own the future like the Amish and the Haredi.
https://imgur.com/a/hJooiIq
As you point out, SLC and St George and similar cities will probably just be Denver and Albuquerque equivalents in another decade or so.
Yes to all this. Honestly when I moved here I was straight up anti-Mormon and really did not like them at all and was quite bigoted about it, for almost a decade. I think really I just mostly didn't like the feeling that they were looking down on me, which felt palpable even though they were surface-level polite. Anyway, I got over it (and they also became legitimately much more accepting after getting more used to non-Mormons and realizing we weren't all immoral standard-less satanists), and at this point it is just so blatantly obvious how much more healthy and successful their culture is, especially when compared to all the social ills going on in broader society. So now after 20 years living amongst them, I have shifted from being anti-Mormon to basically almost straight-up jealous that *I* wasn't raised as a Mormon, and also don't want the LDS population percentage to drop too low because they truly are a bulwark and such excellent people. And there are many more things than just what I listed here, I could go on about it for a long time. Though like you I can't get over the supernatural beliefs part, oh well.
> Sadly, even the mormons are dying out - the fertility crisis has come for them in the end, too, so they won't own the future like the Amish and the Haredi.
So why worry about the fertility crisis? Cultures like the Amish and the Haredi will overrun the world and problem solved. No more low fertility, no more social ills, no more freedoms you all here don’t seem to want others to have, and no more of what you consider degeneracy.
> So why worry about the fertility crisis? Cultures like the Amish and the Haredi will overrun the world and problem solved. No more low fertility, no more social ills, no more freedoms you all here don’t seem to want others to have, and no more of what you consider degeneracy.
Well I personally worry about it, because I'm a godless big-city afficionado just like Kryptogal, and think that having the buzzing riot of cities with tens of thousands of restaurant and entertainment options and things going on is nice.
And a lot of my friends are STEM Phd's or founders and businessmen, and have driven a lot of progress on various fronts, and I wish there were more of those people, too. Both today and in the future. The best way to ensure that is for them to have more kids.
But both of those segments are dying out and have the least kids, and our future is going to be materially different because of it.
I'm not sure where you get people like us not wanting other people to have freedoms, we're exactly the godless metropolitan sophisticates that religious people love to rail about? I'm 100% sure most religious people would consider me a godless degenerate, as it sounds Kryptogal's neighbors considered her for a while, too.
Once the Amish get large enough it will come for them too. Low raw numbers enable the norms to remain relatively insulated from outside conformity/influence.
> Well I personally worry about it, because I'm a godless big-city afficionado just like Kryptogal, and think that having the buzzing riot of cities with tens of thousands of restaurant and entertainment options and things going on is nice.
> And a lot of my friends are STEM Phd's or founders and businessmen, and have driven a lot of progress on various fronts, and I wish there were more of those people, too. Both today and in the future. The best way to ensure that is for them to have more kids.
I’ve always wanted to be one of those, too. When I was young, I didn’t specifically think of having children, because I had enough earlier development steps to worry about, being socially isolated and completely dependent on my parents, but I assumed I’d have them one day. Only during the last ten years or so did it dawn on me that I probably would never have a chance. Now I’m desperate and willing to do almost anything to have children, as many as possible, but I don’t seem to be able to do much at all; in addition, we all know desperation is the best repellent for women, and, even if one or more were able and willing to have children with me, I don’t expect society to just let us go ahead and do it.
> I'm not sure where you get people like us not wanting other people to have freedoms, we're exactly the godless metropolitan sophisticates that religious people love to rail about?
I’m going by what I read around here. Don’t this and other posts, as well as many comments, say that, while you enjoy your modern individual freedoms and don’t want a religious lifestyle for yourselves, you do want it for most people around you, and you appreciate having other people seriously pressured from childhood to conform to their traditional communities, and to give up any hope of following a more individual path and other pursuits?
> I'm 100% sure most religious people would consider me a godless degenerate,
I don’t get that impression from these comments; more like you happily join forces against what you consider a dystopia, and sympathize in not tolerating the opinion that the environment Kryptogal describes would be another dystopia to me.
> as it sounds Kryptogal's neighbors considered her for a while, too.
The keyphrase is _for a while_; now they seem to be allies.
> Don’t this and other posts, as well as many comments, say that, while you enjoy your modern individual freedoms and don’t want a religious lifestyle for yourselves, you do want it for most people around you
Ah, gotcha - I think what I actually want is "people pairing up and having kids and bigger families" and "environments where kids are welcome / can do stuff outside without CPS being called."
I'd prefer that to be true for EVERYONE - but the only place it seems to be happening is in heavily religious communities. And I think it's a matter of taking what you can get, more or less - it's nicer to live yourself in them, and it's better for your own kids if you have them.
On the "pressure" and lack of individual paths, I just don't think that's such a big factor. All "strict" religions have really big dropout rates to get out of that pressure and pursue those individual paths. Myself and my other siblings are in fact direct examples of those dropouts! None of us stayed in the faith (although a number of us did end up having big families).
Pregnancy and marriage and kids largely only happens for adults, after all - where they're legally independent from parents and can move to LA or NYC or wherever they want, instead of bowing to pressure.
That dropout is exactly what's driving the lower mormon fertility in recent times, in fact.
I think the power of these communities to create dystopias is extremely limited, to be honest, at least in the developed world. If anything, they seem to be fighting difficult rear-guard actions and dwindling in the face of the Western developed world omniculture. And for yourself, how could it ever be a dystopia? You're free to move to LA or NYC, or other non-religious places, aren't you?
The story is probably different in the Middle East, I'll agree.
> Now I’m desperate and willing to do almost anything to have children, as many as possible, but I don’t seem to be able to do much at all; in addition, we all know desperation is the best repellent for women
I wrote an article on dating and marriage overseas that might interest you, in direct response to a Bryan Caplan article (he tweeted my article to give it a bump among his readers).
More traditional cultures are still more about having kids and the big family dynamic, and the downsides are pretty limited, as I go over in the article - hopefully at least worth a read.
https://performativebafflement.substack.com/p/the-case-for-overseas-dating-and?r=17hw9h
Loved this. I was raised LDS - though not in Utah - and left the church for reasons that'll be obvious to those who read me. However, being a parent has made me yearn for many of the religious social structures you mention. There's also a pull to live in a high-fertility "kid culture." Where I live now, the community and social structures don't allow me to be as free range as I like. Plus, alas, I lack the Relief Society wife and handful of kids to entertain and babysit each other.
My social structures don’t permit me to be as free range as I would like, but it’s not that inhibiting. You just have to be willing to deal with a few stares or unpleasant looks from busybodies.
I find that men are generally much more willing to withstand this type of social disapproval though, it is very hard for women to tolerate people thinking they're bad moms (even if they think they're all idiots...I just think we tend to be hurt/more upset by social disapproval).
You should try telling a woman to parent her kids in front of a bunch of other moms. You will see the meanest most feeble group rise up to drive you out of an establishment while their kids dutifully stab a waiter or throw something at a flight attendant.
I wonder if it’s partly because (but a lot of it is innate I’m sure) many of us have been burned by social violence as kids. I was a bit of an uppity show off as a girl and my entire friend group ganged up at me and dedicated an entire blog just to hate on me. When you’ve been punished like that once or twice, you just don’t step out of line anymore. Like yes I’m pretty sure I was annoying but god damn.
I don’t think most men ever end up targets for systematic social destruction unless they are divorcing a vindictive and unscrupulous wife. Which, most divorcees are not even that sociopathic. Not as much as 13 year old girls anyway. I know some people going through divorces and honestly the wife just wants things to get better and to move on from the whole thing. So most men will never know what it’s like.
Honestly it’s probably the same reason most women have no idea about male violence and what it’s like to be punched. Unless they get involved with a sociopathic abuser, they never get punched by a man (or by a woman, because we don’t punch, by and large)
Wow, they all made a blog about you? That must have been devastating!
Yeah, but this was before Facebook haha. Things didn’t go viral the same way. But like their blog didn’t have any substantive accusations. Just a list of people they hate and spewed formless vitriol about. It wasn’t until the admins forced us to sit down and talk it out did I even understand what I did wrong. So to me, it was kind of random and terrifying. So I admit I am pretty self conscious at all times about whether I am conforming to majority opinion and what the unspoken codes are. Nothing quite like waking up one day and realizing everyone hates you
Well, they were just jealous haters, I'm sure you know that. The most cruelty I ever saw from girls in middle school was generally when they were ganging up on a girl they were envious of and trying to take down a few pegs. Still, that really sucks that that happened to you.
Interesting to read as an ex-Mormon who could not get out of Utah quick enough, but reading through your post and comments you do have a super good grasp on Mormon and ex-Mormon culture. I’m thankful for how I grew up- super thankful I learned to have fun without alcohol and i can see how my parenting has benefitted from my free range roots. I mostly agree with your take on Mormon men - I think the church offers a really healthy alternative to unhealthy masculinity norms. That said - the patriarchal hierarchy of men above women is so so stringent in the church which makes for horrible marital dynamics and puts many women in very vulnerable positions to be taken advantage/become shells of humans who just serve everyone while their husbands get to be fully fledged humans. And the fact that Mormon men are so much nicer than other men makes it so much harder for men to detect the hierarchy at all. Anyway- interesting thoughts
Hi Celeste! I get it...frankly I very likely would have done the exact same thing in your position. I am trying to figure out how much my coming to respect and admire the LDS culture is a result of their having become legitimately much more tolerant and accepting of others vs my own priorities/values changing vs it just being a reaction to much of the social ills going on elsewhere in our culture and a more wholesome and traditional/stable one starting to seem much more appealing in comparison. I think likely all three.
There are certainly downsides for women and it is not going to work for some of them, nor other people eg most obviously gay people who want to be able to fully participate in all levels of a culture/religion. Otoh I think at the very least they are quite demanding of their boys/men as well. It is somewhat interesting to consider that probably one of the most dangerous possible things for an LDS mother/wife, or circumstance that would make her extremely vulnerable anyway, is if her husband loses his faith and decides to leave the church, after they've had a few kids and especially if she's been a stay at home mom. I have seen a few couples manage to stay married in this circumstance, or the wife eventually follows him out, but for the most part, what really is likely to occur after this happens is a divorce. Even if that's not what he initially wants, after deciding he's no longer going to be active, the next item on the agenda is almost always going to be that he wants to experiment with and find out what else he might have missed in life, including other sexual partners, and I have in fact seen several wives with multiple children end up basically ditched by a no-longer-Mormon husband and now they're a single mother with no work history and extremely vulnerable. This doesn't happen that often, but it does happen now and then, and it's sort of interesting to consider that once a woman puts her trust in her husband to live this type of LDS faithful life, the biggest danger to her is that one day he decides he doesn't want to, anymore.
I don't think you can have a society that works for everyone. I'm serious--you can't build a society where everyone gets to live a fulfilling life. (The Scandinavians probably came closest, but they have a level of social cohesion we never had and are moving further away from.) If you raise the ease of divorce and mandate support for the wife (preventing your single mother with no work history situation), more men figure the marriage is too risky and opt out. If you give women more ability to earn money, many men have nothing to offer, because as you well know, 'being more sensitive and supportive' isn't attractive to most women without having 'masculinity points' from money or brawn or courage.
Similarly if you build life around family formation it's bad for gay people, people who don't want kids, etc.
We can't all win.
It's a lucky thing, at least for those of us in the US, that we are able to freely move anywhere in the nation, (without having to learn a new language or other major barriers) and it's big enough and has the federal system, such that there should be basically a place for everyone. The different states and regions honestly are practically like different countries, that's how different they can be culturally. Like I lived for a few years in Vermont...which on the one hand is a lot like Utah, in that it's filled with tons of white people and very outdoors oriented and mountain recreation focused with abundant scenic beauty. But then otoh, Vermont has almost no children (I swear there's like ten kids in the whole state lol) and also no religious people, of any faith, at all (again, I think there might be about ten in the whole state).
That was my thought as well; let Utah be Utah, let San Francisco be San Francisco. But enough people in Utah think San Francisco's evil and vice versa that never happens.
Conservative argument for federalism? Sure, I agree. But good luck convincing the super-wokies and hardcore trads.
There's problem with federalism though:
Even rights enforcement will null federalism.
Thing is Germany is even more decentralized than US states, but they share the same ideology nonetheless.
Scandinavians don't come the closest tbh. They're annoying to non-wokes.
But yes I agree with this.
Moreover even if you can build such society, such society will have huge coordination problems - All society post Dunbar's number is "religious" for a reason (I'm counting ideologies as religion here).
Humans are weak rationalist (Rationalism exist but doesn't displace larger irrationality) and inherently wants a "religion". Giving them a vacuum just gets them filled.
Hit the nail on the head. You organize society for raising children; cases where this is atenpted and doesn't work out are, unfortunately, collateral damage. Christian charity comes in to try and heal but ultimately things must continue forward
Totally. I know quite a few women in this situation- not only if her husband leaves but if they decide they don’t want to be married anymore for any reason whatsoever- her decision or his- she is screwed with no career. I know so many women who stay in unhealthy marriages because they didn’t finish college and have never had a full time job so its incredibly daunting even considering how to provide for yourself and your kids after never imagining you’d have to. (Sidenote- your commentary on ex-Mormons sowing their wild oats when they first leave, acting like teenagers and then eventually getting it out of their system is SPOT ON. Your takes on Mormon and ex-Mormon culture are the most astute I’ve ever seen from someone never in the church).
This happened to my family growing up. My father read Dawkins and Hitch and pivoted entirely to becoming a militant antitheist (he used to deliberately keep “The God Delusion” on his bedside table in full view of my mother during this time).
This immediately coincided with him not going to work, falling into a depression, sleeping in, disappearing for days at a time. He took up alcohol and found he liked it, quite a bit. My mother desperately continued to raise us within the church and my dad drifted out of our lives.
When they got divorced, my dad kept the house and we moved across the country to live with extended family with almost nothing in the way of possessions.
Now, 15 years later, my mother is living an economically stable lifestyle and is happy within the church. Her faith sustained her throughout the hardest period of her life, and she had a built-in community wherever she moved. My stepfather is one of the nicest people I have ever met. I visit them frequently.
My father got into harder drugs, and became a heavy alcoholic. The last I heard, a few months ago, he was in the ER getting his stomach pumped after breaking up with the latest in a long line of girlfriends. I talk to him once every blue moon. He tries to maintain a facade of contentment, most of the time. I pity him. He is alone.
Interesting you mention that. I don't really think you're going to have a form of masculinity that appeals to most men that doesn't involve some kind of leadership, whether it be of a family or of the relationship, at some point--the Mormon men have traded macho swagger for leadership of their family. That's why boys under feminism rebel and become redpill. I hate BAP's writing style but his argument about 'control over space' I think is true.
Of course, it's not great for women.
“That said - the patriarchal hierarchy of men above women is so so stringent in the church which makes for horrible marital dynamics and puts many women in very vulnerable positions to be taken advantage/become shells of humans who just serve everyone while their husbands get to be fully fledged humans.”
This sounds like an absurd caricature. To be honest, if that’s what it takes to have a functional culture, I support it. So far, the alternative is a barren, soulless culture of meaningless material acquisition and status competition. Progressive/feminist cultures with poor birth rates will simply be outbred by more patriarchal ones unless they can figure out how to get “empowered” women to breed.
" I think the church offers a really healthy alternative to unhealthy masculinity norms. That said - the patriarchal hierarchy of men above women"
These both cannot be true.
I think her point is that they become family men instead of beating up their wives and acting macho. But I suspect if you didn't give them the chance to be first in the home they'd be a lot less interested in doing that.
Beautiful tribute to a fascinating and healthy culture.
It is extremely creepy. I only went to that area once, and the women all stare at the ground and speak in whispers and basically act like terrified livestock. And they also treat their boys horribly because they end up with excess males when the resident 60 year old patriarch decides to marry his eleventh 15 year old bride, so they basically just kick them out as teenagers and force them to live on their own with no ability to function in society...most become homeless or even have to turn to selling their bodies for sex to other males, to survive.
You mean the fundamentalist LDS where they still do polygamy? This is a good description but I think it got disconnected from something else; most Mormons don't do that anymore (and in fact they kick you out if you do I think).
Yes, they are a spin-off sect from long ago when the religion prohibited polygamy. They are not recognized by the LDS and they all live in the very rural desert down by Lake Powell on quasi-legal compounds scamming the federal government. These are also the people who still wear Little House on the Prairie dresses and long french braids, they have almost no contact with the outside world at all.
To be fair, some of them don’t live down by Lake Powell. Some of them live in the desert around Monticello and Blanding, and are otherwise the same. I have family members who knew them for quite a while.
This article is bittersweet because while it's nice to hear that there's places like this left, it's depressing to hear that it's slowly getting absorbed into the prevailing American monoculture.
I truly believe that it never will entirely! We consider it almost a responsibility to be a "peculiar people," so we're never going to absorb entirely. It may be hard to find such homogenous pockets of it as Utah becomes increasingly California-fied, but this culture exists throughout the US (and world) and these communities are desperate to include anyone who wants to be a part of them. They/we WILL be hoping you convert, of course, but you definitely don't have to. We have folks in my church we fondly refer to as "dry members"---never joined the church, but a big part of our community.
Here's a practical thing you could try: if you're a parent, find the local congregation and get on the mom group chat---boom, you'll have a little mini community just like this. Everywhere I move in country it's like this. Seriously, try it and tell me if I'm wrong!
I agree with Jordan, I was being a bit pessimistic, it is never going to truly die, I just think it will become a bit more like Colorado (hopefully we will not get to the point that the whole state smells like marijuana smoke though...hard to imagine it ever being legalized here other than for medical). And also I think some of the opening up to the world, at least in Utah, was a good thing for them. They're still going plenty strong, they just tolerate others more now.
I also agree with Jordan that you do not actually have to join to be included in their community. As I said, my neighborhood is majority active Mormon (probably 70-80%). And they do all kinds of events and involve us, even though they know we are not interested in joining the actual church. For example, once a month my neighborhood has a "walkabout" on Sunday evenings. This is when a few families are selected to put out treats or beverages in their yard, and everyone in the neighborhood walks around from 6-8 pm with their dogs and kids and just visits with each other. It's really, really nice and an enjoyable way to meet your neighbors and they invite all of us, it's not just for church members.
I moved to Alpine, Utah not ever hearing the word Mormon. I lived there for a year and the community was kind and welcoming to me even knowing I was never going to become Mormon. I stocked up on beer, wine, and pot and loved the time I spent there. Without question, they are the most Christian of all the branches of Christianity I’ve seen. Very good humans.
Worked with a bunch in Idaho. Every single one of them carried a concealed Glock at all times and if you asked them about it they would talk about how they had a social responsibility to keep everyone safe.
How can you tell? I do think most families here have a gun. But I've never actually seen one. And I don't think they carry them around with them, but maybe I just have no idea what to look for? The only time my husband ever brings his gun anywhere is if we are in wilderness, in case of a bear or angry bull or something, lol.
I was helping a bunch of them move a piano through tight confines where we were all pressed up against walls and everyone stopped and said “hold on, I need to move my gun.” Then all them took out their guns and set them on the kitchen table. And later told me they were always packing.
This is always funny to me, because living my whole life in CA, more than half the people I know are carrying at any given time (usually illegally), they just don’t give a fuck, and fear crime more than cops. This is also why pistol charges are dropped so much, cops and prosecutors know that’s how it is, and the jails are overflowing as it is without piling on needless weapons charges to routine traffic stops. With the Supreme Court issuing Bruen vs NYPRA, “May issue” concealed carry weapon (CCW) permit policy is banned, “shall issue “ (assuming background check clears) is now the most unconstitutional policy allowed. 17 states adopted constitutional carry, meaning no permit required for concealed carry.
Point is not to be able to tell
Ha ha! Yes! What’s not to love about that!?
I grew up in the church in Idaho, its a little different experience there with the presence of so much farming, work ethic, responsibility, and particularly not being afraid of manual labor are emphasized a little more.
I don't go anymore, mostly out of laziness if I'm being honest. It was refreshing to hear many of the things my wife and I still very much like about the culture. Its why our kids still go with their grandparents. We haven't found a better substitute for the culture, and morality that it teaches.
One of the things that is often overlooked about the patriarchal structure of the church is that the men are taught early on and often, if you are not treating the people in your life well, you have no authority, you have no respect, you have no priesthood.
It’s nice to finally stumble onto an article talking about LDS culture!
I’m a recent convert to the church, and one of the things that felt so right was its cultural stability. It’s a very family-centric institution that in my experience cultivates incredibly mature young adults, particularly among the missionaries.
I’m traveling across the world by bicycle right now and I’ve attended probably twenty LDS congregations in four countries. Almost all of them were served by one or more pairs of missionaries—90% of them young men. I used to think that the main purpose of a mission was to proselytize and gain new converts, but I’m convinced the larger reason is to actually build up the testimonies of its young adults—those stepping into the world away from their families for the first time and who are at risk of, well, a multitude of temptations.
Men typically join a mission between the ages of 18 and 25 and serve two years; women join (I think) between age 19 and 24 and serve 18 months. They’re paired up with companions who rotate every six weeks or so, if I remember right. They’re not completely cut off from technology, but there’s pretty strict rules. They have access to smartphones, but they’re only used for church-affiliated purposes. They have one day a week when they’re allowed to reach out to their families and friends, but the other six days are for serving the community. Missions are by no means obligatory for church members, but it’s a hallmark of the most religious families, particularly among men.
I’ve been around young adults for most of my professional life, and I’ve never met such a mature bunch of people who are genuinely eager to get married and start families, it’s crazy. Most twenty-somethings I knew before joining the church just wanted to party, smoke pot, get laid, and basically run away from commitment. But these missionaries… I mean, when’s the last time you met a 19-year-old who talked about how excited he was to meet his future wife and start a family? Spending two years denying yourself and serving something other than your ego really prepares you for the mindset of being a good father, in my opinion.
Yes I agree with all this. You know it's funny, but when I first came here I honestly just didn't even believe them for a few years, I thought they were all faking. That's how completely alien and shocking it was to me to meet young people, particularly young men, who actually WANTED to get married and not, as you say, just party and rack up notches on their bedpost and avoid commitment. I was so used to that as basically a "natural" state that I assumed they must be lying or faking it!! But eventually it became clear that they were not.
All true!
I’ve lived here for almost 15 years, and it’s one of the best places I’ve ever lived; And I’ve lived in 10-12 states, and 15-18 different cities.
Mormons (LDS as they now prefer) are great neighbors, good citizens, good people, and make great families.
Not only do they always come and introduce themselves and welcome me to the neighborhood, but they have never bugged me about “coming to church”, ever!
They mow their yards, have their kids inside by dark, mind their own business, but always wave “hello”!
The family across the street has given me a bottle of sparkling cider and cookies, every Christmas since I’ve lived here. They never asked me for a single thing, ever.
I’m sure they know I’m not LDS, but they never do anything to show it.
They’re all just super nice, friendly, neighborly, polite, quiet, perfect.
I’ve lived in this house for almost 6 years, and I’ve never had a single issue with any of them, nor them with me.
I’d take a neighborhood of Mormons over pretty much anybody!
(They also store food, as do I, so they are preppers too, so if the SHTF, I think they will be delighted that I’m even crazier than them about it)
I’m even tempted to attend some of their services, just to see what it’s all about; I’m a Christian, so I doubt it will be too shocking.
Plus, let’s just be honest, the women are beautiful! The men are generally pretty good looking and fit too. They’re just a healthy, well bred lot, and I respect that a lot!
Yes, this is my experience. The neighbor Christmas gifts is another thing I could've mentioned! If we ever accidentally leave the garage door open at night, an LDS neighbor will text to let us know. They are about the most friendly and ideal neighbors you could ask for, children are all extremely polite, I could go on and on about it...
Me too!
You kinda toss in at the end of yeah this is maintained through crushing sexism and general self deception and all the pathologies that brings (even moreso than the older religions because there's no fog of time you have to do all these mental gymnastics to orient your whole life around laughably preposterous, obviously invented BS). I fully agree there are some big advantages to the group solidarity and aid that Mormons maintain. I am very aware of missing a lot of that in my own life. But it's weird to write a while paean to the positives while just waiving away what it takes to maintain that. We shouldn't be lamenting, we should be envisioning new ways to create the good parts without the crushing negatives.
Well it may just be bc I live here and therefore also know plenty of ex-Mormons, but I figured that the negatives are plentiful and easy to find (ex-Mormons tend to have quite a lot to say about it lol), and also I feel they're exaggerated. Or maybe not exaggerated so much as that the positives become much more salient and obvious when the rest of society becomes more alienated, negatively polarized, chaotic, indulgent etc.
FWIW I would not agree that LDS culture is "crushingly sexist". Yes there are clear gender roles, and you are expected to get married (hetero married). The gender roles are kind of inherent when so many kids are encouraged, bc one of you is going to be pregnant or breastfeeding quite a lot and the other is not! But as far as sexism ... Idk, on the one hand, yes men are the "head" of the family and can be priests. But otoh, the religion asks/demands quite a lot of them as well, far more than basically any other subculture in America other than maybe Amish. Going on a mission is quite a big ask! And having sex with only one woman your whole life. Also nowadays it really is not unusual to see LDS women who are doctors or own their own businesses, and they never discouraged women from education like some faiths did. I mean look, they have a polygamist history in their origins, there is obviously some funky stuff here and yes the beliefs regarding Joseph Smith finding golden plates in upstate NY just a couple hundred years ago is going to be tough for many to swallow. Regardless, I can't much argue with results, and what I see around me is people who seem healthier, more stable, more successful, and happier than what I can see in most other places.
I've only ever had good experiences with Mormons I've known, though I've never been more than colleagues. So to be fair I'm extrapolating based on what I know about LDS from the outside and my wife's experience growing up in a conservative church (in coastal SoCal, so mainstream evangelical, not fringe).
She had the built in solidarity and community. If you hang it with her extended family it feels exactly like you're talking about.
It's taken her decades of work and some of her challenges still stem from the crushing awfulness that growing up in that environment wraught. She has a sister and a brother. Guess which sibling still goes to church?
I don't have personal knowledge to that degree into LDS but I have enough knowledge to be pretty confident it's not better there.
You should visit one of our services and see for yourself! I used to think a lot of the optimism, cheerfulness, etc. was forced and fake, but I’ve visited enough congregations and met enough members that I’ve come to the opposite conclusion—it’s mostly genuine in a way that simply isn’t allowed in the secular world. I was the one who was deeply cynical, lol.
Yes, the church endorses traditional gender roles, but everyone is expected to step up and be responsible stewards of the community: members are required to avoid certain substances (alcohol, tobacco, coffee, and tea), practice the law of chastity, and tithe 10% of income, among other things. Everyone—men and women—surrenders some autonomy to keep the faith.
I can’t speak authoritatively on the role of women in the church, but I’ve heard it said that men and women are equals, but we just have different roles. For what it’s worth, roughly half the speakers on any given Sunday are women. The church is also kinda unique in that we have one day a month in which the floor is open to anyone to address the congregation, usually for personal testimony or to provide an update on trying circumstances (death in the family, member struggling with faith, etc.)
I don’t want anything I said to come across as hostile or combative. I’m a new member (baptized six months ago) and I’ve just found the basic pillars of the faith to be incredibly rewarding. It provides a structure that the modern world simply refuses to entertain, but one that I suspect works for the vast majority of both men and women.
I'm glad it's been good for you. And I acknowledged the community benefits. But yeah... Read the test if my comments. Recruitment isn't in the cards 😆
“even moreso than the older religions because there's no fog of time you have to do all these mental gymnastics to orient your whole life around laughably preposterous, obviously invented BS”
This is how myself and many others view progressivism tbh. The difference between Mormon bullshit and progressive bullshit is Mormon bs works . Not every single time, but for the group overall. The misfits, eccentrics and outliers are always going to have a bad time, it’s not worth restructuring society around them. I don’t think there’s a way to socially select for only the good outcomes without the sacrifice of dark side. I think society is stuck with tradeoffs .
Obviously there's always tradeoffs. Crushing oppression for half the population and forcing everyone to structure their lives and psychology around laughable lies isn't something I'd call a good tradeoff for anything. Are you saying only silly progressives think it's good for everyone to have equal rights and be allowed to not believe in obvious lies?
“Crushing oppression for half the population”
This is Mormonism/christianity we’re talking about, not Islam. There is no “crushing oppression” of women in the west, and never was. Women being expected to prioritize families and childbearing isn’t “oppression” it’s normal for the vast majority of human history. Your expectation otherwise is what’s weird. You progressives have your own “laughable lies” regarding transgenderism, among other absurdist identity politics.
“You think it’s only progressives who want everyone to have equal rights?”
Actually no, I don’t. I think western Christian Universalism is a baseline western value, but wasn’t conceived of in the modern way until very recently. That very well could be the logical end point ir western civilization , but if that’s true, I think the west is doomed. I don’t think universalism works, and think feminism lead to cratering birth rates that will end progressive/western societies via not being able to replace populations. The religious “extremists” (read: people who take faith seriously) will simply outbreed secular societies.
So yes, you think equal rights for women is only for progressives. Honestly I appreciate you at least being forthright.
Also, you honestly should think a bit harder comparing thinking we should take transgender folks at their word about their experience of life with buying into bullshit some grifter made up 200 years ago. Or for that matter with a bunch of stories built up around an arbitrary member of the Mesopotamian pantheon (yahweh) over the past few millenia.
There is no way to continue this exchange without it devolving into another trans debacle. The reality is most people don’t buy into it at all, whether it’s true or not. You progressives aren’t some “silent majority” you think you are, and the systems you forced on the west are actively failing. Time will tell what the future holds, but it belongs to those who breed. Your kind don’t.
The trans thing is a distraction. They're a tiny percent of society. It's 50% of society Christians and LDS want to oppress and 100% they want to force into a life of self hate and twisted psychology trying to pretend they believe obvious bullshit is true.
Thanks for articulating this so well Matt, that’s exactly what I was thinking while reading this.
I never would have discovered your voice without Substack. This was really great and I've forwarded it to a couple of people with whom I was just having this kind of "kids today" discussion. As you say I do wish this culture could be implemented without the special underpants.
No wine, no beer, and no coffee, ever, are also hard sells. Honestly though I don't see any reason that the kid culture itself couldn't be implemented without the supernatural beliefs, given that the whole country basically did things this way 30-40 years ago. It's more of a collective action and organizational problem, no one wants to make those moves unless everyone does, and it doesn't work as well on an individual level with the supporting culture.
I'm still kind of miffed at her for the punching article, but I have to admit she's well-spoken (written), has an unusual combination of right-wing and left-wing traits (something I sympathize with), and usually defends her position well even if I don't like it.
I had a more free-range early childhood than normal for millenials because we lived in a rural subdivision where there were enough kids to create a pack. One kid can get into really dangerous trouble, but a group usually won’t.
On Mormons: I think its one of the last medium-high control religions in the US that isn’t an actual cult and people find it uncomfortable. But I think their high-control lifestyle works for a substantial set of people—probably a straight-up majority. When it doesn’t work you get ex-mormons or scammers.
Tracingwoodgrains is a gay ex-Mormon and he’s written about his complicated feelings for the culture, which you might find interesting.
Sounds good, but…if Mormonism is so much better than the rest of America, why are Mormons becoming more like everyone else rather than vice versa? (Not a rhetorical question, genuinely curious about how and why Utah is changing.)
The ones who remain Mormon haven't changed much. What has happened is that lots of them have left the faith or are no longer active, and the reason why is the internet. Pre-2000s, things were extremely sheltered here and they just literally did not have much exposure to anything else...reading anything that wasn't affirmatively Mormon was basically considered "anti Mormon" and they shielded themselves from a lot of outside stuff, didn't watch R rated movies, that kind of thing. With the internet and increased exposure to the rest of the world, I think a bunch just stopped believing in it. The LDS faith *does* make a lot of demands..no alcohol, no coffee, no sex before or outside marriage, no porn.
The exodus from active membership has primarily been driven by young men. Bc those demands are more of a burden/sacrifice to them...they want to have sex and watch porn and party. Also they might be more likely to have a rationalist type personality that can't abide by the religious doctrine. Some young women leave too, but not as many. Also there was a large exodus of young people around the Obama era because they were upset at the LDS Church's stance on LGB and not allowing same sex couples to marry.
All that said, it was mostly the past two decades that saw almost entirely young people leaving. I wonder if it's possible that a lot of them make their way back now, once they're older and the pull of sex/partying/etc is not so important to them. Also there may be a factor where 20 years ago, outsiders sort of looked down on Mormons or thought they were weirdos or maybe still polygamists or something, and I think now that's no longer the case...there are a ton of Mormon influencers and people that admire them, so who knows.
Bottom line is that the Mormons haven't changed much, just a bunch of younger people stopped being active in the church or believers, which I think is mostly bc of the internet. As far as Utah goes, tons of businesses from Silicon Valley and NYC have opened offices here and imported workers and tons of people have moved here for the mountains/weather, so there are just more non-natives. though I don't think the outside of Utah immigrants are a huge factor bc most of us like the Mormons and don't try to or want to degrade their culture...lots of young couples for example affirmatively like it here for the good Mormon influence. It is more the former Mormons...a lot of them end up being basically emotionally traumatized when they leave. For real, they often have mental breakdowns, it is very destabilizing to lose such a strong social culture and support network. So then they often tend to swing hard in the opposite direction...get really hard into partying and experimenting with everything that was previously off limits. That tends to be a phase they eventually work through, but there is definitely a big thing here where someone leaves the church and then goes off the deep end into drugs, partying, extreme sexual depravity etc for a few years. I have really seen a few of them basically permanently fuck up their lives this way, though most eventually work through it and come out the other side being normal...though it can take a decade to get there. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if there's an uptick in coming years of some of their wayward flock returning.
I agree so much with these parenting ideas. I more or less did this as a Christian (non Mormon) homeschooling parent. Kind of free range, lots of outdoor time, all had jobs in the house, six kids crammed into a small house but with a big yard. Boys did Boy Scouts( prior to girls being allowed) and finished as Eagle Scouts. Boys need dedicated boy time to learn responsibility and skills.
It's really quite incredible that the Boy Scouts just decided to self-destruct like that. You have to wonder who was on their governing board when they made that decision or what they were thinking?! They lost 60% of their membership numbers in just five years.
I didn't follow the boy scout drama in tremendous depth, but my understanding is that they felt backed into a corner with no good option (pressure about gay scouts, falling non-morman enrollment, sex abuse scandals), so they Just Did Something. Their options were to tie their fate closer and closer to their morman demographic, or to risk losing that demographic but trying again for a wider population.
It isn't clear to me that this was a bad decision for Scouts, and I certainly think it was beneficial for the girls who can join now. From every account I've heard, the modern Boy Scout and Girl Scout programs are in no way interchangeable. I'm sure there are girls who were entirely happy with their Girl Scouting experience, but the ones I've heard from were mostly dissatisfied, and deeply envious of the boys who could do more real activities.
Disclaimer: I am a former boy scout who mostly had a mediocre to bad experience with the program.
See this is crazy to me because I did Girl Scouts as a kid and I looooved it. I can't even imagine why any girl would want to be in boy scouts or unhappy with the girl scouting program. We did "real" things all the time! Girls Scouts owned wilderness properties and we went camping and slept in lean-tos. There was a lake that had the girl scout camp on one side and the boy scout camp on the other, etc. We took field trips to NYC too so it wasn't always wilderness stuff. I wonder if this maybe just varies a lot by state, or perhaps it changed recently. Or maybe in Utah girl scouts got short shrift bc here they wanted girls in Relief Society or something (I did girl scouts in the northeast in the 80s). This really surprises me...I recall reading something like that 80% of women in state or federal elected congressional positions had done Girl Scouts, I just assumed both were popular.
It seems likely that it's a regional thing, as well as a generational thing. My mother was very involved in girl scouts, and did camping. She and her mother both did some amount of adult participation in girl scouts at a bureaucratic level, and feel that the organization "sold its soul to cookies".
I had a good friend in highschool who did Girl Scouts, while her brothers did Boy Scouts, and her experience was dominated by jealousy; evidently her Girl Scout troop was very arts and crafts and cookies focussed. I also know a family with children born 4-5 years after me. Their eldest daughter did Girl Scouts, then switched over to Boy Scouts the moment it opened up, and made Eagle.
So, maybe it's a matter of timing, maybe it's a matter of region/troop, or maybe I just have unrepresentative anecdotes. But that's what I've got.
Your experiences sound like mine from the 90s in California. I was a Boy Scout, my sister was a Girl Scout. GS was very cookie sale focused, almost abusively so. It was also a magnet for social climbing queen bees. Boy Scouts had different problems, mainly that there were 2 main scout types with some overlap: overachieving college application kids, and awkward/autistic boys who’s parents attempted to socialize them into normal, which doesn’t work when it’s all kids like that lol. My friends and I had fun being shitty little Bart Simpson wannabes until our patrol was officially broken up and I was informally asked to leave lol. Good times
Yes, Girl Scout troops have huge variation and it’s a problem. In Illinois we actually hiked and camped, in California we made lip gloss. The girls in the lip gloss troops that want to camp, should be allowed to form another Girl Scout troop (in the same area) that goes after different badges, but they weren’t allowing them to do that… so now we have girls in the Boy Scouts
That's just crazy. I'm astonished that Girl Scouts would allow its own organization to become so lame/degraded that it would even have to worry about losing girls to Boy Scouts. I mean honestly, how embarrassing!
It is, and an unnecessary loss for the Girl Scouts. They have a huge variety of available badges, they just needed to allow for smaller troops, even if they compete in the same areas... Maybe a balance would have been struck between the homemade lip gloss badges and the camping badges. A lot of it depended on who the troop moms were, too. Another manifestation of weird cliqueyness unfortunately. I made it up to first year of Cadettes, and then couldn’t take the California troop anymore. Total culture clash from my old troop