Affirmation 2017
This weekend I went to the Affirmation Conference in Provo,
Utah. Before I get into sharing my experience, I will say that I was incredibly
fortunate to see and meet some truly remarkable people. People like Troy
Williams, Tom Christofferson, Jana Reiss, Peter Moosman, Jen Blair, Jodie
Palmer, Blaire Ostler, Drew Ostler, Amanda Farr, Lindsay Hansen Park, Mica
Nicole, John Bonner, Laura Skaggs Dulin, Augustus Crosby, Jason Michael Walker,
Michael Klein, Heather Deklerk Kester and her brave daughter Savannah and so
many more. For all that you do and contribute, I see you and I truly thank you.
I’ve been debating how to share my experience, so let’s just start at the very beginning, because it’s a very good place to start.
I went in to this conference a little nervous, but cautiously optimistic. I know a couple people who are involved with Affirmation and was told by friends that it would be really good for me. So, I took those things into consideration and went.
Saturday morning started out great! I was beyond thrilled to hear from Jana Reiss and for her to talk about her research and the book she’s been working on, The Next Mormons. She gave a presentation on how quickly Mormons’ attitudes are shifting on homosexuality and same-sex marriage, how many LGBT Mormons and former Mormons are there, and what their views on religion, God, and politics are. I’m grateful that I’m one of the many individuals she interviewed about being an LGBTQ+ individual who grew up in a Mormon world. I’m happy to be part of that kind of groundbreaking and necessary research. I left the morning panel feeling good about the rest of the day. Then I looked at the schedule. For each hour of workshops, there were multiple options for men, but one option for women.
The first option for women was for women and non-binary individuals. The hour itself was fine. We talked about how we identify and our experiences coming out along with where we are now in terms of activity within the church. But the fact that non-binary individuals were lumped in with women disappointed me. Are there non-binary individuals who present as women? Yes. But are there also non-binary individuals who present as men? Also yes. To lump us all together wasn’t fair to any group. Non-binary, male presenting individuals don’t belong in a room full of women. So then where does that leave them to go?
I assume some of those individuals felt like an outcast during that first hour, just like I did during the second hour. During that second hour, there was nothing for women like me. The option for women was for Mothers. Again, there were multiple options for men, and there were classes for straight spouses and LGBTQ+ individuals under 27 along with others, and of course those classes are needed. But there must be a way to include everyone without forgetting about other groups. The second hour wasn’t a complete bust. I sat in the hallway talking to Peter, and it was really enjoyable. I learned about the Ted Talk style presentation he was preparing for later and it was really interesting. And it was fun getting to know him. I don’t regret that hour at all. But I wish there would have at least been an option for someone like me.
Maybe I should have gone to the class for women in the third hour, "Community Support: LGBTQIA+ Women Visibility or Queer Women Visibility", but there were a lot of interesting options that hour and I went to a class called “Cafeteria Mormonism”. It was fun. That’s the first class I took notes in. We were talking about Mormon Culture and Ron Raynesmade a comment that in Fiddler on the Roof, Tevye has a different word for culture, what is it? And all the men in the room answered “Tradition.” Of course at a conference where you’re surrounded by gay men you can throw out a musical theater reference and everyone in the room will get it. The whole idea of cafeteria Mormonism was interesting. We talked about being post-Mormon and what we took and still do from being Mormon and what we cast aside, and the reasons behind both. Did we get rid of it just because it had to do with Mormonism when maybe it could still be good for us, or did we get rid of it because it’s really not good for us. And with what we keep, was it because it does work for us, or is it because that’s what we’re engrained with. Things I hadn’t really thought about before
I was really excited for the women’s class during the fourth hour. It was entitled “Relationship and Sexual Well-Being for Women in Any Relationship.” The description for the class said “Issues around sexuality can be difficult for some to discuss. Sexual health impacts your health and life as a whole, which warrants a mature, thoughtful discussion about sexuality.” I was expecting a class where we could really talk about lesbian relationships and the sexual and emotional health for queer women. Something that desperately needs to be talked about openly and is rarely done.
There were at least 15 queer women in that classroom, all expecting something similar to me. We were all sorely disappointed. First, that class was taught by a straight woman, who within the first 30 seconds made a comment to the effect of when she first started presenting classes such as this and homosexual relationships were brought up her thought was, why would anyone want to do that? The woman presenting was not in tune with how to present to queer women. All of her anecdotes and stories were about her and her husband. Things like, “don’t you just love it when you get home and your husband has done the dishes and put the kids to bed? Doesn’t that get you so turned on?” She simply wasn't able to present without a straight bias. It isn't impossible for a straight woman to speak on lesbian sex to lesbians, but she'd probably have to be a sex therapist who works with lesbian couples, which this presenter was not. She spoke about male anatomy as if we all were interested in that. Pictures on her slides were all heteronormative, including a picture of a book called "Tickle His Pickle." She clearly didn’t understand that most of us in attendance had no desire to hear about that, and it could be potentially traumatizing to some there.
Taliatha Palmer Holmes posed a question about the emotional needs of two women, and you could tell by the way she phrased it that she wasn’t asking because she didn’t have an answer, she asked so that we in attendance could start a discussion without the input of the presenter, which the presenter quickly shut down. When Shelby Jones again tried to ask a question, something along the lines of how to arouse a partner of the same gender, and this question more posed to the presenter, since the group discussion wasn’t going to work, the presenter’s answer was that it was the same as in straight relationships like she’d already discussed and that an arousal cream should be used. Because this woman wasn’t just discussing women’s sexuality (well, straight women’s sexuality), she was also promoting the products she sells for Pure Romance. It was almost as if it was a terrible infomercial for straight people. The last question that was asked was about statistics on sexual health in lesbian relationships, to which we were told that the research doesn’t exist. After just a quick google search, I can tell you without a doubt that research on lesbian relationships does exist, the presenter was merely ignorant on the topic. At that point, the class was already running over and I just got up and left, because I just could not sit there any longer.
I’m glad that I ran into Jodie Palmer after that hour and heard her thoughts on that class as well. I explained to her that as a queer woman who has relationships with other women, that hour was so disappointing and so disrespectful. I wanted to know her perspective as a queer woman in a mixed orientation marriage. Since the presenter was speaking about people in opposite gender relationships, was anything that woman said helpful or did it resonate with her at all? Because we are in different places, and maybe even though it was awful for me, perhaps it was helpful for someone else. But Jodie told me that she was disappointed and discouraged about that session as well and that it was not helpful for someone like her either. She mentioned that her unique needs and challenges in a mixed orientation marriage were not addressed, and in fact, the class was very triggering for her.
Thank God for the next hour, because that is where the redemption started. Blaire’s class on Transhumanism Mormonism was fascinating! I knew nothing about it going into it and I took feverish notes. So, Transhumanism is the ethical use of technology to radically enhance the human condition. “Mormonism and Transhumanism advocate remarkably similar views of human nature and potential: material beings organized according to natural laws, rapidly advancing knowledge and power, imminent fundamental changes to anatomy and environment, and eventual transcendence of present limitations.” So Mormon Transhumanism is very much along the lines of eternal progression. We talked about how Mormon theology is intrinsically queer friendly, from talking about gender being an essential characteristic and that everything that’s eternal is not stagnant, it’s ever changing, which leaves plenty of room for gender fluidity, to queer cosmology creation which show that the creation account of Elohim, Jehovah and Michael has clear homoerotic undertones. They were things I had never thought about before, and they opened so many doors! I want to get involved in with the Mormon Transhumanist Association now! It’s awesome!
Now, before I get into the presentation for Saturday night, I’m going to pose a question, and maybe someone from Affirmation will see this. The sessions geared toward women were incredibly disappointing. Is the problem that there just aren’t enough queer women to present? Or were not enough queer women even talked to about being part of it? If the problem is that there just aren’t enough queer women to present, I will gladly present something. At this point, I have no idea what it would be about, but it would be better than more than half of what I sat through on Saturday. Or maybe the problem is that just not enough queer women go to the conference. But I would bet that if there were better presentations and resources geared toward queer women, more of us would attend.
I find it really ironic that the keynote presentation on Saturday night was all about celebrating women in Affirmation. And yes, the keynote speakers Saturday night were AMAZING. But it was a little disheartening to me because I felt like the organizers of the conference were merely throwing a bone to the queer women after a day of disappointing classes for us. Trying to make us believe that they see us and are aware of us, when all day it felt like being a queer woman was heavily ignored.
And as a side note before really getting into the keynote speakers, from where I was sitting with friends, we were a few rows behind Amanda and Lindsay and Mica, and Lindsay walked past us a few times, and I’m pretty sure I fangirled every time she did. When she’d walk by, I’d look at my friend Heather Hancock and be all, “There’s Lindsay Hansen Park!” and was very disappointed she didn’t know who she was. I told her I’m going to make her listen to the Year of Polygamy podcast, because it really is amazing. It’s so well researched and presented and I learned things that I never knew before. Anyone reading this who hasn’t listened to the podcast really should! I promise that you won’t regret it!
Amanda was the first speaker and she had me crying with her. I understood her story. It resonated so deeply with me, because I have felt some of those same things. The secret of who you are. The trying to crumple your secret into a ball, but it just continues to get heavier and heavier until you can’t handle it anymore and that the only bad part of that secret was keeping it. Amanda is a badass! I loved when she said, “I am Mormon and I am gay and all are sacred.”
Blaire related a dream in which she was wearing a costume to a party and when she tried to take it off and be her authentic self, those around her questioned her motives and preferred the costume to who she really was. She explained that for a while she went with it. “When honesty conflicted with compassion, I chose compassion because honesty brought them pain.” “Why was my costume a qualifier for their love and friendship?” Again, her story resonated with me because I have worn a costume where I pretended to be someone I wasn’t. But people can’t love me if they don’t truly know me and what is life without love? The joy in my life is in my queerness and in being unapologetically me.
Both Amanda and Blaire were honest and vulnerable and I’m so glad that they shared their stories with us. They were followed by artist Judith Mehr, and her talk really should be watched. In fact, all three of their talks should be watched, which you can do here -
I’ve been debating how to share my experience, so let’s just start at the very beginning, because it’s a very good place to start.
I went in to this conference a little nervous, but cautiously optimistic. I know a couple people who are involved with Affirmation and was told by friends that it would be really good for me. So, I took those things into consideration and went.
Saturday morning started out great! I was beyond thrilled to hear from Jana Reiss and for her to talk about her research and the book she’s been working on, The Next Mormons. She gave a presentation on how quickly Mormons’ attitudes are shifting on homosexuality and same-sex marriage, how many LGBT Mormons and former Mormons are there, and what their views on religion, God, and politics are. I’m grateful that I’m one of the many individuals she interviewed about being an LGBTQ+ individual who grew up in a Mormon world. I’m happy to be part of that kind of groundbreaking and necessary research. I left the morning panel feeling good about the rest of the day. Then I looked at the schedule. For each hour of workshops, there were multiple options for men, but one option for women.
The first option for women was for women and non-binary individuals. The hour itself was fine. We talked about how we identify and our experiences coming out along with where we are now in terms of activity within the church. But the fact that non-binary individuals were lumped in with women disappointed me. Are there non-binary individuals who present as women? Yes. But are there also non-binary individuals who present as men? Also yes. To lump us all together wasn’t fair to any group. Non-binary, male presenting individuals don’t belong in a room full of women. So then where does that leave them to go?
I assume some of those individuals felt like an outcast during that first hour, just like I did during the second hour. During that second hour, there was nothing for women like me. The option for women was for Mothers. Again, there were multiple options for men, and there were classes for straight spouses and LGBTQ+ individuals under 27 along with others, and of course those classes are needed. But there must be a way to include everyone without forgetting about other groups. The second hour wasn’t a complete bust. I sat in the hallway talking to Peter, and it was really enjoyable. I learned about the Ted Talk style presentation he was preparing for later and it was really interesting. And it was fun getting to know him. I don’t regret that hour at all. But I wish there would have at least been an option for someone like me.
Maybe I should have gone to the class for women in the third hour, "Community Support: LGBTQIA+ Women Visibility or Queer Women Visibility", but there were a lot of interesting options that hour and I went to a class called “Cafeteria Mormonism”. It was fun. That’s the first class I took notes in. We were talking about Mormon Culture and Ron Raynesmade a comment that in Fiddler on the Roof, Tevye has a different word for culture, what is it? And all the men in the room answered “Tradition.” Of course at a conference where you’re surrounded by gay men you can throw out a musical theater reference and everyone in the room will get it. The whole idea of cafeteria Mormonism was interesting. We talked about being post-Mormon and what we took and still do from being Mormon and what we cast aside, and the reasons behind both. Did we get rid of it just because it had to do with Mormonism when maybe it could still be good for us, or did we get rid of it because it’s really not good for us. And with what we keep, was it because it does work for us, or is it because that’s what we’re engrained with. Things I hadn’t really thought about before
I was really excited for the women’s class during the fourth hour. It was entitled “Relationship and Sexual Well-Being for Women in Any Relationship.” The description for the class said “Issues around sexuality can be difficult for some to discuss. Sexual health impacts your health and life as a whole, which warrants a mature, thoughtful discussion about sexuality.” I was expecting a class where we could really talk about lesbian relationships and the sexual and emotional health for queer women. Something that desperately needs to be talked about openly and is rarely done.
There were at least 15 queer women in that classroom, all expecting something similar to me. We were all sorely disappointed. First, that class was taught by a straight woman, who within the first 30 seconds made a comment to the effect of when she first started presenting classes such as this and homosexual relationships were brought up her thought was, why would anyone want to do that? The woman presenting was not in tune with how to present to queer women. All of her anecdotes and stories were about her and her husband. Things like, “don’t you just love it when you get home and your husband has done the dishes and put the kids to bed? Doesn’t that get you so turned on?” She simply wasn't able to present without a straight bias. It isn't impossible for a straight woman to speak on lesbian sex to lesbians, but she'd probably have to be a sex therapist who works with lesbian couples, which this presenter was not. She spoke about male anatomy as if we all were interested in that. Pictures on her slides were all heteronormative, including a picture of a book called "Tickle His Pickle." She clearly didn’t understand that most of us in attendance had no desire to hear about that, and it could be potentially traumatizing to some there.
Taliatha Palmer Holmes posed a question about the emotional needs of two women, and you could tell by the way she phrased it that she wasn’t asking because she didn’t have an answer, she asked so that we in attendance could start a discussion without the input of the presenter, which the presenter quickly shut down. When Shelby Jones again tried to ask a question, something along the lines of how to arouse a partner of the same gender, and this question more posed to the presenter, since the group discussion wasn’t going to work, the presenter’s answer was that it was the same as in straight relationships like she’d already discussed and that an arousal cream should be used. Because this woman wasn’t just discussing women’s sexuality (well, straight women’s sexuality), she was also promoting the products she sells for Pure Romance. It was almost as if it was a terrible infomercial for straight people. The last question that was asked was about statistics on sexual health in lesbian relationships, to which we were told that the research doesn’t exist. After just a quick google search, I can tell you without a doubt that research on lesbian relationships does exist, the presenter was merely ignorant on the topic. At that point, the class was already running over and I just got up and left, because I just could not sit there any longer.
I’m glad that I ran into Jodie Palmer after that hour and heard her thoughts on that class as well. I explained to her that as a queer woman who has relationships with other women, that hour was so disappointing and so disrespectful. I wanted to know her perspective as a queer woman in a mixed orientation marriage. Since the presenter was speaking about people in opposite gender relationships, was anything that woman said helpful or did it resonate with her at all? Because we are in different places, and maybe even though it was awful for me, perhaps it was helpful for someone else. But Jodie told me that she was disappointed and discouraged about that session as well and that it was not helpful for someone like her either. She mentioned that her unique needs and challenges in a mixed orientation marriage were not addressed, and in fact, the class was very triggering for her.
Thank God for the next hour, because that is where the redemption started. Blaire’s class on Transhumanism Mormonism was fascinating! I knew nothing about it going into it and I took feverish notes. So, Transhumanism is the ethical use of technology to radically enhance the human condition. “Mormonism and Transhumanism advocate remarkably similar views of human nature and potential: material beings organized according to natural laws, rapidly advancing knowledge and power, imminent fundamental changes to anatomy and environment, and eventual transcendence of present limitations.” So Mormon Transhumanism is very much along the lines of eternal progression. We talked about how Mormon theology is intrinsically queer friendly, from talking about gender being an essential characteristic and that everything that’s eternal is not stagnant, it’s ever changing, which leaves plenty of room for gender fluidity, to queer cosmology creation which show that the creation account of Elohim, Jehovah and Michael has clear homoerotic undertones. They were things I had never thought about before, and they opened so many doors! I want to get involved in with the Mormon Transhumanist Association now! It’s awesome!
Now, before I get into the presentation for Saturday night, I’m going to pose a question, and maybe someone from Affirmation will see this. The sessions geared toward women were incredibly disappointing. Is the problem that there just aren’t enough queer women to present? Or were not enough queer women even talked to about being part of it? If the problem is that there just aren’t enough queer women to present, I will gladly present something. At this point, I have no idea what it would be about, but it would be better than more than half of what I sat through on Saturday. Or maybe the problem is that just not enough queer women go to the conference. But I would bet that if there were better presentations and resources geared toward queer women, more of us would attend.
I find it really ironic that the keynote presentation on Saturday night was all about celebrating women in Affirmation. And yes, the keynote speakers Saturday night were AMAZING. But it was a little disheartening to me because I felt like the organizers of the conference were merely throwing a bone to the queer women after a day of disappointing classes for us. Trying to make us believe that they see us and are aware of us, when all day it felt like being a queer woman was heavily ignored.
And as a side note before really getting into the keynote speakers, from where I was sitting with friends, we were a few rows behind Amanda and Lindsay and Mica, and Lindsay walked past us a few times, and I’m pretty sure I fangirled every time she did. When she’d walk by, I’d look at my friend Heather Hancock and be all, “There’s Lindsay Hansen Park!” and was very disappointed she didn’t know who she was. I told her I’m going to make her listen to the Year of Polygamy podcast, because it really is amazing. It’s so well researched and presented and I learned things that I never knew before. Anyone reading this who hasn’t listened to the podcast really should! I promise that you won’t regret it!
Amanda was the first speaker and she had me crying with her. I understood her story. It resonated so deeply with me, because I have felt some of those same things. The secret of who you are. The trying to crumple your secret into a ball, but it just continues to get heavier and heavier until you can’t handle it anymore and that the only bad part of that secret was keeping it. Amanda is a badass! I loved when she said, “I am Mormon and I am gay and all are sacred.”
Blaire related a dream in which she was wearing a costume to a party and when she tried to take it off and be her authentic self, those around her questioned her motives and preferred the costume to who she really was. She explained that for a while she went with it. “When honesty conflicted with compassion, I chose compassion because honesty brought them pain.” “Why was my costume a qualifier for their love and friendship?” Again, her story resonated with me because I have worn a costume where I pretended to be someone I wasn’t. But people can’t love me if they don’t truly know me and what is life without love? The joy in my life is in my queerness and in being unapologetically me.
Both Amanda and Blaire were honest and vulnerable and I’m so glad that they shared their stories with us. They were followed by artist Judith Mehr, and her talk really should be watched. In fact, all three of their talks should be watched, which you can do here -
The Saturday evening talks start around the 10 hour mark.
From the session Blair taught that afternoon up until that point in the evening, I was starting to feel better about this experience. And then a documentary was presented to us. Going into it, all I knew was that it was about a lesbian couple living in rural Utah. While the documentary was beautifully shot, the subject matter itself was so depressing. These two women are in a relationship together, but you learn that they’re only in an emotional relationship, not a physical one. They live in the same house, but have separate bedrooms. They hold hands, but that’s the only physical thing they do, because they’re still active in the church. And these women just seemed so sad. They don’t get to be fulfilled in their relationship with each other and they also don’t get to be fulfilled in their activity with the church. And that’s depressing. Why can’t a film about a lesbian couple be shown where they’re completely and totally together and happy and fulfilled, because those couples do exist! I know some and met even more this weekend! But between that documentary and the video that took over my newsfeed a few months back, the narrative that I’m shown time and time again is of women who choose the church over women who choose to love each other. Sunday morning during Justin Utley’s talk, he showed a slide show of his wedding to his now husband. So why do I get to see happy & fulfilled married gay men, but not happy and fulfilled married gay women? Why the double standard?
I’m used to living in a world where the experiences and voices of queer women are largely ignored and forgotten. But I really thought that at a conference for LGBTQ+ individuals that wouldn’t be the case. So overall, I left this conference disappointed and discouraged, and I know for a fact that I’m not the only one. Voices and experiences of queer women matter, whether the board of Affirmation believes that or not. No group of people has ever received respect without demanding it, and I demand respect for queer women
After what I experienced this weekend, I don’t really have the desire to ever come back to Affirmation, nor would I tell anyone else to attend. At least not if they’re a queer woman. And that has to change.
-->
Comments