Let's talk about patriarchy in the Church, man-to-man

Why this matters to me as a Latter-day Saint man, and why I think it should matter to every man in the Church.

This one is for my brothers in the Church.

The Church was built for us. It was built for men. If you’re a man in the Church, like me, you’re playing the game on easy mode.

This is not always immediately obvious. I’ve always worked hard in the callings I’ve had. Feeling close to God has not always been easy. Being a full-time missionary at age 19 remains probably the most difficult thing I’ve ever done. I don’t feel like being a man has ever made things easy. But I am coming to learn that being a man in the Church is easier than otherwise. Hear me out.

I read an article a while back that changed the way I think about this. It's called Straight White Male: The Lowest Difficulty Setting There Is, and it's worth your time to read it—and I'll also quote generously from it here. Maybe it’s a bit on-the-nose to rely on a video game metaphor to get my gender to pay attention; then again, maybe not. Let’s start here:

Imagine life… is a massive role playing game, like World of Warcraft except appallingly mundane, where most quests involve the acquisition of money, cell phones and donuts, although not always at the same time. Let’s call it The Real World. You have installed The Real World on your computer and are about to start playing, but first you go to the settings tab to bind your keys, fiddle with your defaults, and choose the difficulty setting for the game. Got it?

Okay: In the role playing game known as The Real World, “Straight White Male” is the lowest difficulty setting there is.

This means that the default behaviors for almost all the non-player characters in the game are easier on you than they would be otherwise. The default barriers for completions of quests are lower. Your leveling-up thresholds come more quickly. You automatically gain entry to some parts of the map that others have to work for. The game is easier to play, automatically, and when you need help, by default it’s easier to get.

We don’t have to work very hard to apply this to men in the Church. Men have access to callings that women don’t. There’s an in-born culture of deference to men’s opinions, and men (such as a bishop, stake president, etc.) always have the last word in decision-making. Men, of course, can hold the priesthood in ways that women can’t.

As men, the game is easier for us to move through. It’s still a game, and we still have to play, but there are assuredly harder difficulty levels it could be played on. The article goes on to explain:

As the game progresses, your goal is to gain points, apportion them wisely, and level up. If you start with fewer points and fewer of them in critical stat categories, or choose poorly regarding the skills you decide to level up on, then the game will still be difficult for you. But because you’re playing on the “Straight White Male” setting, gaining points and leveling up will still by default be easier, all other things being equal, than for another player using a higher difficulty setting.

Likewise, it’s certainly possible someone playing at a higher difficulty setting is progressing more quickly than you are, because… they play the game better than you do. It doesn’t change the fact you are still playing on the lowest difficulty setting.

If you’ve ever wondered why—why the Church is hard for some women, or for people of color or LGBTQ+ folks or anybody who fits in at the margins—that’s the answer. They’re playing on a higher difficulty. Things like fitting in, understanding their role, and feeling valued just do not come as easily, quickly, or naturally as they do to us men.

I’d like to talk through a few things I’ve learned, and that I’m trying to understand better. My hope is that this will get you started in understanding patriarchy and women’s concerns in the Church in ways you wouldn’t have before. This is the journey I’m on, and I’d love to have you join me on it.

A quick caveat

I am not an expert on this topic. I don't think I can be, frankly. I’ve gotten the help of several women to help me put this together. But what I can do is use my voice to reach out to other men and share what I've learned. If you've ever been dismissive of what you're hearing from feminists or others where you question their motives, take a moment to hear it from me.

But one thing I can’t do is adequately represent the pain and hurt that women have dealt with for decades, as a result of patriarchy in the Church. Not every woman feels or is comfortable expressing this pain, but please know that it’s there. I’ve shared some resources at the end of this article where you can hear from women as they share their own experiences, and talk about their own pain. Hear it from them, and then go seek out more women’s voices to learn more.

What is patriarchy? What is patriarchy in the Church?

You might have a knee-jerk reaction to the term “patriarchy.” That’s okay. Stick with me.

Patriarchy, generally, is any setup in which men hold the majority of the power and dominate in leadership, authority, and decision-making.¹ The problem with patriarchy is that it generally results in the marginalization of women; over time it shapes societal norms, structures, and expectations across many aspects of life. The flip side is matriarchy, which is a society or organization in which women hold all the leadership positions. Those societies exist, too.

Patriarchy hurts men, too. It’s the system that compels men to conform to a narrow definition of masculinity, and does not allow them to be afraid, sad, or vulnerable.² It created the expectation that fathers can’t take good care of their children, made getting help a sign of weakness, and contributed to addiction rates being almost twice as high, suicide rates being three to four times higher, and rates of violent crime being four times higher for men than for women.

In the Church, patriarchy is the reality that men hold the majority of the “power” in the Church, if you’re comfortable calling it that. That’s patriarchy. You can say that without making any sort of judgment; it’s just calling it what it is. It’s a factual thing. It’s giving a name to the way the Church runs.

Sometimes the differences between how men and women can operate in the Church are obvious, like women not being ordained to the priesthood. You may think discussion of patriarchy is all about that—ordaining women—but it’s not. There’s a lot more to it than that. Many of these gender differences are encoded in Church policy (and written in the General Handbook). Other ways that the disparity between men and women shows up are less obvious.

Allow me to share an example. I just saw something shared on Instagram that was an email from a stake presidency, about the leadership session of an upcoming stake conference. Here’s part of what it said:

Saturday Leadership -- 4:00pm

Invited to attend -- Stake Presidency, Stake High Council, Stake Young Men's President and counselors, Stake Sunday School Presidency, Bishops and counselors, Elders Quorum Presidents and counselors, Ward Young Men advisors and Ward Sunday School Presidents and counselors

Did you notice who is invited, and who isn’t? Essentially all the male leaders in the stake are invited, and none of the women leaders. What must it be like to be, say, the ward Relief Society president (or even the Stake Relief Society President!), be told that your voice and leadership is crucial and at least as important as the elders quorum president, and then not be invited to a “leadership” session of stake conference?

This is a big swing and a miss, and it makes me wonder how I’ve unintentionally excluded women in Church things in the past. This is just one of those things that women face in the Church, that us men tend to be completely unaware of.

Is patriarchy okay to talk about?

Some people might feel uncomfortable talking about patriarchy in the Church. You might see it as being critical of the Church or its leaders. But we've been taught repeatedly that the Church, even with Jesus Christ at the head, is an imperfect organization run by imperfect people. As Jeffrey R. Holland famously taught in 2013:

Except in the case of His only perfect Begotten Son, imperfect people are all God has ever had to work with. That must be terribly frustrating to Him, but He deals with it. So should we. And when you see imperfection, remember that the limitation is not in the divinity of the work.

When we acknowledge patriarchy in the Church, I don't see it as an attack on the Church. Instead, when we acknowledge patriarchy, we make space for everyone to live more fully in the Church (including women who live and struggle with the effects of patriarchy every day). It will take both men and women to make things better. It’s everyone’s job to make space for each other, to make a church that feels made-for-you for everyone, as it does for men now. It comes down to loving each other, and making space for each other. And that’s what Jesus taught us to do.

But what is patriarchy, though?

Here’s what patriarchy looks like in the Church. It’s not one thing, it’s lots of things, and again, some of them are structural while others are cultural. Many of these things are illustrated effectively in this essay. Here are a few:

• Women do not hold any of the highest positions of Church authority either at the general level (prophet, Apostle), or local level (bishop, stake president)

• Women cannot administer most ordinances (baptism, laying on of hands, etc.)

• Women do not have the final say in who gets called to callings, even in organizations led by women leaders (Relief Society, Young Women, and Primary)

• Young Women’s programs have often been funded less than Young Men’s programs

• Programs that used to be led by women—such as the Church welfare programs being run by the Relief Society—have been changed to be under the authority of men

• Constantly talking about our Heavenly Father, but teaching that we can’t talk about our Heavenly Mother (which isn’t true)

• Our Bible, the King James Version, has a lot of verses that are male-centric, when that isn’t crucial to the meaning. Consider Matthew 10:39 in our KJV Bible vs. the New Revised Standard Version, and how the first says “he,” and the latter broadens it to “they”

• Usually saying “brothers” first when saying “brothers and sisters”

• Scripture stories almost always being about men, and rarely mentioning women

• Every Latter-day prophet and apostle has been a man

• General Conference has mostly men speaking

• The art on our building walls depict great ancient male prophets, prominent men in Church history, and male Deity

• Missions are required for men, and “optional” for women

• Young men are celebrated in “coming of age” milestones when they receive the priesthood, advance through the Aaronic Priesthood offices, and then leave on missions; we do not communally celebrate the work of women in the gospel

• Young Men often taught to prepare for missions and exercise the priesthood; Young Women often taught to prepare to be wives and mothers

As Cynthia Winward, of the wonderful At Last She Said It podcast, put so concisely: “There’s not one single decision a woman can make in this church that cannot be overruled by a man.”

Where did patriarchy in the modern Church come from?

There’s a load of history here, and I’m not a historian. There are many books, written by scholars on these topics, that spell out how patriarchy became embedded in our social structures, and eventually embraced by Christian churches (including ours). In the resources listed at the end of this article, there are a couple of books that dive into this history.

But to make it as simple as possible—where did patriarchy in the Church come from? Tradition, mostly.

Let’s set the scene. Patriarchy has been around for centuries. Men have traditionally been the warriors, the captains and chiefs, and the breadwinners. Women have traditionally not been allowed or enabled to be those things, and instead have often been the housekeepers, the cooks, and the nurturers. The scriptures are a surprisingly good example of this, as they tell primarily the stories of men. Women’s work lives in the background of those stories, behind the heroes Peter and Paul and Nephi and Alma. The history of the United States, to be clear, is similar—in the upcoming election, we have the opportunity to have the first female President of the United States in the country’s nearly 250 year history. Change is slow, and throughout much of history women have not had opportunities to overcome the effects of patriarchy.

The Church was restored in a time and a place that favored patriarchal structures. This isn’t really up for debate, this is another factual thing; the early 1800s were a time when men held most positions of authority. In 1830, when the Church was founded, women couldn’t vote, didn’t have property rights, couldn’t attend college, and couldn’t enter certain professions. Women finally got the right to vote in the United States in 1920, ninety years after the Church’s beginning (and even then, it was only white women who could vote). The Church’s patriarchal structure at the time of its founding would have surprised absolutely nobody; that was just how things were done at the time.

That structure has largely endured to today. While other organizations and social institutions have moved forward—more women than men attend and graduate college now; there are still few top-earning female CEOs but the number is growing—the Church’s leadership hierarchy continues to be male-centric.

And separate from the organizational structure, our Church culture continues to perpetuate traditional ideas. Church leaders in the 1980s, and notably President Ezra Taft Benson, spoke strongly of a woman’s role being in the home, supporting her husband. More recent teachings go the other way; Elder Ulisses Soares taught that husbands and wives “do not position themselves as president or vice president of their family.” President Camille N. Johnson, the current Relief Society General President, reinforced this at the 2024 BYU Women’s Conference, where she talked about her decision to work outside the home, not just in any job but as a lawyer.³

But nonetheless, the Church’s gender differences have largely endured from a policy (and possibly a doctrinal) perspective since the early 1800s.

But Jesus Christ runs this church, right?

Now, wait. Some things are true, such as that men can be ordained to the priesthood and women can't, or that men hold the key decision-making positions in the Church and women don't. But how do we know if God set those things up that way, because they are His will, or if they are artifacts leftover from the era in which the Church was founded?

This is a totally fair question. We don't, and can't, know the mind of God. It's possible, I suppose, that the Lord set up His church to center men and make women feel marginalized and less-than. But the older I get, and the more acquainted I become with the character of God, and divine perfections and attributes, the less likely this seems.

Interestingly, in the early Church in this dispensation women would give blessings by the laying on of hands; the prophet Joseph Smith endorsed this practice directly. Further, we read about prophetesses in the Old Testament, and possible female apostles in the New Testament. Between all of these things, it seems exceedingly unlikely to me that our Heavenly Parents—both Father and Mother—want the kind of gender gap that we have in the Church today.

I don’t know which things can change, and which can’t. Could women be ordained to the priesthood someday? I don’t know. If that doesn’t feel likely, remember that it also may not have felt likely to Latter-day Saints prior to 1978 that Black men would ever hold the priesthood and Black Saints would ever receive temple blessings. It seems certain that some things will change, even if we don’t know what; President Nelson has told us this is “just… the beginning” of the restoration.

Are we making progress?

No. Yes? Maybe. I’m not sure.

Let me tell you about an experience I had. You may remember a talk that President Dallin H. Oaks gave in 2014, about how women use the priesthood in their callings. He said:

We are not accustomed to speaking of women having the authority of the priesthood in their Church callings, but what other authority can it be? When a woman—young or old—is set apart to preach the gospel as a full-time missionary, she is given priesthood authority to perform a priesthood function. The same is true when a woman is set apart to function as an officer or teacher in a Church organization under the direction of one who holds the keys of the priesthood. Whoever functions in an office or calling received from one who holds priesthood keys exercises priesthood authority in performing her or his assigned duties.

I thought this was great. It opened up a whole new line of discussion around women and the priesthood. We went from not talking about women and the priesthood in the same sentence, to talking about how women use the priesthood all the time. What a blessing. Progress!

But that was how I saw it. I assumed that all women would be excited by it like I was. But as a man, I’m limited to my own perspective. I’ve since been filled in on why this wasn’t the earth-shattering change I thought it was.

First, very little changed in the Church because of this narrative—and when it wasn’t backed up by actions, it came across as “just words.” There are lots of things that could have changed! For example, there are still lots of callings that can only be held by someone who holds the priesthood—like ward temple and family history leader, ward mission leader, etc.—even though we know that women can use the priesthood in their callings. Many wards and branches still require a priesthood holder to be in the church building when women or young women are having an activity, even though that is not a current Church policy. Young Women’s camps are still required to have priesthood holders in attendance “at all times.”

Without any changes to how things work in the Church, was this just a feel-good talk? Did it mean anything?

And second, I didn’t have any sense of how this talk would come across to women who had been told their whole lives that they didn’t have the priesthood—and are suddenly finding out that they had access to it all along! How many years had they spent being unaware of this critically important, life-changing bit of doctrine? I didn’t expect this new line of thinking to cause pain. But it did. And I had to hear it from women, because I just couldn’t see it from my man-perch.

So, yeah. It’s tough to say how much “progress” is being made.

What can we do?

Being aware of patriarchy in the Church, and how it affects women, is a huge step. This was the biggest hurdle for me (and still is, as I continue to learn)—I simply didn’t know that there was an issue. So please—walk away from reading this with a new awareness, or a new level of awareness.

Here are a few things I’m trying to do better, that I think we can all do:

1. Listen. I’ve said this already, and I’ll say it again. I’ve learned a ton from listening to women on the topic of patriarchy, that I would have had no idea about otherwise.

2. Don’t tell women how to feel. Don’t try to mansplain how things work or how someone should feel about patriarchy in the Church. If you’re a bishop, stake president, etc., you’ve probably screwed this up at least once, but you can get it right the next time.

3. Keep learning. Learn from women’s voices. Here are some places you can go; some of them are my own recommendations, and others were recommended for inclusion by women in my life. I think you’ll find these voices to be refreshing, and overall very practical in their approach:

   1. The At Last She Said It podcast. Susan and Cynthia are “Women of faith discussing complicated things.” This podcast is a great place to start for tough topics like this, and especially to hear a woman’s perspective. I’ve listened to many of their episodes, and they’ve all been great.

   2. The book Women at Church: Magnifying LDS Women's Local Impact, by Neylan McBaine. This influential book looks at how we as lay members and local leaders can adjust and improve gendered practices in the Church, within the existing doctrinal and policy framework that has been set for us. This book should be required reading for every bishop and stake president.

   3. The book The Making of Biblical Womanhood: How the Subjugation of Women Became Gospel Truth, by Beth Allison Barr. The author is a historian at Baylor University and a Baptist pastor’s wife. She makes the case that men’s and women’s roles are not divinely appointed, but instead inherited from our culture.

   4. The Instagram account Women on the Stand, which is a great source for women’s stories throughout the Church, and understanding how they are affected by gender differences.

   5. The Instagram account LDS Changemakers, which focuses on increasing gender equality in the Church in ways we can all contribute to. This account is very honest about women’s issues.

   6. The Instagram account Breaking Down Patriarchy. This account is not LDS-specific, and looks more at a societal level. It also backs things up with a lot of research.

Wrapping it up

For some reason we always fall back on proximity when we talk about issues with marginalized groups; something like, “This matters to me because I have daughters, and I want things to be better for them.” Well, I don’t have any daughters. I have four sons, and this matters to me because we can make things better not only for your daughters, but for my sons too, and for everyone in the Church.

It’s the Lord’s church, and it’s also my church. I love this church. I want this to come through really clear—I believe this is the church of Jesus Christ. And even though he stands at the head of it, there are thing we can do better as its members to make it what He wants it to be.

We are all children of God, and I believe our Heavenly Parents love all of us. I believe that as men in the Church, we have a responsibility to reflect and exemplify that love. We’re playing the game on the easiest setting. And we might be able to make it a little easier for others, too.

1. The Merriam-Webster dictionary’s definition includes the phrase “control by men of a disproportionately large share of power,” which is a little bit wordy but otherwise pretty clear. The Cambridge dictionary packs a little more punch, defining it as “a society controlled by men in which they use their power to their own advantage.”

2. Some good reads on how patriarchy hurts men here, here, here, and here. I’m not exactly plowing new ground by mentioning it.

3. This is one of those things that I thought was pretty cool when I first heard it. I learned later about the issues raised by this talk, like 1) how President Johnson decided to have a career when President Benson was saying that women shouldn’t, 2) not addressing how they raised a family with both parents working, and 3) the abrupt about-face of telling women a career is “okay” when they’d been told the opposite for so long.