NOM

there is no way in heck that any public official from the LDS church wrote: Yes, the kitchen is absolutely right next to the Relief Society room. You can call it sexism if you want, but we call it traditional gender roles and it works if you want a healthy, growing population of happy saints. Do you know what we love to see inside the homes of members even more than a picture of the temple on the wall? We love to see that family portrait showing Grandma and Grandpa at the center with their married adult children and positively surrounded by grandchildren. Organic growth of healthy LDS families is one of the best ways to grow this church.

Yes, we know that divorce, death, and other complications means this does not always happen. But we have to give credit to the families that do make it work and encourage our young people to work towards that. We simply happen to believe that this is model that builds families, and putting the kitchen right next to the Relief Society room is one not-so-subtle nod towards that.

Deepthinker wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2017 7:19 am Something just hit me a few months ago about the building layout for a typical LDS church. Something I had never thought about before and I wanted to see if it is your experience. Of all the LDS meetinghouses I've attended, ever single one has had the kitchen located right next to the Relief Society room. Has this been your experience?

If so, doesn't it seem to be another sign of sexism within the church? I picture a discussion on the layout and someone says "hey, let's put the women by the kitchen where they belong". It seems like such a small thing to notice but it still makes me upset.

Emower wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2017 8:12 am The relief society room is generally one of the biggest rooms outside of the chapel and gymn. Some buildings have large primary rooms, but those rooms typically have all kinds of stuff on the walls, cabinets, etc. It makes sense to have the serving area attached to the larger room, it makes events where food is served a lot easier. I dont think this is sexism. There are plenty of other areas for that.

Korihor wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2017 11:26 am

Emower wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2017 8:12 am The relief society room is generally one of the biggest rooms outside of the chapel and gymn. Some buildings have large primary rooms, but those rooms typically have all kinds of stuff on the walls, cabinets, etc. It makes sense to have the serving area attached to the larger room, it makes events where food is served a lot easier. I dont think this is sexism. There are plenty of other areas for that.

I'm on the same page as Emower. It just seems to be a decent design.

Give It Time wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2017 1:17 pm

Korihor wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2017 11:26 am

Emower wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2017 8:12 am The relief society room is generally one of the biggest rooms outside of the chapel and gymn. Some buildings have large primary rooms, but those rooms typically have all kinds of stuff on the walls, cabinets, etc. It makes sense to have the serving area attached to the larger room, it makes events where food is served a lot easier. I dont think this is sexism. There are plenty of other areas for that.

I'm on the same page as Emower. It just seems to be a decent design.

In the ward of my youth, the kitchen was next to the EQ room. The RS room was the next room down from the EQ room. In the buildings with the current design model, I've noticed it is consistently next to the RS room. Many weeknight RS activities are cooking-based and there are usually doors or a pass-through to the RS to facilitate demonstrations and serving. In that regard, the layout is sexist, but RS doesn't meet very often during the week, anymore. Scouts or choir are more likely to use that room. I think the room is multi-functional and they just call it the RS room.

Now, I'm beginning to think it's interesting that there used to be EQ rooms, but they've been placed on the chopping block and now the EQ just meets in the "cultural hall" which is really a basketball court with a stage which should really be called the cafegymatorium.

Red Ryder wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2017 10:03 am Don't forget all buildings have a priesthood antenna too!

Korihor wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2017 3:50 pm

Give It Time wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2017 1:17 pm

Korihor wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2017 11:26 am

I'm on the same page as Emower. It just seems to be a decent design.

In the ward of my youth, the kitchen was next to the EQ room. The RS room was the next room down from the EQ room. In the buildings with the current design model, I've noticed it is consistently next to the RS room. Many weeknight RS activities are cooking-based and there are usually doors or a pass-through to the RS to facilitate demonstrations and serving. In that regard, the layout is sexist, but RS doesn't meet very often during the week, anymore. Scouts or choir are more likely to use that room. I think the room is multi-functional and they just call it the RS room.

Now, I'm beginning to think it's interesting that there used to be EQ rooms, but they've been placed on the chopping block and now the EQ just meets in the "cultural hall" which is really a basketball court with a stage which should really be called the cafegymatorium.

Well, if you want to go down the "they don't give a shiz about EQ" path, then we've got something in common.

Whether the EQ room or RS room is adjacent to the kitchen seems to be a non-issue. But the guys get super screwed in the whole "having a place to meet" debate. Even if the kitchen is adjacent, at least you get a designated place. We might be on the stage, in the gym, an unused classroom, who knows? If priesthood is so important, I can't figure out why they ignore the EQ.

I don't really care about the whole McChapel thing. THere is efficiency on using the same plans over and over and it's just being intelligent with your money. Putting the kitchen next to this room or that room, really seems to come down to semantics and a decision had to be made. THey try to make the buildings flexible.

However, if you want to argue the horrendous idea of carpeted walls, I will stand by you till the death.

Now, if the building layout was Kitchen - RS - HC, with direct access between the Kitchen and RS, then you would be on to something.

didyoumythme wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2017 5:33 pm This is definitely sexist toward the men in the church. I agree! Women always get the big rooms with the soft chairs, while the men are left sitting on cold, hard fold up chairs that we put away ourselves. Women have eaiser access to the snacks and goodies in the kitchen too. So unfair!

Jeffret wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2017 7:28 pm The whole system is based upon creating different things for men and women and creating a hierarchy. Women have to have some advantages or it collapses. But, the only ones who real power are men.

Jeffret wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2017 7:28 pm

didyoumythme wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2017 5:33 pm This is definitely sexist toward the men in the church. I agree! Women always get the big rooms with the soft chairs, while the men are left sitting on cold, hard fold up chairs that we put away ourselves. Women have eaiser access to the snacks and goodies in the kitchen too. So unfair!

It's true. For there to be sexism against women, which there certainly is, there also has to pretty much be sexism against men. In the Church, these are presented as the eternal gender roles. This is how they maintain the façade of men and women being equal but different. To place women up on the pedestal they declare for them, men have to be prevented from those things that create the pedestal. Men have to be prevented from doing women things and women have to be prevented from doing men things. Separate but equal never really works, so it ends up becoming inequitable. For the most part, boys are socialized to do men things and girls are socialized to do women things. As long as everyone goes along with and accepts the limitations of their roles there is a degree of equilibrium perhaps, or at least stability, though there certainly isn't true equity. If an individual isn't satisfied with their declared role then issues arise. If boy wants to do women things. Or a girl wants to do man things. Or if the subservient class (women / girls) eventually realize that separate is never going to be equal.

It's true that women get the RS room, which is generally nicer than other subservient rooms. But, the men get the bishop's offices, the clerk's offices, the stake offices, (all of which are generally quite a bit nicer than the RS room), and the elevated positions on the stand to control meetings and activities. It's true that the Elder's Quorum gets ignored to scrape about and find their location as best they can. That's the nature of patriarchy. It's not that all men have it better than all women in all things, though generally men have a number of privileges. But, the wife of the chief patriarch has no direct authority, but usually receives substantial recognition reflected off her husband. The whole system is based upon creating different things for men and women and creating a hierarchy. Women have to have some advantages or it collapses. But, the only ones who real power are men.

Korihor wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2017 3:50 pm

Give It Time wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2017 1:17 pm

Korihor wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2017 11:26 am

I'm on the same page as Emower. It just seems to be a decent design.

In the ward of my youth, the kitchen was next to the EQ room. The RS room was the next room down from the EQ room. In the buildings with the current design model, I've noticed it is consistently next to the RS room. Many weeknight RS activities are cooking-based and there are usually doors or a pass-through to the RS to facilitate demonstrations and serving. In that regard, the layout is sexist, but RS doesn't meet very often during the week, anymore. Scouts or choir are more likely to use that room. I think the room is multi-functional and they just call it the RS room.

Now, I'm beginning to think it's interesting that there used to be EQ rooms, but they've been placed on the chopping block and now the EQ just meets in the "cultural hall" which is really a basketball court with a stage which should really be called the cafegymatorium.

Well, if you want to go down the "they don't give a shiz about EQ" path, then we've got something in common.

Whether the EQ room or RS room is adjacent to the kitchen seems to be a non-issue. But the guys get super screwed in the whole "having a place to meet" debate. Even if the kitchen is adjacent, at least you get a designated place. We might be on the stage, in the gym, an unused classroom, who knows? If priesthood is so important, I can't figure out why they ignore the EQ.

I don't really care about the whole McChapel thing. THere is efficiency on using the same plans over and over and it's just being intelligent with your money. Putting the kitchen next to this room or that room, really seems to come down to semantics and a decision had to be made. THey try to make the buildings flexible.

However, if you want to argue the horrendous idea of carpeted walls, I will stand by you till the death.

Now, if the building layout was Kitchen - RS - HC, with direct access between the Kitchen and RS, then you would be on to something.