As the Mormon Bloggernacle continues to ponder the fate of\u00a0Kate Kelly and Ordain Women, I am pleased to report that I am more important than other Mormons commenting this subject.<\/p>\n
For you see, I am Mormon royalty.<\/p>\n
“What?” I hear you virtually scoff. “Mormon royalty? Just who does this guy think he is?”<\/p>\n
First of all, it’s not wise to scoff at royalty, even virtually. And secondly, my regal status has been affirmed by no less an authority than Kate Kelly herself.<\/p>\n
It all began over at timesandseasons.org<\/a>, one of the more prominent Mormon group blogs that opines on all LDS subjects without fear of reprisal and even, at one point, had its own Languatron infestation.<\/a> My brother-in-law Nate Oman is a contributor to that particular blog and so happened to have the occasion to write a brilliant piece with a rather provocative title:<\/p>\n “Some Thoughts on the Inevitable Failure of the Ordain Women Movement”<\/a><\/p>\n Even if you are the most ardent of OW supporters, Nate’s piece is worth your time, as most of Nate’s pieces are. He does not take issue with anyone in OW personally or belittle their objectives, but rather details\u00a0why\u00a0lobbying efforts directed at the church tend to be\u00a0counterproductive. (I said essentially the same thing in my last post<\/a>, only not as well and without all the messy research.)<\/p>\n Nate’s post generated 166 comments and a direct response from Kate Kelly over\u00a0at\u00a0feministmormonhousewives.org<\/a>. Titled\u00a0“Some Thoughts on the Inevitable Failure of Male Mormon Privilege,<\/a>” Kelly’s post cleverly mimics the structure of\u00a0Nate’s initial essay\u00a0to provide\u00a0a lengthy ad hominem attack on Nate\u00a0himself for being too frickin’\u00a0male to be allowed to have an opinion on the subject.<\/p>\n The considerable substance of Nate’s piece was not addressed at all. Instead, Kelly\u00a0reveals that\u00a0Nate Oman is\u00a0“oblivious and pejorative,” “insulting,” and “dismissive,” and he is quick to “spout unemotional, scorched-earth critiques while somehow ironically and simultaneously being completely blind to and fueled by [his]\u00a0own male privilege.” He also rides a “high horse of unearned authority,” which, when ridden\u00a0during what Kelly describes as a “a hazed-out binge of [his]\u00a0own male privilege,” is\u00a0likely to\u00a0cause considerable chafing.<\/p>\n The first wave of\u00a0responses are\u00a0largely sycophantic, but down the line, one commenter refuses to pile on:<\/p>\n Rosalynde Welch writes:<\/em><\/p>\n Just wanted to put in a word for Nate, who can certainly defend himself without my help. But I think you\u2019ve pegged him very wrongly, and done it in an unnecessarily nasty way. Nate is *exactly* the kind of Mormon man who is most likely to materially aid your efforts in the future, and I regret that you\u2019ve reacted in this way to his piece. I think it reflects poorly on your efforts, and it certainly has alienated me.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n But Kate Kelly is having none of it.<\/p>\n Kate Kelly writes:<\/em><\/p>\n Rosalynde, I would have to respectfully disagree that a man who writes a post entitled \u201cSome Thoughts on the Inevitable Failure of the Ordain Women Movement\u201d is \u201cmost likely to materially aid [our] efforts in the future.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n But then another Oman supporter chimes in:<\/p>\n RMM (Random Mormon Mommy) writes:<\/em><\/p>\n I agree with Rosalynde. If you see Nate as the enemy, you might not be familiar enough with the influential members of the online Mormon community, and you may want to remedy that ASAP.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Which allows Nate Oman himself to finally jump into the fray:<\/p>\n Nate Oman writes:<\/em><\/p>\n I deny that I am an influential member of ANY community.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n “Oh, dear,” then writes someone named hkobeal. And the game is on.<\/p>\n Nate Oman writes:<\/em><\/p>\n Regardless, I have to admit, that \u201chazed-out binge of their own male privilege\u201d is a great turn of phrase.<\/p>\n For what it\u2019s worth, I am not sure exactly which of the claims that I made in the post you believe to be mistaken or wrong. I\u2019m willing to concede that the title and first and last sentence were meant to be a bit flippant and provocative. I certainly seemed to have succeeded on the provoking front.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Kate Kelly writes:<\/em><\/p>\n Nate, it\u2019s actually not your intentionally titillating and \u201cprovocative\u201d title to which I am responding, it\u2019s the fact that, apparently, you can\u2019t see that the fact you have the luxury to be so flippant as to intentionally provoke for sport is direct evidence of your hurtful use of male privilege.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Nate Oman writes:<\/em><\/p>\n Got it. So it\u2019s not that I said false things, but that I said perhaps true things or perhaps false things but I said them flippantly without apologizing or noting the luxury of speaking flippantly in the first place.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Kate Kelly writes:<\/em><\/p>\n As many have, successfully in my opinion, argued in the comments section of your OP, Nate, history and contemporary happenings (see in re: http:\/\/www.mormonsandgays.org) do not support your \u201cit\u2019s only well after the media storm has passed that the Brethren can ever feel ok inside about making any changes\u201d type argument.<\/p>\n However, you have also completely (willfully?) misinterpreted our goals and dreams.<\/p>\n Is it possible for you to see that the success of our movement is not measured by what the Brethren do or don\u2019t do?<\/p>\n We trust in the Lord that our prayers will be answered, and women will be one day ordained\u2026 But if not\u2026 we have been transformed in the process.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Nate Oman writes:<\/em><\/p>\n Kate: I am not sure that it\u2019s entirely unreasonable to think that success for an organization called \u201cOrdain Women\u201d might consist in\u2026well\u2026the ordination of women.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Ouch.<\/p>\n Others jump in here, including some defending Nate, and one who says that Kelly has pegged Nate wrongly, and that he is precisely the kind of person who could build bridges between OW and priesthood leaders. But Kelly is not at all convinced.<\/p>\n Kate Kelly writes:<\/em><\/p>\n Men should start groups for men about how to not be sexist and how to purge themselves of harmful paradigms and behaviors that being raised in a patriarchy has imbued them with. I live 2 hours and 22 minutes from Nate & would be happy to be an in-person guest speaker at his newly formed \u201cMormon Male Allies\u201d group, should he choose to form one.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Nate responds to this in the only reasonable way possible:<\/p>\n Nate Oman writes:<\/em><\/p>\n I find it slightly bizarre and perhaps just a little creepy that you know within minutes exactly how long it would take you to drive to my home.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n That pretty much ends the exchange between Kelly and Oman. But then comes the Coronation!<\/p>\n Kate Kelly writes:<\/em><\/p>\n I don\u2019t give a rat\u2019s rump if Oman is well-connected, married to Mormon royalty or a generally swell chap.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n And there it is!<\/p>\n Nate Oman, you see, is married to my sister. And my sister, according to Kate Kelly, is Mormon royalty. And if she’s a royal, then I, her older brother, am ahead of her in the Mormon royalty succession.<\/p>\n Here’s my sister’s royal response:<\/p>\n Heather O. writes:<\/em><\/p>\n SWEET! I\u2019m Mormon royalty!?!! YES! I expect some minions to order about and some drinks with little umbrellas in them IMMEDIATELY, as befitting my Mormon Royalty Status!<\/p>\n (On a more serious note, Kate Kelly\u2013did you seriously just call me that? I don\u2019t\u2026I can\u2019t\u2026I just\u2026wow.)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Wow indeed.<\/p>\n Kneel before Stallion, Mormon peasants!<\/strong><\/p>\n That is all. Dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Asthe Mormon Bloggernacle continues to ponder the fate of\u00a0Kate Kelly and Ordain Women, I am pleased to report that I am more important than other Mormons commenting this subject.For you see, I am Mormon royalty.\"What?\" I hear you virtually scoff. \"Mormon royalty? Just who does this guy think he is?\"First of all, it's not ... Read more<\/a>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3362","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/stallioncornell.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3362","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/stallioncornell.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/stallioncornell.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stallioncornell.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stallioncornell.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3362"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/stallioncornell.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3362\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3367,"href":"https:\/\/stallioncornell.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3362\/revisions\/3367"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/stallioncornell.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3362"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stallioncornell.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3362"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stallioncornell.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3362"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}