NICE GIRLS FINISH FIRST

So one day I was thinking about today’s woman, as I often do, considering that I write funny books about the everyday (and not so everyday!) things we all go through, and I was wondering about that perpetual dilemma – the Myth of the Nice Girl.

Somehow, through a peculiar evolution of the professional environment, women today are finally recognized (mostly) as equally competent, ambitious, and dedicated as men in the workforce. (We’ll leave the “we have to work smarter and harder” argument aside for now.) But yet, we have an added burden: we have to be NICE.

Now, this isn’t really tough for most women, most of the time. We were raised to be nice. That’s what little girls do, right? “Play nice!” “Be nice!” Except, well, there are times when you can’t be all that nice . . . Boyfriend cheating? Kick him to the curb! Um, in a nice way? Opposing counsel trying underhanded tactics? Notify the judge and get him sanctioned! Er, nicely?

The idea of a character who is very ambitious and a great person, but a little bit of a tough chick on the surface, really intrigued me. And I had the perfect character in Kirby Green, newly-hired exec at the Whips and Lace Co. She’d pretty much stolen every scene she was in in AMERICAN IDLE (Double RITA finalist, how cool is that??). Then I wanted to compare and contrast Kirby with a character who was so nice that she was in danger of becoming a doormat. Brianna sprang to life. My good friend who is an opera singer (no, really!) provided some great background for her. Then I set the two of them loose to play on the pages – each helping the other learn something about life, and about herself. That’s how NICE GIRLS FINISH FIRST was born.

Can we be successful as women today and still retain some of that niceness that was so valued in earlier years? I think so. But nice doesn’t mean dumb, and today’s nice girls DO finish first. They might just have to kick a little ass along the way.

Nicely.

Thanks for helping me celebrate the release of my second novel!! – Alesia Holliday

I’m perplexed. Jeff Lindsay, of the Mormanity blog, apparently thinks that everyone should live their lives according to the unofficial teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. In other words, if it ain’t pretty, HIDE IT or lie about it.

The reason he speaks of this, is because he is attacking, without naming, Simon Southerton, who has received a media blitz lately because he has been called into a Church “Court of Love,” to address his membership in the Church. Apparently, this membership is in danger because when Simon was separated from his wife, he had a relationship with another woman. And he now has the GALL to be honest about it. Simon, whatever are you thinking? Of course, the truth is Simon’s membership status is in jeopardy because he wrote a book that is not pro-Book of Mormon. But given the recent fiascos like the Grant Palmer affair, leaders want to make it look like they are “loving” Simon out of the Church ‘cuz he was bumping nasties with someone other than his wife.

Jeff’s headline on his blog of Friday, July 22, read:
Tip for Anti-Mormons on Maintaining Credibility:
Do No Evil, or at Least Admit to No Evil

Um, that’s kind of an oxyMormon, er, oxymoron, isn’t it? Maintain your credibility by LYING???

Of course, we all know Jeff is guilty of a little “spinning here.” You can go read his entire blog on this matter, but I found this interesting.

Given that, I just don’t understand why one up-and-coming anti-Mormon would tell the world that he’s being excommunicated for adultery, and even admit that adultery took place. Why, why, why? Seriously, this kind of thing rattles other devout anti-Mormons and makes it difficult to keep the debate focused on the real issues. And I just don’t understand why someone who rejects the Church would wait for Church disciplinary action to be taken, allowing an issue like adultery to even enter into the debate. If you reject the Church and want to depart, you only have to write a letter asking for your name to be removed. Even if local leaders know there were moral transgressions involved, they are required (as I understand the current rules) to accept your request and remove your name from the records, if that’s what you really want. So, if for some reason you are planning on a career as an anti-Mormon apostate, please don’t do stupid stuff, or at least don’t admit to doing stupid stuff, and just get your name off the records before any stupid stuff you’ve been doing might become an issue.

The comments about lying aside, you are sadly MISTAKEN, Jeff, about it being easy to have your name taken off. Why I myself had my name removed only to show up again, TWICE, on the local records. Thus, you have me, a Mormon, chastizing you, a fellow Mormon, for your stance on Simon’s dilemma. I tried to be an ex-Mormon. I really did. For some reason, they are reluctant to let me go. So much so, that they have CLONED me and given me an imaginary son.

So, as a fellow Mormon, I have to ask, WHY are you encouraging Simon to lie? Surely this is against all the tenets of ANY religion professing to follow the gospel of Jesus Christ?

This is perplexing stuff, Jeff.

As for the rest of you readers, you can see my response to Jeff’s entire post, here: I am reprinting it, as there is a good possibility it will be deleted, in the Mormon Church spirit of “hide and cover up what you can’t explain.”

My response:

Jeff, Jeff, Jeff….

The REASON ex-Mormons cannot leave the Mormon Church alone is because the Mormon Church will not leave US alone.

It’s really very simple. Consider this:

You decide, based on teachings, tenets, and beliefs, that you can no longer reconcile membership in a religion, so you leave.

Then the calls start. The doorbell rings. The bishop comes over. The visiting teachers love bomb you. Neighbors give you strange looks in the grocery store. Family members confront you daily.

“Well, why ARE you leaving?” they ask.

You are honest, and tell them. They come back with answers about why you should not leave, and why your answers are faulty.

So you find MORE answers. After all, you did not reach this point just because someone said something NASTY to you at Church the week before. Or because the bishop’s nose hair was offensive to you. No, you left because you didn’t like the racist teachings of Brigham Young, or the fact that the Church is trying to hide the fact he “taught” those racist teachings, or even better, that the official biography of Brigham Young only mentions one wife. What happened to honesty?

Oh yeah, I remember. “Some things that are true are not very useful.” Boyd K. Packer.

Back to the “truth.” When you tell your concerned Mormon friends and family about the lack of truth in the Church, they try to rebut that, and can’t, so it generally ends up with a “You should pray about it.”

Because faced with the truth, that is the only answer they can have, and the only way THEY can reconcile what they believe. If you feel a burning of the bosom, it must be true.

Ex-Mormons don’t embrace that burning bosom anymore. And Ex-Mormons cannot leave the LDS Church alone because it will not leave THEM alone.

End of story.

As for Simon, why shouldn’t he be honest about his life? He doesn’t live under the Mormon mantra of some truths not being useful, because he has come to the conclusion that Mormonism is NOT true.

Instead of giving him credit for being honest, you are bringing out the adultery claims to drag him down, even stating that he should not “admit to evil.” As if Simon himself is required to live by LDS tenets when he has rejected those tenets.

Should he be excommunicated? Yes. He has said that himself. He is no longer living his life according to the tenets of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and therefore, should no longer be a member.

What Simon takes issue with, and where the Church has made yet another fatal mistake, is that this is all coming about AFTER his book came out and garnered great publicity. And instead of being honest, and admitting that the BOOK is the reason he is being exed, the bishop prosecuting him is trying to make it about adultery. If the “adultery” were the issue, it would have been addressed at the time the ADULTERY took place, and not now that his book is lighting up the media fires.

It’s just an excuse, and you know it as well as I do. Make Simon look bad, or “evil” as you say, and it will discredit his book. After all, he has an “agenda.” He’s evil.

I realize that YOU are trying to focus on Simon’s human fallibility, and not the book, so you are talking about the same issue as the Church is. I’m sure they appreciate your spin, but they don’t really need it. They are spin masters extraordinaire. Gordon B. Hinckley spins with the best. In fact, I cannot even set eyes on him without needing a good dose of dramamine, he makes me so dizzy.

Your heading on this post is interesting, really, in that you are actually ENCOURAGING “Anti-Mormons” to lie. That would certainly suit your purpose, but why would they? They are not governed by that “protect the Church at all costs” mentality anymore.

Most ex-Mormons have learned to be brutally honest. If you are not, you will be hounded to death for time and all eternity.

On another note, why is it you believe that your church can send out thousands of missionaries to tell people that Mormonism is the only true church, but no one is allowed to disagree?

If you are willing to STEP UP and say something is true, surely you should have to defend it?

Or would that make too much sense?

That’s right, today is Utah’s biggest holiday, Pioneer Day. The day Brigham Young supposedly sat up in his wagon, sick though he was, and declared “This is the place. Unpack the wagons and bring me some women. The younger the better.” (I made that last part up. I’m sure he was thinking it, but I haven’t read that in any history books. Just wanted to clarify.)

It’s quiet here, though. That eerie, Sunday-in-Utah-all-is-closed-and-all-the-vehicles-are-in-the-church-parking-lot-quiet that occurs once a week. There are no parades, no fireworks, no family barbecues. We don’t celebrate holidays on Sunday in Utah. So tomorrow, despite the fact that it is the 25th and not the 24th, is when we will be partying, Mormon-style.

It doesn’t really irk me that Pioneer Day is not celebrated on a Sunday, should it happen to fall on that day. Mostly because it IS the Mormon holiday, and the Mormons pretty much have the right to celebrate it whenever they want.

But it’s REALLY quiet today.

So I went on a blog hunt and discovered some interesting Mormon blogs that are part of the Bloggernacle. Since I normally point out the sheer silliness of some Mormons, I thought I’d point out some of the bright spots in the Mormon blog world, since it’s really the Mormon Holiday TODAY, despite the fact it is SO FUCKING QUIET.

So here we go.

I’ve read this blog and Web site before, and while I am not generally a fan, I did find Jeff Lindsay’s post on mental health, and the issues facing bishops, very interesting and relevant. Jeff Lindsay on mental health.

This site is really not as perplexing as it might seem. There are probably hundreds of thousands of Mormons who really don’t believe all the claptrap that comes out of Church HQ, or the early teachings of Briggy and Joe, but who CHOOSE to remain Mormons for cultural and family reasons. Not everybody wants to be known as one of those damn angry ex-Mormons. I was just surprised to find that someone actually organized a SITE relating to it. New Order Mormons.

Feminism is one of the “F” words, at least to Mormons. So, this is an interesting site just because Mormons don’t generally like feminists. That, and I found it well-written and quite interesting to read. Feminist Mormon Housewives

Here we have something HIGHLY unusual. A Mormon blog where there is no CENSORSHIP. Unheard of! Given the fondness most mucketymuck Mormons have for revisionist history, this really surprised me. Go figure. Mormon Open Forum

I found this blog interesting, because of a discussion where the writer openly questioned the decisions of Church hierarchy in excommunicating Mormon authors, especially on trumped up charges like those facing Simon Southerton. It’s worth reading. Dave’s Mormon Inquiry

This blog was interesting, written from the perspective from stay-at-home moms trying to stay sane. Mormon Mommy Wars

And last, at least for today, this blog is written by a Mormon married to a non-Mormon, and he’s pretty honest about his activity–and sometimes lack of it–in the LDS Church. Viva Ned Flanders

Happy Pioneer Day. Go immerse yourself in Mormonism….

Apparently, in my last post, which mentioned Trapped by the Mormons, the movie, I was wrong. Whoulda thunk it? One of the leads, who is a drag QUEEN, actually plays the MALE character who leads the women into temptation. My bad.

I was rather intrigued by him being the WOMAN. Oh well. Life rarely works out the way I think it will or should.

And I still think about half of Briggy’s wives look like they are sporting a BIT much testosterone.

Because I was bored this morning, and avoiding those pesky revisions, I was Web surfing when I happened across a Web site that had Trapped by the Mormons on it. Now, I’ve explained that I took this name from a campy old silent movie that was pretty silly, even though many people have chosen to believe that I am trying to say I am actually TRAPPED by the Mormons. They send me nasty emails that say, “There are millions of people who want the true gospel of Jesus Christ, we sure don’t need to trap a skanky ass bitch like you.” But in Mormonspeak, so it’s more like, “There are millions of people who want the true gospel of Jesus Christ, we sure don’t need to keep an A-POS-TATE on our roles.”

Anyway, I found this site that stated they are REMAKING the movie Trapped by the Mormons. Hmmm. Are they sure ONE wasn’t enough?

It actually sounds kind of amusing. The woman being lured to Mormonism through hypnosis is actually being played by a drag queen. This may sound far fetched, but have you SEEN the pictures of Brigham Young’s wives?? I swear, some of them shaved alongside Brigham.

Anyway, I didn’t hear about this movie before, so I’m guessing it won’t be mentioned in the next Academy Awards, but hey, I thought it was amusing.