Potential Members
Moderator: Marduk
Potential Members
Question 62251, for reference.
I'm slightly disappointed with the answers to this question, as the asker stated it was MEMBERS at large who asked these questions, not the mission leaders. It also asked about the demographics of those who ask this question, not whether or not someone SHOULD care about this. Anyone have any thoughts as to the actual question this person asked?
I'm slightly disappointed with the answers to this question, as the asker stated it was MEMBERS at large who asked these questions, not the mission leaders. It also asked about the demographics of those who ask this question, not whether or not someone SHOULD care about this. Anyone have any thoughts as to the actual question this person asked?
Deus ab veritas
- Tim the Monkey
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 3:37 pm
Re: Potential Members
As someone who hasn’t served her mission yet (but is reporting…WEDNESDAY!!...though I don’t want this thread to get sidetracked from the get-go…) I can’t really speak to the “common experience” side of this question, but I do have some thoughts on why these opinions might be shared by members of the Church (who, imo, obviously haven’t studied Christ’s ministries very closely /judgment face).
The first thing that crossed my mind when I read this question is that it might have something to do with the political leanings of this missionary’s area. It might just be that there’s a trend towards anti-welfare/immigration/etc. political leanings—which are typically indicative of the sort of stereotypes that this missionary mentions—in the area. If such is the case, it would make sense that if certain members didn’t think certain people should be around PERIOD, that those members wouldn’t want those people in their Zion (where I might tentatively, tongue-in-cheek guess that they think all is well…jus’ sayin'). But we don’t know where this missionary served, other than it’s in the US, and had urban, suburban and rural areas…Doesn’t really narrow it down.
Another thing I thought might explain it would be something that isn’t really said in our culture (so some might disagree with my wording…)…but might apply. Simply put…there are some better functioning, more efficient, more loving etc. wards than others. Perhaps this missionary just happened to serve in these “others,” and in these wards, people saw how little got done, and so those people either wanted help (if they felt like they’re “the only ones doing the work around the ward”) or they want to be taken care of (if they felt like their “leadership is failing them”). I think that’s still pretty obviously the member’s issue to work out…(/sooooo much judgment in this post...sorry!!!)
Of course, I would personally like to doubt that the missionary heard this a lot. It kind of sounds like something they might hear over dinner at a few members’ houses sometime shortly after those members got together on their own, had a few too many Mountain Dews and decided that that was why the missionaries were failures. As in, it’s something they heard said as something they should do, but never as something they must, had, or needed to do.
But I also grew up in a pretty dysfunctional* ward, so I have no qualms in saying that I can picture this being said over the pulpit by…someone with authority…too.
*So I’ve been told by objective third parties.
The first thing that crossed my mind when I read this question is that it might have something to do with the political leanings of this missionary’s area. It might just be that there’s a trend towards anti-welfare/immigration/etc. political leanings—which are typically indicative of the sort of stereotypes that this missionary mentions—in the area. If such is the case, it would make sense that if certain members didn’t think certain people should be around PERIOD, that those members wouldn’t want those people in their Zion (where I might tentatively, tongue-in-cheek guess that they think all is well…jus’ sayin'). But we don’t know where this missionary served, other than it’s in the US, and had urban, suburban and rural areas…Doesn’t really narrow it down.
Another thing I thought might explain it would be something that isn’t really said in our culture (so some might disagree with my wording…)…but might apply. Simply put…there are some better functioning, more efficient, more loving etc. wards than others. Perhaps this missionary just happened to serve in these “others,” and in these wards, people saw how little got done, and so those people either wanted help (if they felt like they’re “the only ones doing the work around the ward”) or they want to be taken care of (if they felt like their “leadership is failing them”). I think that’s still pretty obviously the member’s issue to work out…(/sooooo much judgment in this post...sorry!!!)
Of course, I would personally like to doubt that the missionary heard this a lot. It kind of sounds like something they might hear over dinner at a few members’ houses sometime shortly after those members got together on their own, had a few too many Mountain Dews and decided that that was why the missionaries were failures. As in, it’s something they heard said as something they should do, but never as something they must, had, or needed to do.
But I also grew up in a pretty dysfunctional* ward, so I have no qualms in saying that I can picture this being said over the pulpit by…someone with authority…too.
*So I’ve been told by objective third parties.
Re: Potential Members
Where are you going?Tim the Monkey wrote:As someone who hasn’t served her mission yet (but is reporting…WEDNESDAY!!...
Re: Potential Members
I served a mission in a place that has both urban, suburban, and rural areas. I only saw it in rural areas. I only heard it a few times and I think it was from members who were aggravated with recent converts who seemingly (and probably) were only in the Church for welfare purposes. It never aggravated me personally, but I found it in poor taste. I didn't think it was stimulated by racism. I heard it from white members about white people, and from black members about black people.
Really, it's something where I see the members are coming from, but unless you're the Bishop, you really shouldn't be saying anything about it. It seemed like backbiting more than anything else.
Really, it's something where I see the members are coming from, but unless you're the Bishop, you really shouldn't be saying anything about it. It seemed like backbiting more than anything else.
- TheAnswerIs42
- Posts: 962
- Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 1:13 pm
- Location: Pleasant Grove, Utah
Re: Potential Members
The only time I have seen this sort of thing come from mission leaders is the story of my friend's father's mission. He was in the first group that served in the Phillipines. And they were not taught another language, on purpose. He was told that they wanted to establish the church in the area from nothing, and the best way to do that was to get converts that would be strong members. And the stronger, more wealthy people in the Phillipines speak English. Obviously that policy isn't one that lasts very long. It's really sad that this person saw this backbiting so much.
- Tim the Monkey
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 3:37 pm
Re: Potential Members
Everett, WashingtonKatya wrote:Where are you going?Tim the Monkey wrote:As someone who hasn’t served her mission yet (but is reporting…WEDNESDAY!!...
Re: Potential Members
Oooh, it's on the coast. Sounds lovely! (Do they let missionaries harvest geoducks? Probably not. But you could still eat them.)Tim the Monkey wrote:Everett, WashingtonKatya wrote:Where are you going?Tim the Monkey wrote:As someone who hasn’t served her mission yet (but is reporting…WEDNESDAY!!...
Re: Potential Members
didn't Tangerine serve in that mission?
Re: Potential Members
I did. I served in the Washington, Everett mission. Tim the Monkey, if you want some info, e-mail me.
My mission president was all about "farming the ghetto" as he put it. He said it's the missionaries' job to baptize people, it's the members' job to teach them the gospel and keep them active. I baptized a few welfare cases, but didn't baptize even more.
My mission president was all about "farming the ghetto" as he put it. He said it's the missionaries' job to baptize people, it's the members' job to teach them the gospel and keep them active. I baptized a few welfare cases, but didn't baptize even more.
- Dragon Lady
- Posts: 2332
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 12:07 pm
- Location: Riverton, UT
Re: Potential Members
I read:
Whistler wrote:didn't Tangerine serve in that mission?
And my first thought was, "Why is Tangerine using Dr. Smeed's account?"Dr. Smeed wrote:I did.
Re: Potential Members
and the plot thickens...
He who knows others is clever;
He who knows himself has discernment.
He who overcomes others has force;
He who overcomes himself is strong. 33:1-4
He who knows himself has discernment.
He who overcomes others has force;
He who overcomes himself is strong. 33:1-4
- Tim the Monkey
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 3:37 pm
Re: Potential Members
Thanks for the offer! If anything comes to mind between now and then, I definitely will.Dr. Smeed wrote:Tim the Monkey, if you want some info, e-mail me.
Re: Potential Members
I thought you served in Alaska...Dr. Smeed wrote:I did. I served in the Washington, Everett mission. Tim the Monkey, if you want some info, e-mail me.
My mission president was all about "farming the ghetto" as he put it. He said it's the missionaries' job to baptize people, it's the members' job to teach them the gospel and keep them active. I baptized a few welfare cases, but didn't baptize even more.
EDIT: oh, just searched the archives. Never mind...
"If you don't put enough commas in, you won't know where to breathe and will die of asphyxiation"
--Jasper Fforde
--Jasper Fforde
Re: Potential Members
Easy misunderstanding. I just worked in Alaska for a summer and played hockey up there.
Re: Potential Members
Was the work in a cannery? I did that in Alaska for two summers, fortunately getting assigned to the side that handled the fish after they had been gutted and frozen.Dr. Smeed wrote:Easy misunderstanding. I just worked in Alaska for a summer and played hockey up there.
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
Re: Potential Members
It's actually one of those times when the name everybody just uses isn't actually descriptive, but that's what everybody calls it. At the "cannery" where I worked, the fish came in off the boat into the fresh half of the building, where a machine could quickly behead the fishes en masse and the human workers grabbed the bodies and slit the bellies and ripped out the guts, throwing them onto the floor (some workers used large squeegees to sweep it into a drain in the floor leading to a chopper). Then those headless, gutless fish bodies went into a blast freezer about the size of a room, which froze them solid in about 45 minutes.
On the side where I (as I said, thankfully) worked, we took the trays of frozen fish bodies out, threw them onto a conveyor which dipped them in some brine (which I guess was for defrosting/disinfecting purposes) and then humans would take each fish body, stick it into an individual plastic bag not unlike what you see at Subway, and drop it onto a table, where another worker, called a scaler, had to quickly grab bagged fish bodies and stick them into a box on a scale. The box had to weigh between 49.7 and 50.3 pounds, so when the box was almost full, they had to be good at holding a fish in each hand and being able to feel which one was slightly lighter or heavier. They tried letting me be a scaler for about 5 minutes as I recall. I spent most of the summer being one of the guys taking frozen fish of the trays from the blast freezer and putting them on the conveyor.
Yet another division at the "cannery" was the egg house, almost entirely run by Japanese people. The female salmon got their bellies slit and the egg sacs went into big vats of brine. I was one of the Americans that got to work in there for a few days before I ended up on the frozen fish side.
All in all, it was a fun time for a college-aged kid, but I'm sure glad it's not my career.
On the side where I (as I said, thankfully) worked, we took the trays of frozen fish bodies out, threw them onto a conveyor which dipped them in some brine (which I guess was for defrosting/disinfecting purposes) and then humans would take each fish body, stick it into an individual plastic bag not unlike what you see at Subway, and drop it onto a table, where another worker, called a scaler, had to quickly grab bagged fish bodies and stick them into a box on a scale. The box had to weigh between 49.7 and 50.3 pounds, so when the box was almost full, they had to be good at holding a fish in each hand and being able to feel which one was slightly lighter or heavier. They tried letting me be a scaler for about 5 minutes as I recall. I spent most of the summer being one of the guys taking frozen fish of the trays from the blast freezer and putting them on the conveyor.
Yet another division at the "cannery" was the egg house, almost entirely run by Japanese people. The female salmon got their bellies slit and the egg sacs went into big vats of brine. I was one of the Americans that got to work in there for a few days before I ended up on the frozen fish side.
All in all, it was a fun time for a college-aged kid, but I'm sure glad it's not my career.
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
Re: Potential Members
Maybe in other places, but not so much in Alaska. If you know anyone who fishes, you are very likely to get some in your freezer at one point or another. I'm personally not a fish fan, but most people I've known prefer fresh fish to canned.Marduk wrote:Is there a big market for canned fish?!
"If you don't put enough commas in, you won't know where to breathe and will die of asphyxiation"
--Jasper Fforde
--Jasper Fforde
-
- Someone's Favorite
- Posts: 998
- Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 9:08 am
- Location: Provo, UT
Re: Potential Members
Canned tuna has its merits, though.
Re: Potential Members
It's funny to me how the tuna in water costs more (at least in my area) than the tuna in oil. You'd think the oil cost more than the water. It probably does, and they know that the stuff not soaked in oil tastes better, so they make even more profit by charging more for the stuff that costs less to make.thebigcheese wrote:Canned tuna has its merits, though.
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.