Victim blaming occurs when the victim of a crime or harmful action is held partially or fully responsible for what happened to them. This mindset shifts the blame away from the perpetrator and can further harm the victim by suggesting they could have prevented the incident.
Church leaders and materials are known to place blame for abuse onto the victims. Here are a couple of examples of an Apostle speaking at General Conference and another of a church President publishing this mentality in a book about forgiveness.
The victim must do all in his or her power to stop the abuse. Most often, the victim is innocent because of being disabled by fear or the power or authority of the offender. At some point in time, however, the Lord may prompt a victim to recognize a degree of responsibility for abuse. Your priesthood leader will help assess your responsibility so that, if needed, it can be addressed. Otherwise the seeds of guilt will remain and sprout into bitter fruit. Yet no matter what degree of responsibility, from absolutely none to increasing consent, the healing power of the atonement of Jesus Christ can provide a complete cure.
Elder Richard G. Scott, Healing the Tragic Scars of Abuse, General Conference April 1992
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1992/04/healing-the-tragic-scars-of-abuse?lang=eng&id=p16#p15
Many who have experienced the trauma of rape, have been led to question their own culpability in the act from statements and thinking along the lines of Elder Richard G. Scott. This will make anyone struggle with feelings of self-worth and worthiness expecting that they must confess to some “degree of responsibility.” It sets the stage that members (and especially youth) need their ecclesiastical leader, or Bishop, to help them understand their responsibility in order to find healing. The problem is, that these bishops have no training in how to guide someone to healing from this trauma, they only have tools that the church provides, like antiquated ideas and victim blaming. These things hurt the situation much more than they help.
The Miracle of Forgiveness
Even in a forced contact such as rape or incest, the injured one is greatly outraged. If she has not cooperated and contributed to the foul deed, she is of course in a more favorable position. There is no condemnation where there is no voluntary participation. It is better to die in defending one’s virtue than to live having lost it without a struggle.
Spencer W. Kimball, The Miracle of Forgiveness, 1969
The Miracle of Forgiveness is a book written by Spencer W. Kimball, who later became the 12th President of the Church. Published in 1969, the book is intended as a guide for church members seeking to repent of sins and receive forgiveness through the teachings of Jesus Christ. Kimball emphasizes the importance of sincere repentance, outlining a detailed process that includes confession, restitution, and a complete change of heart. The book covers a wide range of sins, with a particular focus on sexual immorality, which Kimball views as one of the most serious transgressions. Within the church, The Miracle of Forgiveness has been used extensively as a resource for those working through personal issues, particularly in the context of ecclesiastical counseling. Bishops and other church leaders often recommended the book to members who were struggling with feelings of guilt, sin, or the desire for spiritual renewal.
(This, of course, doesn’t apply if it’s a prophet of God who promises celestial rewards for you and your family for deeds in the barn… We must submit to the priesthood right?)
The book has also been criticized for its harsh tone and the intense guilt it can produce in readers. Many former Mormons have shared that the book contributed to feelings of shame and unworthiness, particularly when dealing with normal human experiences like sexuality. The book doesn’t help victims to find relief. Rather, it introduces the idea that the victim must at some level have cooperated or contributed to the foul deed. President Kimball, the living prophet, tells youth who have suffered this unimaginable trauma that “It is better to die defending one’s virtue than to live having lost it without a struggle”! This is the message a generation of Mormon youth grew up understanding from the church.
Porn Shoulders
This follows the urging from leaders (especially men) towards young women to dress modestly. Young Women are called upon to dress modestly due to the responsibility they have to keep immoral thoughts out of the minds of others, supposedly the young men, but this must also include any men.
The tongue-in-cheek term “porn shoulders” is used to describe how the LDS (Mormon) Church views and regulates women’s clothing, particularly emphasizing modesty standards. The term refers to the church’s strict dress code, which discourages women from showing their shoulders, as doing so is considered immodest and potentially sexually provocative. Ex-Mormons often use this term humorously or critically to highlight the church’s rigid and unrealistic expectations around modesty and sexuality. Something as innocuous as bare shoulders is seen, by the church, as comparable to pornography in terms of inappropriate content.
Are women (and young women) responsible for the lustful thoughts of men? Are these church men so weak that viewing a woman’s shoulders or legs is too enticing that they cannot help the sexual thoughts that overcome them? Is it the fault of women for showing their shoulders for the unwelcomed advances and even abuses they receive?
More reading:
- https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1992/04/healing-the-tragic-scars-of-abuse?lang=eng&id=p16#p15
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Miracle_of_Forgiveness
- Mormon Stories #1386: The Miracle of Forgiveness – Why It Should be Removed from Deseret Book: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndTuoTj2QV4
As a woman and as a former elementary school teacher who dealt with several cases of sexual abuse during the nine years that I taught Scott and Kimball’s comments outrage me to no end. The worst case that I dealt with was when the best friend of one of my students confided in me and then to the principal that her friend’s father, who was 1st counselor in the local stake presidency, along with their recently returned missionary oldest brother were raping their daughters/sisters and telling them that this was how they should “honor the Priesthood”. The father had tried to play footsies with me under the table at parent conferences, so I was not surprised at all although my heart ached for my student and her sisters.
When word got out about these despicable crimes it was the victims who were blamed and not the father, brother or mother who knew of the incest and did nothing to stop it. Word was that these poor girls must’ve somehow tempted these creeps into committing incest. The older girls were able to become emancipated from their parents and move to the home of a family friend who took them in. My student was too young to be able to do so.
When her father and brother returned home from prison my student was terrified because both of the men had promised retribution when they left prison. Even though she had several locks on her bedroom door she knew that they weren’t enough to keep her safe. I worked with the authorities to get her out of that house and she and her younger brother moved to Texas to live with relatives.
Before she left her bishop insisted that she immediately forgive these two monstrous men who had violated and abused her. Even worse was the fact that the ward and neighborhood acted as if nothing at all had ever happened even though one of my colleagues’ partner was their parole officer and said that they were the most evil parolees that she’d ever been in charge of. I’ve often wondered how many more victims these men had as a result of the church leaders and ward members/neighbors’ blaming the victims rather than the perpetrators and not even excommunicating them for their gross crimes.