LDS Sexuality

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_aussieguy55
_Emeritus
Posts: 2122
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2006 9:22 pm

Post by _aussieguy55 »

I think you made a Freudian slip as a "missionary and other positions" ? :) I understand that the Kama Sutra was written by a man who was intent in keeping marriages together, so his focus on positions that made sex more pleasurable. Lets face it sex is good for your health as well as your relationship. I think its the icing on the cake of marriage. I remember Kimball said once he found out that a lot of divorce in the LDS church was over sex.
_Jason Bourne
_Emeritus
Posts: 9207
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:00 pm

Post by _Jason Bourne »

aussieguy55 wrote:I think you made a Freudian slip as a "missionary and other positions" ? :) I understand that the Kama Sutra was written by a man who was intent in keeping marriages together, so his focus on positions that made sex more pleasurable. Lets face it sex is good for your health as well as your relationship. I think its the icing on the cake of marriage. I remember Kimball said once he found out that a lot of divorce in the LDS church was over sex.


Kimball did say this. And it was clear that he did not believe sex was just for making babies. It is interesting to me to see the plethora of LDS books about married sex that have some out over the past ten year.
_barrelomonkeys
_Emeritus
Posts: 3004
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2007 7:00 pm

Re: LDS Sexuality

Post by _barrelomonkeys »

Jason Bourne wrote:
Who asks LDS couplde about their sex life?


I must have gotten the wrong impression. I thought I'd read that there was talk between women about how chaste they were? Maybe I read it wrong.

For those of you with children in LDS are you concerned or pleased with the emphasis on sexuality?


I have mixed feelings. I believe we should teach appropriate sexuality which I believe should be only between married people. But I do believe that when I was a teen in the 70's the way we were taught was pretty heavy handed and created exceessive guilt and hang ups for many in my opinion. I think the the Church had made some strides in being less shaming but that there is still a long way to go. I do not have all the answers though.


I'm concerned about this because my step-son is having quite a bit of difficulty with this. My husband is concerned that he gets ill, physically, when he becomes sexually aroused. I'm concerned for him... but I also have children here and he comes here and acts out in odd ways. I'm concerned for his sisters here.


I think that sicuety created guilt and a lot of hang ups about human sexuality and many conservative religions can exacerbate this by using shame and punative teachings to control this area of peoples lives. I think we need to find ways to teach healthy sexual behavior without overtly shaming and guilt tactics.


I agree with this!
_barrelomonkeys
_Emeritus
Posts: 3004
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2007 7:00 pm

Post by _barrelomonkeys »

beastie wrote:The question most bishops NOW ask married couples is very vague, something like "are you chaste"? In the past, they would ask more probing questions, but I think have been told not to do that anymore.

In my experience, guilt and sexual difficulties are extremely common in Mormonism. I think it has to do with past teachings that still leave their shadows - in the past, leaders taught that sex was for procreation, and birth control was taboo. I think this teaching was a shadow of the teachings about polygamy, which was actually very victorian in its approach to sex.

I think it's possible the church is gradually changing (there is a rumor that members are no longer required to confess masturbation to the bishop, but that is hotly argued, and I don't think the church has made a clear statement on it, people are guessing from some conference talks). But change, in the LDS church, takes a very long time.

I will never forget one RS sister who was so open about the fact that she didn't like sex, didn't want to have it, that she talked IN RELIEF SOCIETY, in front of a room full of women, about she and her husband having to go get therapy for this problem, and the counselor telling the husband to masturbate to relieve the pressure until they worked it out. Her husband said no, their religion forbade it, and she was very proud of him.

There may not be many sisters who are this open about it (I felt horribly embarrassed for her husband) but there were many others who had very similar attitudes about sex. It's hard for women to be taught, your entire life, that sexual feelings and desires must be squashed and then suddenly to turn the tap "ON" when you get married.


Beastie, I really hope that my step-son isn't asked any more questions. :(

That's really sad about that wife and husband.
_barrelomonkeys
_Emeritus
Posts: 3004
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2007 7:00 pm

Post by _barrelomonkeys »

ajax18 wrote: I'm still convinced that the antimasturbation stance is a way to force people into earlier marriages. Refusing to admit that this is the real reason behind the doctrine may irritate me more than the doctrine itself.


That makes a lot of sense. Why does the church want people to marry so young?
_Polygamy Porter
_Emeritus
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:04 am

Post by _Polygamy Porter »

barrelomonkeys wrote:Why does the church want people to marry so young?
One word.

Economics.

Think about it.

The earlier they marry, the more likely they will be retained as an adult member, and adult member pay the bills.

The earlier the couple has kids, the sooner they are bound to a regiment that will include religion.

The sooner they start having kids, the sooner a new tithe payer will be paying into the coffers of LDS Inc.

It is a FACT that the best converts come from TBM wombs.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Post by _harmony »

barrelomonkeys wrote:Why does the church want people to marry so young?


The church leaders are for the most part, stuck in the 1950's. The social norms that they grew up with are what they want to see continue. Marrying young, having large families, mothers stay at home to raise the children while fathers work... these are the social norms that formed our leaders, and they see no reason to change. They pay lip service to more modern norms like girls getting an education, but for the most part, very little has changed in 50 years.
_Polygamy Porter
_Emeritus
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:04 am

Post by _Polygamy Porter »

harmony wrote:
barrelomonkeys wrote:Why does the church want people to marry so young?


The church leaders are for the most part, stuck in the 1950's. The social norms that they grew up with are what they want to see continue. Marrying young, having large families, mothers stay at home to raise the children while fathers work... these are the social norms that formed our leaders, and they see no reason to change. They pay lip service to more modern norms like girls getting an education, but for the most part, very little has changed in 50 years.
WHAT?

It is all part of the restored gospel!

Jesus' mother stayed home and his dad worked.

None of the ladies back then got an education, cuz they did not need one.

Did Jesus come from a large family? Then again, he did get all of the attention..
_ajax18
_Emeritus
Posts: 6914
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:56 am

Post by _ajax18 »

Jason Bourne wrote:
I wonder if masturbation is still specifically mentioned and questioned in the baptismal interview. I hated asking that quesiton. I guess I could ask the elders. Any better ideas on how to find out? The first time I was grilled on the issue was by my stake president. I guess all my other interviews were done by my dad who was the branch president and there was no way he was going to ask about that.


I'm my 27 years in the Church, as a missionary and in other positions where I knew about things ,this has never been a question for baptism or any other specific interview. Yes bishops can and may ask it but it more in their discretion.


You're kidding me, you didn't have to mention masturbation as a missionary?
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
_ajax18
_Emeritus
Posts: 6914
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:56 am

Post by _ajax18 »

barrelomonkeys wrote:
ajax18 wrote: I'm still convinced that the antimasturbation stance is a way to force people into earlier marriages. Refusing to admit that this is the real reason behind the doctrine may irritate me more than the doctrine itself.


That makes a lot of sense. Why does the church want people to marry so young?


For one thing, if you wait too long, you're not going to be able to have as many babies. Secondly, I would guess that a significant number of men would simply forego marriage altogether. Getting married is not a very fun process for the young LDS man. I don't think women like it much after a while either but it's still mainly up to the men to make the marriage happen at all. Staying married isn't much easier. Sex drive is what gives them the motivation to put up with all the crap that imperfect people are bound to dish out to one another.

I think this fits with what I see outside the Church. Men avoid marriage as much as long as they can. Only in Mormonism is the situation reversed such that it is the men who want to marry and the women who want to put it off as far as they can.
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
Post Reply