Modesty & LDS Girls/Women & Sexually Frustrated Men

[Guest]

So I notice lots and lots of giggles and jokes about things that really aren't that sexually enticing (well atleast to me) or suggestive on this board. Almost to the point of being childish and asinine. Now this very well could just be the internet and the odd mix of posters that reply to sexually suggestive threads or posts that have innuendos in them. I was wondering if this had more to do with LDS and the culture though.

In the breastfeeding thread I was really struck by sailgirl7's comment that women should be respectful of men because they may be turned on by the form of a woman breastfeeding. That struck me as really, really odd. I don't talk for women outside of LDS and can only speak of my own experiences (and by no means am I suggesting I'm the norm) in dealing with men and the way in which they are sexually stimulated. I never felt guilty if a man was excited by me and never felt as though I had done anything harmful to him.

So. Are LDS women/girls taught that they are somehow responsible for men being stimulated by the sight of them? Does this not create stress for the women that they may have this power to taint the boys or somehow lead them astray? Does this also not create the illusion in the girls/women's mind that they are quite powerful when it comes to all things sexual?

I just know as a young woman, and even now, I assume that men can be turned on by me when I walk by them, when I smile at them, or anything else that does it for them. I don't consider their reaction to a female as somehow being my responsibility or concern.

In your opinion do you think it is healthy that women are told to be modest so that they don't frustrate the boys/men? I'm not advocating that girls wear things that are sexually suggestive necessarily... I'm just thinking about how ANYTHING can be sexually suggestive to somebody. So is it the woman's fault if the man gets turned on?

by the way, I have no idea why this interests me so except I see things on this board (the snickering and excited titillations) that remind me of the *off* way in which my step-son comes here and acts.

Perhaps it is I that has the twisted belief that women shouldn't be ashamed of (or responsible for) how men react to them?

If anyone is interested in seeing more excited "*giggles* and wide eyed excited key tapping look no farther than the MAD thread on porn shops.

[_Yoda]

If anyone is interested in seeing more excited "*giggles* and wide eyed excited key tapping look no farther than the MAD thread on porn shops.

Damn! Now I'm going to have to tunnel to MAD and see what's going on. I haven't been over there in months. LOL

So. Are LDS women/girls taught that they are somehow responsible for men being stimulated by the sight of them? Does this not create stress for the women that they may have this power to taint the boys or somehow lead them astray? Does this also not create the illusion in the girls/women's mind that they are quite powerful when it comes to all things sexual?

In answer to all of these questions, yes, yes, and yes.

That's why a lot of LDS women have problems dealing with sex. What's ironic is, in many cases, it can actually have the reverse affect of what the Church hopes it will have. Three of my close LDS friends in High School got pregnant out of wedlock, and rushed into marriage. Only one of those three friends is still married to the original spouse, and active in the Church.

[_barrelomonkeys]

If anyone is interested in seeing more excited "*giggles* and wide eyed excited key tapping look no farther than the MAD thread on porn shops.

Damn! Now I'm going to have to tunnel to MAD and see what's going on. I haven't been over there in months. LOL

So. Are LDS women/girls taught that they are somehow responsible for men being stimulated by the sight of them? Does this not create stress for the women that they may have this power to taint the boys or somehow lead them astray? Does this also not create the illusion in the girls/women's mind that they are quite powerful when it comes to all things sexual?

In answer to all of these questions, yes, yes, and yes.

That's why a lot of LDS women have problems dealing with sex. What's ironic is, in many cases, it can actually have the reverse affect of what the Church hopes it will have. Three of my close LDS friends in High School got pregnant out of wedlock, and rushed into marriage. Only one of those three friends is still married to the original spouse, and active in the Church.

Hey Liz, I can definitely see how it could have the opposite effect. Everything is off limits so everything then becomes taboo and sexually appealing.

[_truth dancer]

You called it girlfriend!

Elder Oaks gave a talk on Porn in General Conference where he basically blamed girls for the thoughts of men.

It was unbelievable!

He said to the young women of the church concerning the way they dress.... "they are becoming porn," or something like this.


~dancer~

[_Yoda]

Hey Liz, I can definitely see how it could have the opposite effect. Everything is off limits so everything then becomes taboo and sexually appealing.

Exactly!

So...I'm too lazy to go over to MAD. Can you give a synopsis of the porn thread?

LOL

[_barrelomonkeys]

You called it girlfriend!

Elder Oaks gave a talk on Porn in General Conference where he basically blamed girls for the thoughts of men.

It was unbelievable!

He said to the young women of the church concerning the way they dress.... "they are becoming porn," or something like this.


~dancer~

Holy moly!

I believe men are responsible for themselves. Perhaps it's easier for them to blame women for their own sexual excitement?

Why must anyone be blamed for feeling a natural response to another human and feelings of sexual attractiveness?

[_Scottie]

I'll reiterate what I said in the breastfeeding thread...

I can not count the number of times that I have been called a "pervert" for looking at a scantily clad woman.

But in answer to your question, yes, the church advocates that women should dress modestly lest you tempt the young men.

I can't say that I necessarily disagree with that. In a church where there is absolutely no recourse for sexual release before marriage, the young men shouldn't have to be more frustrated than they already are!

Well, actually, what I would REALLY like to see is an acceptance of masturbation as a normal part of adolescence. But we all know this won't happen. It's easier just to guilt the women into dressing modestly

[_barrelomonkeys]

I'll reiterate what I said in the breastfeeding thread...

I can not count the number of times that I have been called a "pervert" for looking at a scantily clad woman.

But in answer to your question, yes, the church advocates that women should dress modestly lest you tempt the young men.

I can't say that I necessarily disagree with that. In a church where there is absolutely no recourse for sexual release before marriage, the young men shouldn't have to be more frustrated than they already are!

Well, actually, what I would REALLY like to see is an acceptance of masturbation as a normal part of adolescence. But we all know this won't happen. It's easier just to guilt the women into dressing modestly

Why blame women for men's sexual frustration when the Church has decided that men MUST be sexually frustrated? I don't understand that.

[_truth dancer]

The whole thing is backwards to me.

I think it appropriate for women to dress respectfully not because they are to blame for the thoughts of a guy but because I think it is a about time women and girls value themselves for something other than how sexually attractive they are to men.

After six thousand years of women being valued for their form, their worth equal to their bodies, I would hope we could move to a place where women are seen (by themselves as well as by men), as human beings, with thoughts, ideas, understanding, value, and creativity, who can contribute to the world in ways beside getting a guy turned on, or by having babies.

The idea that man was lonely so God created woman, just needs to disappear from off the face of the earth! ;-)

~dancer~

Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting having babies is not a fabulous thing!

[Guest]

The whole thing is backwards to me.

I think it appropriate for women to dress respectfully not because they are to blame for the thoughts of a guy but because I think it is a about time women and girls value themselves for something other than how sexually attractive they are to men.

After six thousand years of women being valued for their form, their worth equal to their bodies, I would hope we could move to a place where women are seen (by themselves as well as by men), as human beings, with thoughts, ideas, understanding, value, and creativity, who can contribute to the world in ways beside getting a guy turned on, or by having babies.

The idea that man was lonely so God created woman, just needs to disappear from off the face of the earth! ;-)

~dancer~

Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting having babies is not a fabulous thing!

I agree TD!

I want my daughters to respect themselves and not think of themselves as objects of sexual fascination for men (which I think this LDS decree telling women they are responsible actually creates that impression on women's minds) but rather as unique individuals.

I think the Church shames a woman to dress a certain way and also at the same time gives women the sense that who she is (as a woman) is a sexual object that holds sway over men... I just think all in all not a great message.