I've been on vacation this week, so have missed most of this discussion, however, I do think I have a perspective to offer that has not been discussed.
In my ward, the teenage girls are held directly accountable for the righteousness of the teenage boys. I find this unacceptable. My bishop, my former bishop, and my SP have all had discussions about the inappropriateness of this irresponsible teaching, yet it continues today. My girls both fought this ("don't pet the tiger, because the tiger has no control over his libido" is how it's taught) on their level while I was fighting it on mine.
My problem with this teaching is that it teaches the boys that they are not responsible for themselves, that they can abdicate their pursuit of righteousness to someone else, and essentially opt out of taking the blame for their own actions. I find this rehensible, and I would not allow my own sons to buy into this stupidity.
My mother still gets admiring glances from strangers. I've been known to cause some unrest myself. I also have two very attractive daughters, neither of which dresses inappropriately. Both have been known to stop men in their tracks. One brought a professional baseball game to a screeching halt, because she had her feet propped up on the rail behind the on-deck circle and the batter was distracted by her legs (the umpire was not amused, although the crowd all laughed). The other brought havoc to a crowded mall one day while completely unaware of the reactions of the men she left in her wake. Wolf whistles are commonplace. Inappropriate comments are the norm. And yet none of us invite that sort of behavior. We ignore it as best we can. We just accept it as part of life and continue about our business. However, we also do not feel that we have in some way caused this behavior, nor are we responsible for it. That is the teaching that I feel is destructive to women in the church, and Elder Oaks put the stamp of official approval on it, in his talk a few conferences ago, when he said girls were walking porn. I was appalled then, and I still am at that comment.
Modesty & LDS Girls/Women & Sexually Frustrated Men
-
_barrelomonkeys
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 3004
- Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2007 7:00 pm
Barrel, women are NOT to blame for men having these thoughts. Neither are men! It is natural. It is the way we are.
The problem is that mens sexual arousal has been the cause of a lot of contention and problems if not harnessed and controlled. Hence we have a problem. Whenever you have a problem, it's only human to try to blame someone for it. It's also human to try to make sure that the responsibility and blame is as far away from you as possible. So this is what we get.
Are men ultimately responsible for how they react to their sexual desires. Yes, of course. Society punishes them very heavily if they can't control it.
Would it be nice of women to help men out and not purposely tempt them in this way? Yes, but as I'm seeing in this thread, they don't seem to really care. Their right to seek power through sexual means seems to trump any of these concerns for other people. Are women generally good or evil? I think that's a matter of perspective.
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.
-
_barrelomonkeys
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 3004
- Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2007 7:00 pm
ajax18 wrote:Barrel, women are NOT to blame for men having these thoughts. Neither are men! It is natural. It is the way we are.
The problem is that mens sexual arousal has been the cause of a lot of contention and problems if not harnessed and controlled. Hence we have a problem. Whenever you have a problem, it's only human to try to blame someone for it. It's also human to try to make sure that the responsibility and blame is as far away from you as possible. So this is what we get.
Are men ultimately responsible for how they react to their sexual desires. Yes, of course. Society punishes them very heavily if they can't control it.
Would it be nice of women to help men out and not purposely tempt them in this way? Yes, but as I'm seeing in this thread, they don't seem to really care. Their right to seek power through sexual means seems to trump any of these concerns for other people. Are women generally good or evil? I think that's a matter of perspective.
Hey Ajax. I used to know a guy that wanted to pay me so that he could rub my feet. I was an evil, terrible, awful, sinful, temptress in my sandals. I know he agrees with you.
:D
In reading this thread, the same scripture learning scriptures keeps on coming back to overshadow the whole theme......"the natural man is an enemy to God."
I think this is where the warping is going on, biologically speaking. If a man looks at a woman and feels any type of natural, physical response, he is somehow equating that with the natural, animalistic part of him that must be overcome. But as has been pointed out, these reactions are instinctive. It is at this level that the response is being demonized. This is why Oaks is telling girls that if they are bringing out that "natural man" in the young men by not dressing modestly then they bear some of the responsibility. Why can't the female just wear a burqua so as not to inspire the emergence of that natural enemy to God?
Of course it is instinctive. Of course it is not the woman's fault. Of course if you have someone with any propensity towards sexual aberration or dysfunction at all, you're going to find a pile of problems. Example 1:(this is a real life example, by the way) first counselor in bishopric feels that sex is a divine mandate in order to multiply and replenish and any other sexual activity with just recreational intent therefore is a sin because the motive is not to fulfill that stupid first commandment. Therfore, counselor will only have sex with wife if it is to multiply. Once pregnant, no sexual relations are to occur. Recreational sex is turning man into that nasty animal that is an enemy to God.
And to further complicate matters, the youth are given major red lights when it comes to even the simple basics of sexual intimacy....intensive kissing, necking, petting, etc. Then the second marriage occurs, the light turns to a major green and its off to the races supposedly. Only no one knows what to do because of the drastic change. Because there is no ease into sexuality, and there was such a restriction previously, hangups do occur. People can only mentally, physically and emotionally upshift so fast when it comes to sex. Such extremes are problematic.
These are just a few of the reasons why some Mormons have strange ideas about sex.
I think this is where the warping is going on, biologically speaking. If a man looks at a woman and feels any type of natural, physical response, he is somehow equating that with the natural, animalistic part of him that must be overcome. But as has been pointed out, these reactions are instinctive. It is at this level that the response is being demonized. This is why Oaks is telling girls that if they are bringing out that "natural man" in the young men by not dressing modestly then they bear some of the responsibility. Why can't the female just wear a burqua so as not to inspire the emergence of that natural enemy to God?
Of course it is instinctive. Of course it is not the woman's fault. Of course if you have someone with any propensity towards sexual aberration or dysfunction at all, you're going to find a pile of problems. Example 1:(this is a real life example, by the way) first counselor in bishopric feels that sex is a divine mandate in order to multiply and replenish and any other sexual activity with just recreational intent therefore is a sin because the motive is not to fulfill that stupid first commandment. Therfore, counselor will only have sex with wife if it is to multiply. Once pregnant, no sexual relations are to occur. Recreational sex is turning man into that nasty animal that is an enemy to God.
And to further complicate matters, the youth are given major red lights when it comes to even the simple basics of sexual intimacy....intensive kissing, necking, petting, etc. Then the second marriage occurs, the light turns to a major green and its off to the races supposedly. Only no one knows what to do because of the drastic change. Because there is no ease into sexuality, and there was such a restriction previously, hangups do occur. People can only mentally, physically and emotionally upshift so fast when it comes to sex. Such extremes are problematic.
These are just a few of the reasons why some Mormons have strange ideas about sex.
-
_Dr. Shades
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 14117
- Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 9:07 pm
barrelomonkeys wrote:Hey Ajax. I used to know a guy that wanted to pay me so that he could rub my feet. I was an evil, terrible, awful, sinful, temptress in my sandals. I know he agrees with you.
How many times did you allow him to do it?
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
--Louis Midgley
--Louis Midgley
-
_barrelomonkeys
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 3004
- Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2007 7:00 pm
-
_truth dancer
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 4792
- Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:40 pm
Hi Ajax...
Would it be nice of women to help men out and not purposely tempt them in this way? Yes, but as I'm seeing in this thread, they don't seem to really care.
I don't think this reflects the women on this board.
I think most of us here believe in being respectful, appropriate, and decent.
What I think every woman here will attest to is that regardless of how appropriate, respectful, decent, and modestly, they dress, they will still be treated inappropriatly, and will still be objectified by SOME men. (NOT the great fabulous men on this board... other not-so-fabulous men)!
I think women use their bodies for power when they feel powerless, and when they feel they are of little value for anything else. Unfortunatly, the message being given to girls and women (generally in society) is that their sexual power is their only power and their body is their only value.
Well, I don't quite see humans in this way (good or evil).. I agree with your point completely! :-)
~dancer~
Would it be nice of women to help men out and not purposely tempt them in this way? Yes, but as I'm seeing in this thread, they don't seem to really care.
I don't think this reflects the women on this board.
I think most of us here believe in being respectful, appropriate, and decent.
What I think every woman here will attest to is that regardless of how appropriate, respectful, decent, and modestly, they dress, they will still be treated inappropriatly, and will still be objectified by SOME men. (NOT the great fabulous men on this board... other not-so-fabulous men)!
Their right to seek power through sexual means seems to trump any of these concerns for other people.
I think women use their bodies for power when they feel powerless, and when they feel they are of little value for anything else. Unfortunatly, the message being given to girls and women (generally in society) is that their sexual power is their only power and their body is their only value.
Are women generally good or evil? I think that's a matter of perspective.
Well, I don't quite see humans in this way (good or evil).. I agree with your point completely! :-)
~dancer~
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj
-
_truth dancer
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 4792
- Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:40 pm
Hi Harmony...
Glad you are back!
I remember there was a thread on FAIR about this topic, and you and I were about the only ones who didn't rave about Oaks talk... it was so weird.
Actually, If I recall correctly, I think Juliann agreed with us as well...but for the most part, people didn't have a problem with blaming girls and women for the thoughts of guys, or for telling girls they are porn because guys may have sexual thoughts about them. (sigh)
~dancer~
Glad you are back!
I remember there was a thread on FAIR about this topic, and you and I were about the only ones who didn't rave about Oaks talk... it was so weird.
Actually, If I recall correctly, I think Juliann agreed with us as well...but for the most part, people didn't have a problem with blaming girls and women for the thoughts of guys, or for telling girls they are porn because guys may have sexual thoughts about them. (sigh)
~dancer~
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj