Does Moism disconnect women from their natural sexuality

[Born Free]

What does (normal) suppressed sexual energy take shape as in women?

Some context: I run separated men's groups, and I also have been involved in peer-support men's groups for over 13 years.

One book down here that has encouraged men's groups involvement is Steve Biddulph's book Manhood. In it he lists his 7 Steps to Manhood, the 2nd of which is:

Finding sacredness in your sexuality.

Of that issue the author says that for men, sex will be either sleazy and obsessive, or a sacred and powerful source of wellbeing. Our men's group plans to put a lot of effort into exploring that this year.

Recently I have been getting my head around what the corresponding issue for women around sexuality might be! Nancy Friday, in her book The Myth of Beauty claims that women learn from their mothers to have a poor/problematic relationship with their sexuality and genitals, and that the anger little girls are told nice girls don't have, gets projected onto men in later life.

As Mormonism sends strong messages to women to be "nice" (as in, not angry), and non-sexual or at least passive sexually, I am keen to see what the women on this list feel is women's version of the above challenge to men.

My reading, thinking and observation would suggest that it is probably something in the area of owning responsibility for being fully connected with and proud of their sexuality, but I am of the opposite gender looking in. I see few women who subvert that and turn it into sleaze, as men are prone to do, so what happens to that healthy sexual energy, when it gets stuffed down in women, and denied a healthy expression?

Daryl

[mutleydog]

What does (normal) suppressed sexual energy take shape as in women?

Some context: I run separated men's groups, and I also have been involved in peer-support men's groups for over 13 years.

One book down here that has encouraged men's groups involvement is Steve Biddulph's book Manhood. In it he lists his 7 Steps to Manhood, the 2nd of which is:

Finding sacredness in your sexuality.

Of that issue the author says that for men, sex will be either sleazy and obsessive, or a sacred and powerful source of wellbeing. Our men's group plans to put a lot of effort into exploring that this year.

Recently I have been getting my head around what the corresponding issue for women around sexuality might be! Nancy Friday, in her book The Myth of Beauty claims that women learn from their mothers to have a poor/problematic relationship with their sexuality and genitals, and that the anger little girls are told nice girls don't have, gets projected onto men in later life.

As Mormonism sends strong messages to women to be "nice" (as in, not angry), and non-sexual or at least passive sexually, I am keen to see what the women on this list feel is women's version of the above challenge to men.

My reading, thinking and observation would suggest that it is probably something in the area of owning responsibility for being fully connected with and proud of their sexuality, but I am of the opposite gender looking in. I see few women who subvert that and turn it into sleaze, as men are prone to do, so what happens to that healthy sexual energy, when it gets stuffed down in women, and denied a healthy expression?

Daryl

Its an interesting question.

IMHO generally I think that the church has found itself in both scenarios - a root and cause scenrio. Most people I found, both men and women saw sexuality and the sex itself as "sacred and powerful", however by taking this concept to the extreme have caused it to have a "sleazy/obsessive" quality outside the former box, which consequentially makes the whole subject very taboo, which reinforces the negative side. Am I making sense so far?!

Generally, some of the attitudes I found were:

a) Any thoughs about sex outside of marriage were wrong - even though such thoughts are a healthy part of human nature!
b) Any sexual intimacy outside marriage is wrong and if you engage (member or not) you must be promiscuous - which is definitely not the case!
c) If you are gay you are most obviously promiscuous, long-term relationships do not happen and it is just solely abnormal - I even heard comments that if you are gay you must be perverted and have peadophilia tendencies - what a load of tosh!!

For me. I found it very hard to subdue my sexuality. I relished thoughts about people I fancied and did alot of fantasasing! I acted on those fantasies with the oh so taboo action of 'self gratification'! At times I felt hideously guilty, but at the same time felt sorry for those who seemed to hide from themselves in that respect. I thought I must have a severe problem if I couldn't control my appetites! I now realise I was entirely normal. I have always seen sexual intimacy as something special and an ultimate expression of love for a person, but do not believe this has to be solely between man and women or even in the realms of marriage (marriage isn't for everyone and not everyone can get married and not everyone has a partner!!).....

As a YSA, I am not sure I ever talked about intimacy or anything near......yet with non-member friends it was quite an open subject. It was never seen as sleazy or talked about crudely, it was just healthy discussion on certain topics, the way it all should be treated!

Not sure I have made any sense at all.....sometimes I just find myself babbling a way!! :Crazy: :D

[silverfox]

What does (normal) suppressed sexual energy take shape as in women?

Some context: I run separated men's groups, and I also have been involved in peer-support men's groups for over 13 years.

One book down here that has encouraged men's groups involvement is Steve Biddulph's book Manhood. In it he lists his 7 Steps to Manhood, the 2nd of which is:

Finding sacredness in your sexuality.

Of that issue the author says that for men, sex will be either sleazy and obsessive, or a sacred and powerful source of wellbeing. Our men's group plans to put a lot of effort into exploring that this year.

Recently I have been getting my head around what the corresponding issue for women around sexuality might be! Nancy Friday, in her book The Myth of Beauty claims that women learn from their mothers to have a poor/problematic relationship with their sexuality and genitals, and that the anger little girls are told nice girls don't have, gets projected onto men in later life.

As Mormonism sends strong messages to women to be "nice" (as in, not angry), and non-sexual or at least passive sexually, I am keen to see what the women on this list feel is women's version of the above challenge to men.

My reading, thinking and observation would suggest that it is probably something in the area of owning responsibility for being fully connected with and proud of their sexuality, but I am of the opposite gender looking in. I see few women who subvert that and turn it into sleaze, as men are prone to do, so what happens to that healthy sexual energy, when it gets stuffed down in women, and denied a healthy expression?

Daryl

Let me add a twist here.......the book says women learn from their mothers? Where do men learn their views regarding sex? (BTW, I agree with this mommy thing and I will PM you as to why. (don't want to get tooo personal publicly) )

I have found over my years of experience that men can complicate the sexual issue with women maybe more so than their upbringings. Mo'ism impacts what could be a healthy view of sex for men just as much as it does for women.

Example - if a girl is "promiscuous" (and this can only mean ONE time having sex) she is viewed as a ho, slut, etc and thus a negative reputation ensues. But if a boy is "promiscuous" he is considered a stud and the blame usually lies on the "hussy" who tempted him. It is very much a double standard. In and outside the church.

This tosses out confusion for girls/women. (and probably men, too????) When are women ALLOWED to be free of any sexual stigma and just be ourselves? Without fear of punishment or ridicule? We are damned if we do and damned if we don't. If we are not sexually open we are considered a prude, frigid, etc. If we are it is uncomfortable for men. They start wondering where this knowledge has come from, where this woman has been.

I've always been very open in all kinds of communication. And I have scared off quite a few men but then on the other hand attracted some men I would not have cared to attract.

Am I getting off track, off the course of where you wanted this thread to go? I just can't help feel that there is more to this than just mommy's influence and the church.

[lsands]

I don't think the Mormons have a corner on this market; this is a problem of the sin-guilt-shame approach of Christianity in general. I think much if not most of the problems we have in Mormonism are present in all of Christianity; Mo'ism just adds its own twist and intensity.

I have had the discussion about mixed messages for men and women with my sons in regards to hip-hop music and rap. The woman-hating themes in that music are blatant, and I find them very offensive. :mad:

I want to write about this subject in more detail later, but let me say this: I think most people, men and women, are disconnected from their sexuality. I recently read Sam Keen's book The Passionate Life (published about 20 years ago; I purchased it used at a bookstore in Salt Lake.) From that book I realized that our sexuality is an integral part of who we are in all aspects of our life. We compartmentalize it into a small box (or parts of our bodies: genitals) and only allow it to emerge in pre-authorized situations and people and times. We have so much fear about this energy that we've damn near killed it altogether.

I'm so glad you've raised this subject, Daryl. It's an area I've been thinking about a lot.

Laraine

[silverfox]

I don't think the Mormons have a corner on this market; this is a problem of the sin-guilt-shame approach of Christianity in general. I think much if not most of the problems we have in Mormonism are present in all of Christianity; Mo'ism just adds its own twist and intensity.

We have so much fear about this energy that we've damn near killed it altogether.

I'm so glad you've raised this subject, Daryl. It's an area I've been thinking about a lot.

Laraine

Yes, very interesting topic and I agree that Mo'ism doesn't have the corner on it. I don't think it's religion even alone in itself. I think some people (parents) just have some weird ideas regarding sex and pass it along whether religion is a part of it or not.

From all your experiences and/or observations, everyone, where is the fear coming from? What are we afraid of? Other's reactions? Our own reactions? Neither? It is all so very interesting.

[Born Free]

Let me add a twist here.......the book says women learn from their mothers? Where do men learn their views regarding sex? (BTW, I agree with this mommy thing and I will PM you as to why. (don't want to get tooo personal publicly) )


A big chunk of men's sexuality comes from their Dad, and that includes that he usually cannot express intimacy, boys learn that the only place they can get intimacy is with sex, so they come to believe that is a "package deal". So if a female sexual partner is unavailable, you (guys) are fresh out of any chance of intimacy, unless you are gay or bi-sexual.

He models how to relate to:

Intimacy,
ONes body,
Sensuality,
Women

whether by example or omission.

What I am looking for is that women rarely turn sex sleazy, but they appear to get wounded in another way. I suspect it may be that they have difficulty connecting with earthy sexuality, and trusting "randiness" without being self-judgemental and auto-activating slut scripts Being at odds with "down there" seems to be a lesson from Mum, that many appear to have to overcome.

I have attached a great Sam Keen quote re little boys disassociating. I am looking for the female equivalent.

Come on! There are some well thought, felt, and read women on this list. Shine more light on this for me?

Daryl

"“My earliest memory of what I did not yet know was sex was in my fourth year. On a warm Florida afternoon, Mother put me in a crib on the back porch with orders to take a nap. So that I would not be distracted, she removed all toys from easy reach. As endless minutes stretched into sleepless eternity punctuated only by the drone of an occasional fly, I searched for some way to brighten my exile. Lo and behold, I discovered a marvellous snake-like toy equipped with a sensory interactive device that caused it to change shapes. The more I played with it, the better I felt and the larger it became. And best of all, it was attached to me. How I had overlooked such an object until this time, I could not imagine. I was totally engaged in exploring the multiple potentialities of my new toy when I sensed the eyes upon me and heard Mother's voice from distant Sinai, "Sammy, nice boys don't do that."

Primal confusion clouded my body mind: "I want" and "You should," duty and desire, were at war with each other. The Mother Goddess announced that her face would shine upon me only if I was "nice," which meant not playing with my newly discovered erotic toy. But in the depth of my being, exploring this randy marvel felt like goodness incarnate. Caught in the spotlight of Her eyes, everything shifted and I became ashamed of what a moment before had been a source of growing pleasure and swelling pride. Right and wrong suddenly switched places and I was instructed that the good feelings in my penis were to be considered bad.

Exposed, bathed in the light of shame, I divided myself, Janus-like, into two persons to cope with the dilemma. I shaped one face into a "nice" mask and learned to perform in ways that would win the approval of the Mother Goddess and all the women who would subsequently re-present there. My second face turned toward the protective darkness. To avoid the threat of exposure and judgement, I became secretive and clandestine. My sexuality would henceforth be hidden under the cover of darkness. It would be many years before I discovered that the eyes from whom my carnal secrets were most hidden were my own.” Sam Keen – Hymns to an Unknown God – chapter Carnal Knowledge: Sex and Spirit.

[silverfox]

What does (normal) suppressed sexual energy take shape as in women?

Recently I have been getting my head around what the corresponding issue for women around sexuality might be! Nancy Friday, in her book The Myth of Beauty claims that women learn from their mothers to have a poor/problematic relationship with their sexuality and genitals, and that the anger little girls are told nice girls don't have, gets projected onto men in later life.

As Mormonism sends strong messages to women to be "nice" (as in, not angry), and non-sexual or at least passive sexually, I am keen to see what the women on this list feel is women's version of the above challenge to men.

My reading, thinking and observation would suggest that it is probably something in the area of owning responsibility for being fully connected with and proud of their sexuality, but I am of the opposite gender looking in. I see few women who subvert that and turn it into sleaze, as men are prone to do, so what happens to that healthy sexual energy, when it gets stuffed down in women, and denied a healthy expression?

Daryl

I guess I am trying to pinpoint exactly what it is you are looking for. So I will just share my experiences as a TBM and some ideas. Warning.....I feel an unorganized ramble coming on.....

I remember well being called into the bishop's office quite a few times and receiving a lecture regarding sexuality. As soon as it was common knowlege that I was dating a specific male I was always called in and reminded that this male individual has a chance to be called to go on a mission and that he is preparing for it. And that it was my responsibility to allow that opportunity and to not take it away from him. It didn't take long for me to understand the bishops were always talking about sex. Most of my relationships with Mo boys were very NON sexual except for one. And even then it was petting not real sex. And we both got hell for that. Ended up splitting up post haste. Too bad I really liked the dude.

I always felt as a TBM female the responsibility for all sexual scenarios was on ME. If a boy made a mistake sexually (no matter how minor) it was the girl's fault. How many times are Mo boys told to dump a girl because he is sexually attracted to her?

I remember in my early days as a new convert there was a boy in our ward who had gotten a girl pregnant. He was slated to go on a mission when this happened. He was allowed to continue with his plans with no interuption while the girl was disfellowshipped and left behind to have the baby on her own. WTF????? He went on his mission, came home and they didn't have anything to do with each other again. Now, maybe they didn't love each other or it was just casual sex. Okay, fine you don't have to marry her but to be allowed to go on like nothing had happened and the girl was punished....well, that's just silly and wrong. I remember her sitting in sacrament, not partaking of the sacrament, having that baby on her own, bringing her to church. She held her head proud...I give her that! But I always felt for her situation.

You ask what happens to that healthy sexuality when it is suppressed? (did I understand correctly?) IMHO, I feel it is released in other ways. Maybe a woman jogs, or spends her energy doing other things, daydreams, watches soap operas???? I dunno. I never really allowed my sexuality to be suppressed. I always felt the church was whacked on the subject from the beginning and was open about my feelings regarding the subject. (which got me into trouble)

But I wonder if eventually those bottled up feelings and urges may explode or implode into something detrimental and self destructive - an affair? Rebeling against the spouse or the family? Depression? Anxiety? Unhappiness? Feelings of unfulfillment and inadequacy? Shopaholics? Weight gain?

I am curious to read others' feedback.

I know the focus of this thread is on the female side....I am curious to hear about the male side as well.

[Born Free]

I guess I am trying to pinpoint exactly what it is you are looking for. So I will just share my experiences as a TBM and some ideas. Warning.....I feel an unorganized ramble coming on.....

I remember well being called into the bishop's office quite a few times and receiving a lecture regarding sexuality. As soon as it was common knowlege that I was dating a specific male I was always called in and reminded that this male individual has a chance to be called to go on a mission and that he is preparing for it. And that it was my responsibility to allow that opportunity and to not take it away from him. It didn't take long for me to understand the bishops were always talking about sex. Most of my relationships with Mo boys were very NON sexual except for one. And even then it was petting not real sex. And we both got hell for that. Ended up splitting up post haste. Too bad I really liked the dude.

I always felt as a TBM female the responsibility for all sexual scenarios was on ME. If a boy made a mistake sexually (no matter how minor) it was the girl's fault. How many times are Mo boys told to dump a girl because he is sexually attracted to her?

I remember in my early days as a new convert there was a boy in our ward who had gotten a girl pregnant. He was slated to go on a mission when this happened. He was allowed to continue with his plans with no interuption while the girl was disfellowshipped and left behind to have the baby on her own. WTF????? He went on his mission, came home and they didn't have anything to do with each other again. Now, maybe they didn't love each other or it was just casual sex. Okay, fine you don't have to marry her but to be allowed to go on like nothing had happened and the girl was punished....well, that's just silly and wrong. I remember her sitting in sacrament, not partaking of the sacrament, having that baby on her own, bringing her to church. She held her head proud...I give her that! But I always felt for her situation.

You ask what happens to that healthy sexuality when it is suppressed? (did I understand correctly?) IMHO, I feel it is released in other ways. Maybe a woman jogs, or spends her energy doing other things, daydreams, watches soap operas???? I dunno. I never really allowed my sexuality to be suppressed. I always felt the church was whacked on the subject from the beginning and was open about my feelings regarding the subject. (which got me into trouble)

But I wonder if eventually those bottled up feelings and urges may explode or implode into something detrimental and self destructive - an affair? Rebeling against the spouse or the family? Depression? Anxiety? Unhappiness? Feelings of unfulfillment and inadequacy? Shopaholics? Weight gain?

I am curious to read others' feedback.

I know the focus of this thread is on the female side....I am curious to hear about the male side as well.

Here is my take!

Male genitals are external, so when there is even mild arousal, it is harder to ignore, even in little boys.

Sam Keen's story above is extremely powerful for me because it shows how males discover the joys of their "sensory interactive device", and because Mom is their primary caregiver, she traditionally was the source of "don't" messages.

That creates a very deep and powerful split: One part wants to please this powerful female source to care and nurturance (and the the women who come to "re-present her" as Keen so accurately puts it), whilst the otehr goes underground and continues the pursuit of erotic arousal and pleasure furtively.

I argue this split is a major element of most men's fascination with things such as lesbianism, and threesomes, because in those contexts, they perceive (don't confuse perception with reality) the woman who provides to permission for his interest in sexuality, and she even matches his interest.

To stay stuck there, seeing woman as the eternal, all powerful "No" is to remain adolescent, always waiting for a woman to find his sexual interest disgusting. In that mindset, his sexuality must be expressed in defiance. It is also a place where he has not yet seen and acknowledged his mother as a sexual being in her own right, limiting her to being the nurturer, the breasts that always give, but never anchored in a full human being, who has needs.

Does that make any sense, particularly from a feminine perspective?

What I am specifically looking for is the particular sexual distortion, without the displacement onto other more acceptable behaviour and activities; the direct equivalent of males particular expression of shame.

Daryl

[silverfox]

Here is my take!

Male genitals are external, so when there is even mild arousal, it is harder to ignore, even in little boys.

Sam Keen's story above is extremely powerful for me because it shows how males discover the joys of their "sensory interactive device", and because Mom is their primary caregiver, she traditionally was the source of "don't" messages.

That creates a very deep and powerful split: One part wants to please this powerful female source to care and nurturance (and the the women who come to "re-present her" as Keen so accurately puts it), whilst the otehr goes underground and continues the pursuit of erotic arousal and pleasure furtively.

I argue this split is a major element of most men's fascination with things such as lesbianism, and threesomes, because in those contexts, they perceive (don't confuse perception with reality) the woman who provides to permission for his interest in sexuality, and she even matches his interest.

To stay stuck there, seeing woman as the eternal, all powerful "No" is to remain adolescent, always waiting for a woman to find his sexual interest disgusting. In that mindset, his sexuality must be expressed in defiance. It is also a place where he has not yet seen and acknowledged his mother as a sexual being in her own right, limiting her to being the nurturer, the breasts that always give, but never anchored in a full human being, who has needs.

Does that make any sense, particularly from a feminine perspective?

What I am specifically looking for is the particular sexual distortion, without the displacement onto other more acceptable behaviour and activities; the direct equivalent of males particular expression of shame.

Daryl

Yes this makes perfect sense. And I find it very interesting. I've been thinking about what you are specifically looking for as far as sexual distortion regarding the female gender and expressions of shame.

I will risk responding.

All I come back to is I've know many women who have become self destructive in a sexual manner. (multiple partners, unprotected sex, one night stands, etc) Once the seed of sexual shame is planted it appears a women can go either way.....frigid or promiscuous. (Just throwing out ideas based on my observations)

I think maybe as little girls in "normal" upbringings one would see their father as very non sexual. He is supposed to be the pillar of trust and security. Sex is not in the equation. So maybe for women our focus isn't so much the sexual regard of a relationship??? Does throwing sex into the equation cause some internal emotional conflict for women? Do women long more for the security, the love, the strength of a partner and for some reason this conflicts with our ideas of a sexual partner? Women have their own fantasies as well....maybe not a threesome, etc but the fantasies entail more emotional security than perhaps a man's typical fantasy which may be geared more toward just sex?

What do I know? I just find this all interesting and wanted to plug in my thoughts.

[miss taken]

What does (normal) suppressed sexual energy take shape as in women?

Some context: I run separated men's groups, and I also have been involved in peer-support men's groups for over 13 years.

One book down here that has encouraged men's groups involvement is Steve Biddulph's book Manhood. In it he lists his 7 Steps to Manhood, the 2nd of which is:

Finding sacredness in your sexuality.

Of that issue the author says that for men, sex will be either sleazy and obsessive, or a sacred and powerful source of wellbeing. Our men's group plans to put a lot of effort into exploring that this year.

Recently I have been getting my head around what the corresponding issue for women around sexuality might be! Nancy Friday, in her book The Myth of Beauty claims that women learn from their mothers to have a poor/problematic relationship with their sexuality and genitals, and that the anger little girls are told nice girls don't have, gets projected onto men in later life.

As Mormonism sends strong messages to women to be "nice" (as in, not angry), and non-sexual or at least passive sexually, I am keen to see what the women on this list feel is women's version of the above challenge to men.

My reading, thinking and observation would suggest that it is probably something in the area of owning responsibility for being fully connected with and proud of their sexuality, but I am of the opposite gender looking in. I see few women who subvert that and turn it into sleaze, as men are prone to do, so what happens to that healthy sexual energy, when it gets stuffed down in women, and denied a healthy expression?

Daryl

Gosh good question, hard to answer. Jesus's admonition was to be pure in thought not just in deed, I think he used this to condemn those who would condemn the adulteress (funny it was a female being stoned not a man!!!!)

I found that in an environment that says that to commit fornication/adultery is next in seriousness to murder, that keeping thoughts clean is the best way to keep yourself out of temptations way!!!

Not so easy in today's sex-drenched and sex-obsessed society.

It also helps to choose a partner for the 'right' as opposed to the 'wrong' reason. So, if you marry on a wave of 'lust' what do you do after you have had your lust satisfied, you then have to live with the person for the rest of your life, and if you are in the church, you would believe for the rest of eternity.

So, in the context of the high, exacting standards of the church, keeping yourself clean in thought is the first step to keeping everything in its proper perspective.

Is this denying sexuality or making it 'dirty'?? I never thought so, and was always taught that sex was 'sacred' and for use only in marriage.

I didn't have a problem with it, and don't feel I lost out in anyway.

But that's just me, perhaps a typical woman, who doesn't think that sex is that big a deal. Nice, but not imperative!!!

[lsands]

Sex between two people can be many things (some of which I've experienced, and some of which I have not.) It can be fun and playful, comforting and a way to assuage loneliness. It can be deeply erotic and lust-full (in a good way!). It can be the deepest expression of our humanity; it can cement a relationship and balance out the fighting and discord. It can create another human life. It can even connect people to God. And this is not a complete list.

Sex can also be engaged in obsessively, in an addictive way, and it can be only about genitals and physical pleasure, with no human connection at all. Casual sex, for example, can be a way to avoid intimacy. Pornography which is only about body parts is another example.

One aspect that has not been discused which has particular significance for women is how sex can be used for power and to wound. So many women (and some men, as well), have been molested, abused, raped. In Bosnia, rape was a tool of war, and was recognized as such later. Of course, this presents a distorted use of sexuality for both men AND women.

The dualistic model---that sex is either sleazy or sacred---doesn't work for me. And I have concerns about how we define "sacred" as well. The words "clean, pure, wholesome,", etc. can be used to limit people's thinking and actions even within the approved box for sexuality, marriage.

As I have thought about Daryl's question in my own life, all I can come up with is that I buried my sexuality, along with all of the other passionate parts of me that would have caused me to feel. I was deeply depressed for many years. I feel as if I am continually excavating and finding buried treasure---my own unique personhood! What a glorious adventure this is!

Laraine

P.S. Anyone here familiar with Eve Ensler's Vagina Monolgues? It's a play based on dozens of interviews that Ensler did. I read it several years ago, then saw it performed last year at the University of Utah. One of my daughter's friends, a student there, was a member of the "Vulva Chorus"! It is extremely well written and emotional---it may provide you with some of the info. you're looking for, Daryl.

BTW, it was performed here at Utah Valley State College also last year. As you might imagine, it was very controversial! In fact, an "unknown" donor offered to buy out every seat in the theater if the event organizers would agree NOT to perform it. They were turned down, and the show went on.

[Born Free]

Gosh good question, hard to answer. Jesus's admonition was to be pure in thought not just in deed, I think he used this to condemn those who would condemn the adulteress (funny it was a female being stoned not a man!!!!)

I found that in an environment that says that to commit fornication/adultery is next in seriousness to murder, that keeping thoughts clean is the best way to keep yourself out of temptations way!!!

Not so easy in today's sex-drenched and sex-obsessed society.

It also helps to choose a partner for the 'right' as opposed to the 'wrong' reason. So, if you marry on a wave of 'lust' what do you do after you have had your lust satisfied, you then have to live with the person for the rest of your life, and if you are in the church, you would believe for the rest of eternity.

So, in the context of the high, exacting standards of the church, keeping yourself clean in thought is the first step to keeping everything in its proper perspective.

Is this denying sexuality or making it 'dirty'?? I never thought so, and was always taught that sex was 'sacred' and for use only in marriage.

I didn't have a problem with it, and don't feel I lost out in anyway.

But that's just me, perhaps a typical woman, who doesn't think that sex is that big a deal. Nice, but not imperative!!!

I always had a problem with the Church's attitude toward sexuality and sacredness. For instance, I found 'crazy-making' the notion that an act that one day is degrading, lustful and sinful (pre-marriage), the day after is now magically transformed to 'sacred'. Little wonder many people report they can't straddle the gap.

IMHO, that requires some real mental gymnastics, and the sort I reject.

The Church speaks so much of worthy marriage, but its policies create high levels of young marriages, which statistically are far more prone to failure. Young people do not know themselves, and I would argue that young Mormons probably know themselves less than the great unwashed masses outside, due to the level of brainwashing and propoganda so prevalent in Mormonism.

For me, the idea of sacred lies more in the area of transformative, that which reminds us that we are much more than two bodies, so I don't see that marriage covenants offer any "special" increase in the liklihood of achieving that, but I am sure that a deep and committed relationship can be a positive factor.

[templenamesarah]

Finding sacredness in your sexuality.

My reading, thinking and observation would suggest that it is probably something in the area of owning responsibility for being fully connected with and proud of their sexuality, but I am of the opposite gender looking in. I see few women who subvert that and turn it into sleaze, as men are prone to do, so what happens to that healthy sexual energy, when it gets stuffed down in women, and denied a healthy expression?

Daryl

Howdy, Daryl.

In my view, the Morg most definitely tries to disconnect women from their natural, healthy sexuality, but the LDS Church is hardly alone in this endeavor. American culture in general is so crazy and split over sexuality, particularly when it comes to women, that it's a wonder anyone at all in the US can manage to have a healthy sex life.

I am embarrassed to admit that I am addicted to those trashy Fox Network "reality" tv shows. Did anyone see the episode of Trading Spouses where the fundamental Christian woman (not LDS) switched with the Jewish mom? The Christian mom went to work on the Jewish dad, trying to get him to lecture his daughters about sexual purity, using the candy bar metaphor. (No man is going to want a candy bar that has other men's fingerprints all over it.)