ALarson Posted February 7, 2018 Share Posted February 7, 2018 (edited) 13 minutes ago, rongo said: What if the person brings it up (i.e., not the priesthood leader at all) and asks? Not even then? Let's get real here. What person (especially a young man or young woman) is going to bring up that topic? And say..."...Hey Bishop, let's talk about masturbation. What can you tell me about it?" That's not going to happen (at least in my experience or from what I know about the youth). If a young man (or woman) who is preparing for a mission needs to confess and repent (which usually also involves the viewing of porn), then hear the confession and help him through his repentance. But details regarding masturbation do not have to be part of the discussion. I've heard too many instances where a Bishop (or other Priesthood leader) wants to hear too many details and ask too many probing questions. That's where it become inappropriate. And a leader should never just out of the blue, bring up the topic of masturbation. Period. Edited February 7, 2018 by ALarson 3 Link to comment
webbles Posted February 7, 2018 Share Posted February 7, 2018 25 minutes ago, ALarson said: Let's get real here. What person (especially a young man or young woman) is going to bring up that topic? And say..."...Hey Bishop, let's talk about masturbation. What can you tell me about it?" That's not going to happen (at least in my experience or from what I know about the youth). It does happen. I did it as a teenager. Link to comment
ALarson Posted February 7, 2018 Share Posted February 7, 2018 17 minutes ago, webbles said: It does happen. I did it as a teenager. What did you ask? (If you don't mind sharing....if not, I do understand.) In my experience (several bishoprics), this has never happened unless a young man is wanting to repent in preparation for a mission. Link to comment
Investigator Posted February 7, 2018 Share Posted February 7, 2018 There have been tens of thousands of child abusers, perpetrators of domestic abuse, rapists, drug dealers, abusive ecclesiastic leaders, and corrupt politicians and attorneys etc. who have been brought to justice because those who were being abused had the courage to record the abuse and brought it into the light. No one would have believed them had they not had that tool of being able to record what was going on without fear of recrimination and the ability to bring that evidence forward. The only people who will benefit from this proposed legislation are those who in power who seek to hide what they are doing and do not want the truth to be known. Additionally, judges and lawyers will benefit as those who do want to be able to record their conversations will have to get a court order to do so; thus, further lining the pockets of judges and lawyers “that they might get money according to the suits which [ are] brought before them”. Additionally, ecclesiastical leaders should not “seek deep to hide their counsel from the Lord” or anyone else. Law makers of Utah will be held accountable if they pass this legislation. Link to comment
rongo Posted February 7, 2018 Share Posted February 7, 2018 1 hour ago, ALarson said: Let's get real here. What person (especially a young man or young woman) is going to bring up that topic? And say..."...Hey Bishop, let's talk about masturbation. What can you tell me about it?" That's not going to happen (at least in my experience or from what I know about the youth). It's happened to me. Multiple times. Boys and girls alike. I've been asked why it's wrong. I've been asked for help/counsel in stopping doing it. Etc. Link to comment
ALarson Posted February 7, 2018 Share Posted February 7, 2018 (edited) 29 minutes ago, rongo said: It's happened to me. Multiple times. Boys and girls alike. I've been asked why it's wrong. Who brought the topic up? Who said the "M" word first? If it was a young woman or young man, that brought it up out of the blue, that is so foreign to me. Most boys (and girls) who are young teens are mortified at the thought of discussing that with an adult and very embarrassed at the thought of talking about it at all. In all the years I've been doing birthday and other interviews with the YM and YW had any of them say something like: "Hey....can we talk about masturbation?" 29 minutes ago, rongo said: I've been asked for help/counsel in stopping doing it. Etc. This...yes. But only in preparation for putting papers in or wanting to serve a mission soon. A want to repent prior to leaving on their mission. Edited February 7, 2018 by ALarson 1 Link to comment
The Nehor Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, ALarson said: Let's get real here. What person (especially a young man or young woman) is going to bring up that topic? And say..."...Hey Bishop, let's talk about masturbation. What can you tell me about it?" That's not going to happen (at least in my experience or from what I know about the youth). I can tell you that my bishop has said he has had such questions from our youth (without naming names of course). It was never asked that way I am sure. It is more them questioning whether it is a sin (probably without naming it). I am sure it is not everyone but the Youth can confide in and question the Bishop in a way many do not feel comfortable doing with their parents. I can tell you that if I had a question about sexual sin the last people I would have wanted to ask were my parents. I would have asked my Bishop. I never had any questions though. My parents gave a fairly thorough sex ed awkward conversation when I was young. Edited February 8, 2018 by The Nehor 1 Link to comment
The Nehor Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 44 minutes ago, Investigator said: There have been tens of thousands of child abusers, perpetrators of domestic abuse, rapists, drug dealers, abusive ecclesiastic leaders, and corrupt politicians and attorneys etc. who have been brought to justice because those who were being abused had the courage to record the abuse and brought it into the light. No one would have believed them had they not had that tool of being able to record what was going on without fear of recrimination and the ability to bring that evidence forward. The only people who will benefit from this proposed legislation are those who in power who seek to hide what they are doing and do not want the truth to be known. Additionally, judges and lawyers will benefit as those who do want to be able to record their conversations will have to get a court order to do so; thus, further lining the pockets of judges and lawyers “that they might get money according to the suits which [ are] brought before them”. Additionally, ecclesiastical leaders should not “seek deep to hide their counsel from the Lord” or anyone else. Law makers of Utah will be held accountable if they pass this legislation. I think your indignant commentary missed that the proposed legislation does not cover cases of abuse and no court order is needed to record a conversation in such a situation. 2 Link to comment
ALarson Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 (edited) 26 minutes ago, The Nehor said: I can tell you that my bishop has said he has had such questions from our youth (without naming names of course). It was never asked that way I am sure. It is more them questioning whether it is a sin (probably without naming it). I am sure it is not everyone but the Youth can confide in and question the Bishop in a way many do not feel comfortable doing with their parents. I can tell you that if I had a question about sexual sin the last people I would have wanted to ask were my parents. I would have asked my Bishop. I never had any questions though. My parents gave a fairly thorough sex ed awkward conversation when I was young. Yeah...mine too But, I would not have ever asked my Bishop to teach me about sex. I can only go on my experience (and also what my Bishop has related on this as well with his experiences in general). I've never once had a young teen be the one to bring up the dreaded "M" word and they all for sure don't need to be educated regarding what it is. I have had those prepping to go on their mission have concerns and a wish to repent. Edited February 8, 2018 by ALarson 2 Link to comment
juliann Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 1 hour ago, Investigator said: Additionally, judges and lawyers will benefit as those who do want to be able to record their conversations will have to get a court order to do so; thus, further lining the pockets of judges and lawyers Where in the world are you getting this from? You haven’t read the bill that is going to bring on the end of world, have you. Newsflash! You CAN record abusers! It allows for that! And whatever you do, don’t move to California! 1 Link to comment
Jeanne Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 1 hour ago, The Nehor said: I can tell you that my bishop has said he has had such questions from our youth (without naming names of course). It was never asked that way I am sure. It is more them questioning whether it is a sin (probably without naming it). I am sure it is not everyone but the Youth can confide in and question the Bishop in a way many do not feel comfortable doing with their parents. I can tell you that if I had a question about sexual sin the last people I would have wanted to ask were my parents. I would have asked my Bishop. I never had any questions though. My parents gave a fairly thorough sex ed awkward conversation when I was young. Why is your bishop telling you this???? Link to comment
Amulek Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 20 hours ago, sunstoned said: The timing on this is interesting. Perhaps this is coincidental. But this legislation is being pushed with the church's support just as the church's practice of ecclesiastical closed door interviews with miners is coming under fire. It would be interesting to know the details of the motivation for this bill. Maybe it's just to help Mitt Romney from being secretly recorded by waitstaff at future fundraising events. Link to comment
provoman Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 20 hours ago, juliann said: CA has had a 2 party law for as long as I'm aware of and nary one Mormon has been called out on it. People who are going on alert because they hear the M word haven't read the bill. It excepts every situation they are lamenting. What about abuse victims! Well, it allows for recordings. What about crime! Well, it exempts that... It even exempts recording solicitors. LOL But back in the real world, in CA I have protection that an off hand comment that may not be PC won't be recorded and blasted all over the internet so I'll lose my job. Most of all, isn't it interesting that the Trib didn't want its readers to see the bill? Where is a link? Could that be because it doesn't really prevent recording if you "reasonably believe" that even psychological abuse is going to occur. I'm not shy to call out things I think are harmful in church culture, but this one is a made-up crisis that is about as dishonest as it gets. https://le.utah.gov/~2018/bills/static/HB0330.html The exemptions make the law useless on its face, thus further demonstrating the unnecessary nature of the law. Link to comment
The Nehor Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 (edited) 3 hours ago, Jeanne said: Why is your bishop telling you this???? Edit: On second thought I probably should not answer that. I can say it was mentioned only on very general terms. Edited February 8, 2018 by The Nehor 1 Link to comment
rongo Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 5 hours ago, ALarson said: Who brought the topic up? Who said the "M" word first? They did. "Can I ask you a question? Why is masturbation so bad? I've heard that it's a natural part of growing up. Why is it a sin?" Or, "I really want to stop doing it, but I keep slipping up. What can I do?" Things like that. If it was a young woman or young man, that brought it up out of the blue, that is so foreign to me. Most boys (and girls) who are young teens are mortified at the thought of discussing that with an adult and very embarrassed at the thought of talking about it at all. In general, I agree. It does seem like youth and people in general are comfortable enough to talk to me about all sorts of stuff I'm not sure I could if the roles were reversed. In all the years I've been doing birthday and other interviews with the YM and YW had any of them say something like: "Hey....can we talk about masturbation?" 1) I think it is much less common to bring things like this up with a counselor. I think people intuitively sense that this is a "bishop" item. 2) I also haven't had this in annual or semi-annual interviews, but it also hasn't usually been in TR, ordination, mission or temple interviews (some have, though). Usually, the person makes an appointment specifically to talk about this. It's on their heart and conscience. It also seems to me to be much less difficult for women with problems to talk about this with their bishop than it would be with another woman (as some advocate), or with their parents if they are teens. And while this problem is still more of a male problem, it is increasingly something that happens with women, too. Link to comment
ALarson Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 11 hours ago, rongo said: They did. "Can I ask you a question? Why is masturbation so bad? I've heard that it's a natural part of growing up. Why is it a sin?" I honestly think that's great you have this type of rapport with your youth. 2 Link to comment
stemelbow Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 if the Church wants to stop seeing embarrassing recordings of it's leaders online, then perhaps it should start by not doing press conferences. Link to comment
kiwi57 Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 4 hours ago, stemelbow said: if the Church wants to stop seeing embarrassing recordings of it's leaders online, then perhaps it should start by not doing press conferences. I'm not aware that the Church was embarrassed by the press conference. I'm sure the brethren knew in advance that there would be some who could not help subjecting it to the most hostile parsing possible, but that's just par for the course. Link to comment
stemelbow Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 36 minutes ago, kiwi57 said: I'm not aware that the Church was embarrassed by the press conference. I'm sure the brethren knew in advance that there would be some who could not help subjecting it to the most hostile parsing possible, but that's just par for the course. I think a good sign of whether it was embarrassing or not is whether they do another press conference or not. I suspect everyone involved realizes it was at least in parts embarrassing. But if you don't see it, more power to you. My comment was not meant to be taken all that seriously, anyway. Link to comment
CV75 Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 9 hours ago, ALarson said: I honestly think that's great you have this type of rapport with your youth. I once had distraught parents ask me to counsel their teen daughter who had told them that she was having oral sex with her boyfriend. I obliged, and when I asked her what kind of "oral sex" she was having, she said, "Kissing." Link to comment
Calm Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 So apparently this got defeated because only the Church was for it. Utah is apparently not a theocracy after all. https://www.sltrib.com/news/2018/02/06/mormon-church-interested-in-bill-that-could-prevent-recording-bishop-interviews/ PS: it is the same link as earlier, the Trib just updated the story today leaving the original story at the bottom 3 Link to comment
rongo Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 This just happened at a high school in our county my brother used to teach at (my brother is now an assistant principal at another school). http://www.pinalcentral.com/san_tan_valley_sentinel/local_news/poston-butte-vice-principal-resigns-over-offensive-language/article_206da911-bf96-5bad-bd69-6e7b0c1983e4.html The thing about this, and things like this, is: even if you were to go after the student for recording it with a law, the damage is done. The guy is still going to be fired/made to resign. When are people going to learn that you need to act properly at all times and in all places? Link to comment
clarkgoble Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 (edited) 17 hours ago, stemelbow said: I think a good sign of whether it was embarrassing or not is whether they do another press conference or not. I suspect everyone involved realizes it was at least in parts embarrassing. But if you don't see it, more power to you. My comment was not meant to be taken all that seriously, anyway. They'll do more press conferences although I doubt anyone will pay attention to them. As you know I thought the press conference was a failure although I meant specific things by that. I think a lot of the divide is over rhetorical style with some people wanting people to speak in their style not older styles. But I wouldn't say the press conference was embarrassing. There were a few parts that bothered me that clearly didn't think through how things would appear on video. That seems a different matter though. So I think you're exaggerating a lot here. I think they just need to spend time prepping for such things. Where prepping involves people asking the obvious questions in different ways, videoing the response, and playing that back so they can adjust their words, facial expressions and so forth. i.e. media 101. 12 hours ago, Calm said: So apparently this got defeated because only the Church was for it. Utah is apparently not a theocracy after all. https://www.sltrib.com/news/2018/02/06/mormon-church-interested-in-bill-that-could-prevent-recording-bishop-interviews/ PS: it is the same link as earlier, the Trib just updated the story today leaving the original story at the bottom More it got defeated because of how the Tribune framed it. IMO. This is a relatively uncontroversial law most states already have. Utah's really an outlier for not having it. My guess is we're seeing the Tribunes strategy to get people to pay to get past the new paywall. The interesting question, given most won't pay for the Tribune, is whether this sort of sensationalism with a subtle (or in this case not so subtle) anti-Church bias, will be as effective when not as many people are reading it. Presumably some will get copied and pasted and passed around. However they are losing the ability for people to merely paste a link on Facebook or Twitter and generate outrage. Edited February 9, 2018 by clarkgoble 1 Link to comment
Gray Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 4 minutes ago, clarkgoble said: This is a relatively uncontroversial law most states already have. Utah's really an outlier for not having it. Only 11 states require that all parties consent to a recording. 1 Link to comment
clarkgoble Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 39 minutes ago, Gray said: Only 11 states require that all parties consent to a recording. Huh. You're right. I was confusing it with the hidden camera law which all states have. But for audio alone there's not explicit bans, although often they're banned where there's an expectation of privacy. So hidden recording where there's an expectation of privacy is covered by eavesdropping laws and involves more than 11 states. For instance Arizona requires consent if there's an expectation that a conversation is private. 2 Link to comment
Recommended Posts