Calm

Which may or may not be a third group, which could be quite small or quite large or most likely in my view, a symbolic number, one that is used probably to show his influence was significant imo.

This is a very good, accurate analysis in my view based off of my own classes and research since university as well as discussions with working therapists. Impressive. But much of my stuff is out of date though this honestly feels like such a basic standard that has consistently been proven more effective and it intuitively more sensible, I doubt that it will ever get dumped. Obviously if a client feels uncomfortable with a therapist they are less likely to participate even if forced to go. My daughter was a prime example of this, she just withdrew and refused to speak for the session. This is one reason why ‘fit’ is so important in the therapeutic relationship, if the client won’t open up, not much to work with. One of the fastest way to increase discomfort is for someone to feel judged. Avoiding judgment while helping the client see realistic consequences of their behaviour as well as helping them recognize there are other options to choose from which will result in different consequences is the hallmark of a good therapist, imo. A lot of therapists do personal therapy for themselves so that they learn to recognize their own biases, triggers, and also very important their own blind spots so as to make it less likely their own issues and own preferences prevent them from being effective with their clients, especially needed when it comes to judgment. That way they are better able to do what most of them went into the field for, help those who reach out to them for help.

But do you treat these as a systemic or cultural issue or as individual events, where the issue is one person’s behaviour with limited impact on society? Do you discuss these as something we need to prevent, that they show troubling patterns of behaviour we need to stop being normalized, etc? Are they a cause for you like gender affirming care or other transgender issues? Serious question as I want to know your own perception of your comments.

Except I am not dismissing your arguments for that reason and I am not addressing this lack of balance to make an argument. It’s a lack of understanding on my part why you are so focused on a small issue, it’s so important to you if one measures by time and effort spent on it while a much greater issue is a diminutive interest for you by the same measure (people spend time and resources on what matters to them). I am wondering why it actually matters to you because if it was simply that girls and boys were being harmed it makes much more sense to invest time and effort into a persistent and dramatically larger issue causing harm than a smaller one. First deal with that which harms the most, then seeks out lesser harms. At this point sexualization is a pervasive element in our culture, ignoring it (and by that I mean you pretty much push aside and spend very little time in the past when I bring up such things) is like ignoring a malignant bone cancer while focusing on potentially cancerous moles (many of which aren’t likely to be cancerous). PS: while I believe bigotry is one reason that some people focus on sexualization from some in the queer community, I don’t believe that’s the only reason why someone might spend an inordinate amount of time on that aspect of sexualization while ignoring the greater social context that such is rooted in and is most often displayed in heterosexual sexualization. Why you don’t see me ranting much on this board (I admit I have probably ranted about Dehlin, Daybell, and Tim Ballard and likely a few others)is because I don’t spend huge amounts of time and effort on arguments that will have little impact, including providing information. I don’t see constant repetition of the same claims that aren’t particularly well grounded as that persuasive for one thing. Also, I define rants as longwinded arguments that are more inflammatory than solid documentation (meaning actual psychologists discussing it academically and possible interpreting it in more popular language if dealing in psychology, but someone who knows the technical stuff as well to avoid the misinterpretations that happen so often when amateurs interpret technical language…because they don’t understand what is relevant and what isn’t, methodology, etc….like supplements being pushed as effective based on rat studies).

Apparently yes if you accept there are appropriate religious contexts for what other people see as adultery because they don’t believe God commanded it, but the client is of the religious belief God commanded it, correct? If for example, Joseph and Emma had gone to couples counseling over the practice and the therapist was nonLDS, it would have under that standard been appropriate for that therapist to encourage Emma to look at it from her husband’s POV, to trust him and not push for details if he didn’t believe it was right to share them because Joseph believed he should obey God and Emma should support him in that. —— Do you see that others argue against plural marriage and they define it as adultery because they don’t believe God would inspire anyone to live that way and therefore it’s the polygamist’s own wishful thinking or family pressure or whatever, not the Spirit, that convinces them…therefore they see no difference between that and someone convincing themselves it’s right because of other forms of wishful thinking?

But the context is not a religious discussion on the marriage, but the standards a therapist should be using. And if you insist that the term adultery, etc, do not apply to JS within that context, do you agree you are providing your own personal religious beliefs to argue such?

Academic or popular references?

Just like a man may feel a moral duty to defend his country, he could feel a moral duty to strengthen it by having children he raises to be contributing citizens.

But are you arguing in the beginning of this thread on religious grounds against this so-called attack on marriage (I used “so-called” because I don’t see it as a reasonable interpretation of the guidelines, the criticism seems to me written by someone who does not understand the purpose and methodology of mainstream psychotherapy)? Or are you arguing from a social stance…our societal norms/standards of marriage?

Why don’t we see massive rants against the increasing sexualization of young girls by the straight community from you, Smac? https://www.apa.org/pi/women/programs/girls/report Straight sexualization of young girls is more prevalent, has actually been studied and not just protested against, and significant harm has been documented, not just claimed.

I think the question is if it’s happening to the extent it’s being claimed and involving the people that are being targeted the most. That it’s happening is likely true, but it seems to me someone is ignoring the elephant in the room to instead rant about a much smaller issue. I personally see the heterosexual community as sexualizing young girls and also boys to a massive extent. You only have to look at the typical age of models starting out fr adult clothing and this has been going decades, not a very recent development. Why did this not catch the eye of those claiming to want to prevent the sexualization and grooming of children? https://prostasia.org/blog/underage-models-in-the-art-and-business-of-fashion/ Why isn’t there a massive protest and push for laws to not use underage models in adult runways/fashion shoots. At best we are getting some self regulation, but it took till not too long ago apparently to get it going. Kids are much, much more likely to see this stuff on ads, etc than the queer communities unusual dress standards.

Why do you see there is a right to privilege deeply held religious ideology, but don’t give the same respect to deeply held moral ideology? Why is an identical moral duty not respected by you as much as the same religious duty (to raise good children who will then help others and make the community, faith or social) better?

So you wold be okay with the break off sects still secretly practicing plural marriage as they 1) believe they are following God’s divine commanded, 2) have been highly persecuted, and 3) if they regulated it so as not to be abusive, involving only consenting adults, etc? Ignore the fact the Church has declared them apostate since they feel the same way about us. There is no way to empirically demonstrate who is right. Just judge by what standard you describe here. This could also be any Christian or Muslim or Jewish or other group that believes polygamy is divinely mandated, but are persecuted because of it.

I very much wish we did this.

If the person believes that the cheating is a good thing morally because it makes them and the other feel better and the nonmonogamist believes they have a moral right to do so, what is the fundamental difference besides if God actually commanded it (which we may satisfactorily prove for ourselves, but no one else at this time). For example, maybe the person believes it’s their moral duty to have children to contribute in a lasting way to society and his wife can’t get pregnant. Both Joseph and the current non monogamist believe they were acting morally, correct?

Spam reported

I wanted 4, my husband told me 12 when we were first dating before I knew how to tell when he was joking or not. I figured we end up with 4. I liked the symmetry of that number. Figured two kids per parent was very workable. Could even space them out three or four years and still not be too old. My mom tanked with her 5 child (7th pregnancy) and I didn’t want that happening to my kids (she was so present as a mother for us until that happened and then it felt we were left on our own, no more help with school, no more fun art projects, no mom in charge of church parties, no parties pretty much). And that is why I ended up with two spaced 8 years apart. I basically was a zombie with my first pregnancy. I wanted my son to be old enough he could fix his own meals and arrange to play with friends, etc if that happened with the second. Second pregnancy wasn’t as bad, but my daughter was a full time job and by the time she was in kindergarten it was obviously not a good idea to try for one more. We were going to adopt, but that was wishful thinking. Not one person in the Church has ever suggested I wasn’t living the commandment to multiply. My husband is the only one who really suffered, I think. Being a dad and grandpa is his favorite thing, he should have had more opportunities. I did feel some pressure from my mother-in-law for the first pregnancy even though I was in school. She was not a college grad and her daughters all got pregnant before graduating if they went (most got nursing degrees and worked). My family was the opposite.

Very clearly explained, imo. Aligns with what I was taught in the psych at BYU. You have to start where the client is, not where you are.

As far as I am aware, Joseph never said God commanded him to lie, only to engage in plural marriage. The lie part seems in my view to be Joseph wanting to make both God and Emma happy when he couldn’t do so honestly. I don’t believe Joseph made the right choice here with lying to Emma. I believe God commanded plural marriage though maybe not in the way it was practiced. I don’t believe God commands people to lie, though I don’t believe lying is inherently sinful. When it’s done to protect others from significant immoral harm I see it as reasonable, lying to a Nazi kind of thing; when it’s done to protect the other from discomfort, having to cope with the difficulty of life when they are capable of handling it, I see it as an immature and lazy choice though maybe not sinful. When it’s done to protect oneself from a loved one’s anger or to avoid personal conflict, I see lying as selfish and therefore sinful. At this point, I see Joseph’s choice as both lazy and selfish. Emma deserved honesty given what she had sacrificed for him…and just because she was his chosen companion. Emma might have divorced him if he had been honest from the start, but it seems unlikely given she stuck with him even after knowing what she knew. It would have been much more troublesome for both from the beginning it seems like though if he had been honest. Overall harm is pure speculation, but if it were me, the lying would have hurt me until I died. I might forgive, but not to be trusted, etc, with the truth….that says something about how my spouse sees me. I do believe Joseph choosing to lie to Emma was wrong as even if he did it to protect her, I find it hard to believe he didn’t realize she would eventually find out surely and be hurt by the lying. I am concerned with his public lies as I believe consenting adults have privacy rights about their relationships they choose. It’s a problem for me though when it involves church members or those investigating the church sincerely who might have a problem with plural marriage. The younger ages do bother me, but that did match the culture even if not the usual mode. The whole attitude towards women overall in the greater culture as well as the local one troubles me much more and I see the younger ages as part of that, so I look on that accusation as missing the point.

I don’t.

I blame TV and movies not being up to date. They portray a psychiatrist as doing both therapy and medications. I nor my daughter have never had actual talk therapy from a psychiatrist and we have been to a number of them. They just don’t have the time to do both, there are too few out there apparently, so they are booked with just dispensing the drugs (after talking about issues and what drugs might help, if any). Most we went to had talk therapists associated with them they referred clients to.

Yes, this is the hard part. I have been to 5 different therapists. Maybe one was a good fit (unfortunately she moved before I could find out for sure). The others helped, it was definitely worth it (especially the couples one), but for the time invested I felt I should have gotten more out of it. Unfortunately that might have been impossible at the time due to lack of awareness of autism in older women as that may be a big contributor to my frustrations and areas where I see therapy would be helpful in helping me figure my life out. Two of them were for my daughter and I just piggybacked. One was a horrible fit for her (specialized in diabetes and anxiety, so on paper looked good), she just shut down. He was recommended. If I was willing to let her have a meltdown, force her to go in by herself, maybe that could have helped, but that looked like it would be traumatizing as it was (again, we didn’t know about the autism in the family and she is not what one typically thinks of, she reads “shy” and “introverted”).

That is the solution to this argument I have heard before, he didn’t just want to stop the Plan from being fulfilled, he was too invested in corrupting and pulling down others and wouldn’t have the chance otherwise. I am kind of surprised NoFear hadn’t heard the “why didn’t Satan just sit on his hands and keep his mouth shut” argument. I heard it back in seminary, iirc. If not at least in college. I thought it was a common part of the conversation. That can be answered by the possibility God had a variation where he would give the necessary knowledge for procreation eventually (since this is all speculation anyway).

Not being in the US or Canada, I wonder if there is a different procedure.

Ether93….are you not in the US? Would this be what I would call a mortgage or something else? That and the R for the currency suggests South Africa (I can delete this info if you are uncomfortable with it, but you might want to change the money to US dollars and “home bond” to “mortgage” if so). If you are outside the US and Canada or other dense LDS populations, that could explain why they just didn’t get a new bishop (smaller membership pool) and possibly why the investigation took so long. And maybe they don’t have the automatic audits as often? It makes sense to call for one to ensure Ether93 is not held accountable for anything incorrectly. I should have said first off “welcome to the board and congrats on the new baby”, but also hope you can get both this and your financial difficulties resolved soon. It must be very stressful having a new baby with this hanging over your head. Is it your first?