Tacenda Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 21 hours ago, canard78 said: Threads even on this board have been shut down for not being "implicit" enough, so had initially suggested the conversation not be overly explicit in nature. I agree with you, however, that the talk tiptoed too much around certain language. The ambiguity in her language meant that many could be left with the wrong impression of what does and does not constitute "purity" in sexual relationships. I listened last night to more of her talk, she did mention sexual intimacy at one point, but will need to find where now.
amo Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 (edited) On 1/9/2017 at 2:28 PM, Scott Lloyd said: ... I had been asked to help pass the sacrament because I was one of the few priesthood holders in the meeting wearing a white shirt ... You are kidding, right ? (If your off-topic was ok, mine should be 2, right ? ) Edited January 11, 2017 by amo
thesometimesaint Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 20 hours ago, Jane_Doe said: It has to do with being pure. Being pure effects everything, including marital intimacy and sex. For example, a spouse which abuses the other is going to have an unhealthy relationship and have lesser happiness because of it, including in the sexual category. The abused spouse will always be holding back, and the abuser disregards them. If the spouses were to respect and treat each other as they should then they could more fully connect on every level. Non sequitur. Is lack of sexual purity, whatever that means, an indication of abusiveness?
Jane_Doe Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 (edited) 45 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: Non sequitur. Is lack of sexual purity, whatever that means, an indication of abusiveness? You're reversing cause and effect: abusiveness CAUSES lack of purity and less fulfilling martial intimacy. Lying CAUSES lack of purity and less fulfilling martial intimacy. Cheating CAUSES lack of purity and less fulfilling martial intimacy. Etc. There are MANY things which can cause lack of purity and less fulfilling martial intimacy. And lack of sexual intimacy can result from many more things than lack of purity. Therefore we cannot remotely automatically assume "you are not have good sex, he must be abusive!". There are many other possible causes of poor intimacy, not just abuse. Edited January 11, 2017 by Jane_Doe 3
Thinking Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 21 hours ago, Jane_Doe said: If the spouses were to respect and treat each other as they should then they could more fully connect on every level. True, and the Holy Ghost doesn't need to be anywhere around during marvelous marital intimacy. 2
pogi Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 On 1/9/2017 at 5:06 AM, canard78 said: "The more pure you are, the more marvelous your marital intimacy will be" To me, purity means spiritual/physical chastity, virtue, honor, restraint, decency, freedom from guilt or shame, honesty, integrity, temperance, uprightness, and singleness of heart. I don't think it matters whether or not she was talking about physical intimacy or not. She is absolutely right that physical intimacy (or not) is much more "marvelous" when it is more than something purely physical. All of the virtues of purity improve trust, respect, and oneness, which improves intimacy in every form. Who would not want these qualities in a spouse? The reason you want these qualities in a spouse is because it will deepen intimacy - not just physical. Without the connection of emotional and spiritual intimacy, physical intimacy is cheap. 3
Bobbieaware Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 26 minutes ago, Thinking said: True, and the Holy Ghost doesn't need to be anywhere around during marvelous marital intimacy. If the couple live their lives in the way that enables the Holy Ghost to becomes their constant companion, then the Spirit of God will be present and sanctify their participation in the most sacred and holy act on earth. God created sex and in his mind there's nothing dirty or obscene about it, so long as is engaged in within the bounds he has set. 1
Jeanne Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 Ew....this I will never understand. Intimacy is personal and where a couple learns more about eachother and desires. Other than mutual love for eachother and for God..I think it is tacky to have the HG involved at all. Ew... 1
thesometimesaint Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 1 hour ago, Jane_Doe said: You're reversing cause and effect: abusiveness CAUSES lack of purity and less fulfilling martial intimacy. Lying CAUSES lack of purity and less fulfilling martial intimacy. Cheating CAUSES lack of purity and less fulfilling martial intimacy. Etc. There are MANY things which can cause lack of purity and less fulfilling martial intimacy. And lack of sexual intimacy can result from many more things than lack of purity. Therefore we cannot remotely automatically assume "you are not have good sex, he must be abusive!". There are many other possible causes of poor intimacy, not just abuse. No. You can beat the heck out of your spouse and still be sexual pure, what ever that means. You can lie through your teeth every day and still be sexually pure, whatever that means
Jane_Doe Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 1 hour ago, Thinking said: True, and the Holy Ghost doesn't need to be anywhere around during marvelous marital intimacy. If the spouse are treating themselves and each other with God-like respect, there's a good chance the HG is there already
Jane_Doe Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 43 minutes ago, pogi said: To me, purity means spiritual/physical chastity, virtue, honor, restraint, decency, freedom from guilt or shame, honesty, integrity, temperance, uprightness, and singleness of heart. I don't think it matters whether or not she was talking about physical intimacy or not. She is absolutely right that physical intimacy (or not) is much more "marvelous" when it is more than something purely physical. All of the virtues of purity improve trust, respect, and oneness, which improves intimacy in every form. Who would not want these qualities in a spouse? The reason you want these qualities in a spouse is because it will deepen intimacy - not just physical. Without the connection of emotional and spiritual intimacy, physical intimacy is cheap. Amen!
Jane_Doe Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 36 minutes ago, Jeanne said: Ew....this I will never understand. Intimacy is personal and where a couple learns more about eachother and desires. Other than mutual love for eachother and for God..I think it is tacky to have the HG involved at all. Ew... The HG isn't a peeping tom- don' worry about that. 1
Jane_Doe Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 30 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: No. You can beat the heck out of your spouse and still be sexual pure, what ever that means. You can lie through your teeth every day and still be sexually pure, whatever that means We're talking about being pure- the entirety of your person. Not just some type of "sexually pure", what ever that means. 1
thesometimesaint Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 9 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said: The HG isn't a peeping tom- don' worry about that. Why?
Jane_Doe Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 (edited) 19 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: Why? A peeping tom is some one who watches events for some form of sexual excitement. The HG is not this. And frankly, the HG / rest of the Godhead see everything everyone does, sexually or other, throughout all of time, regardless of people's lives are being lived. Edited January 11, 2017 by Jane_Doe
ERMD Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 I really like this: http://www.familylifeeducation.org/gilliland/procgroup/Souls.htm
canard78 Posted January 11, 2017 Author Posted January 11, 2017 16 hours ago, BlueDreams said: well, I had a whole presentation about that for my YSA ward for an FHE night. If you like, you're welcome to see the handout I had. The gist I've got down is giving consistent definitions. Accurate information on Sex, anatomy, and what happens to both men and women in arousal and sexual encounters. Discuss that men and women experience sex differently and that there isn't a right way to experience arousal. Also note that one cannot control or help another partner's arousal and that you are responsible for your body primarily, while respecting the desires, concerns, and boundaries of another's. I replace our sacred/bad model with a good, better, best (and bad) model. I talk about consent, not just to intercourse but any physical act. I change out the term "sex" to practicing sexuality And define that as anything that brings one feeling closer through physical connection. A hand hold can be sexual, depending the context. Pointing out that vest is still within marriage and that good and better often have strains of what makes it best in a marriage (commitment to varying degrees, fidelity, willingness to work with a partner, etc). Discuss following the LoC less about what you do or don't do and more about congruency and what best meets up with ones goal for fidelity to one's spouse. Discuss that this may vary from person and that I don't have authority to tell you what's ok or not, but that decisions as to what to do in a relationship should be made with prayerful consideration. Then I talk about bad, which includes any form of coercion, abuse, or insisting on ones own sexual desires be met over another's. Talk about consent and what entails sexual assault and that when doing something new to the relationship be tentative and ask. And if there's pulling away to stop and have a discussion as to what's the other partners concern. No labeling, and emphasize that women have a right to the own sexuality and how they choose to express it or not. In short, I believe heavily in value congruent sex with meaningful encounters that are representative of ones relationship as best. I think that that covers a good chunk of it. I also challenge common definitions that have become culturally ingrained. With luv, Bd That sounds outstanding. They're lucky to have you there. I wish you'd written "Aunty Wendy's" talk for her. It seems a shame that the books you've read and the books she's read have resulted in such a different approach to teaching sex and sexuality. Could I ask, do you ever discuss masturbation in any of your lessons like the one you've just described? I grew up in a generation where it was strictly prohibited. I wondered if your professional experience meant you taught a different approach?
Popular Post BlueDreams Posted January 11, 2017 Popular Post Posted January 11, 2017 3 hours ago, Jeanne said: Ew....this I will never understand. Intimacy is personal and where a couple learns more about eachother and desires. Other than mutual love for eachother and for God..I think it is tacky to have the HG involved at all. Ew... My internet on my computer is being wonky so I'm going to try this again on my phone. I don't thing it's tacky at all. This sounds more like cultural reactivity and baggage that splits God from sex, than anything else. Our modern society has a fixation on sex that divorces is from. Spirituality and maintains it as more base or naughty. But there really isn't anything good, IMHO, that God cannot help foster. I have seen people who are skeptical about themselves as sexual beings find the gift of sexuality and exploration in sex With their spouse after earnest study and prayer. I've had others assert that they felt the Holy Ghost when we were talking about bodies, sex, and sexualit in presentations. All of this would be considered influences on sex by the HG and I assure you it was anything but tacky. with luv, BD 5
Meadowchik Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 (edited) 29 minutes ago, canard78 said: That sounds outstanding. They're lucky to have you there. I wish you'd written "Aunty Wendy's" talk for her. It seems a shame that the books you've read and the books she's read have resulted in such a different approach to teaching sex and sexuality. Could I ask, do you ever discuss masturbation in any of your lessons like the one you've just described? I grew up in a generation where it was strictly prohibited. I wondered if your professional experience meant you taught a different approach? I'd like to hear about these last two questions, especially in regards in what to teach children and teens, if anything. 26 minutes ago, BlueDreams said: My internet on my computer is being wonky so I'm going to try this again on my phone. I don't thing it's tacky at all. This sounds more like cultural reactivity and baggage that splits God from sex, than anything else. Our modern society has a fixation on sex that divorces is from. Spirituality and maintains it as more base or naughty. But there really isn't anything good, IMHO, that God cannot help foster. I have seen people who are skeptical about themselves as sexual beings find the gift of sexuality and exploration in sex With their spouse after earnest study and prayer. I've had others assert that they felt the Holy Ghost when we were talking about bodies, sex, and sexualit in presentations. All of this would be considered influences on sex by the HG and I assure you it was anything but tacky. with luv, BD Quoting you so you see the above! Edited January 11, 2017 by Meadowchik
Robert F. Smith Posted January 12, 2017 Posted January 12, 2017 (edited) On 1/9/2017 at 8:57 AM, canard78 said: Hi bluebell, if you go to 19:07 on this link you'll hear her say "The truth is, the more pure you are, the more marvelous your marital intimacy will be." When she says the above, she is showing a slides that says: Worldy Sex: Involves carnal, sensual, and devilish passions God-ordained marital intimacy: Involves Spirit-enhanced and purified passions Were you questioning whether she was really talking about sex in the original quote? One should always prefer the original quote. Moreover, your blatantly sexual interpretation makes sense only if one equates "sexual" with "marital intimacy" -- which presumably is not limited to sexual activity, which may be the point of the contrast she highlights in her slide. How narrow should our focus be? How inclusive? Is there a religious dimension to such matters? Emma Green says: Quote If Millennials do eventually become religious, they may reap some unexpected fringe benefits. For one thing, compared with the nonreligious, religious people report more satisfaction with their love lives [3] and sex lives [4]. Frequent church attendance has also been associated with lower rates of smoking and drinking, a greater tendency to exercise [5], reduced risk of cancer, and improved cardiovascular health [6]. A research review conducted on behalf of the National Institutes of Health went so far as to declare that “church/service attendance protects healthy people against death” [7]. Green, “Keeping the Faith: How childhood influences churchgoing,” Atlantic, Nov 2014, online at http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/11/keeping-the-faith/380799/ , citing Neto and da Conceição Pinto, “Satisfaction With Love Life Across the Adult Life Span,” Applied Research in Quality of Life, April 2014; Neto, “The Satisfaction With Sex Life Scale,” Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, Jan. 2012; Powell et al., “Religion and Spirituality: Linkages to Physical Health,” American Psychologist, Jan. 2003. Religion tends to make people happier, healthier, and more civically engaged. It creates a foundation for communal and social life, provides a common set of behavioral rules for people to abide by, and can be a useful guide for navigating the exhaustion and pain of everyday life. Green, “How Will Young People Choose Their Religion?” Atlantic, Mar 20, 2016, online at http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/how-will-young-people-choose-their-religion/474366/ . Lori L. Fazzino says that Quote Religion plays a major role in easing the convert’s transformation by providing an institutionalized set of guidelines for beliefs, behaviors, and expectations that are socially supported and reinforced (Berger; Gooren). One’s ideological destination is identified, embraced, and immediately available. A positive emotional response arises from a sense of control and reliance on a higher power, a sense of assurance, feelings of ecstasy, and liberation through self-surrender (James; Mahoney and Pargament). Fazzino, Journal of Contemporary Religion, 29/2 (2014):249-266. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13537903.2014.903664?src=recsys . Sounds like Professor Nelson is on to something valid and important. Hardly a surprise since she has had 25 years teaching the subject at the university level. Edited January 12, 2017 by Robert F. Smith 2
Calm Posted January 12, 2017 Posted January 12, 2017 5 hours ago, thesometimesaint said: No. You can beat the heck out of your spouse and still be sexual pure, what ever that means. You can lie through your teeth every day and still be sexually pure, whatever that means If you don't even know what it means, how in the world can you be so certain about its impact?
Tacenda Posted January 12, 2017 Posted January 12, 2017 46 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said: One should always prefer the original quote. Moreover, your blatantly sexual interpretation makes sense only if one equates "sexual" with "marital intimacy" -- which presumably is not limited to sexual activity, which may be the point of the contrast she highlights in her slide. How narrow should our focus be? How inclusive? Is there a religious dimension to such matters? Emma Green says: Lori L. Fazzino says that Sounds like Professor Nelson is on to something valid and important. Hardly a surprise since she has had 25 years teaching the subject at the university level. I agree! At first I thought it a little strange, equating purity with sex. My mentality I guess. But as I listened to most of her talk, I like what she said, and saw what it meant. I think it's vital to have a good relationship out of bed in order to have a good intimate one. When I say good, I lack the ability right now to come up with better descriptive words. Lack of sleep all week ha ha, wish that was the whole reason. Just plain don't have that ability or memory right now. Anyway, I like what she said. 2
thesometimesaint Posted January 12, 2017 Posted January 12, 2017 21 hours ago, Jane_Doe said: A peeping tom is some one who watches events for some form of sexual excitement. The HG is not this. And frankly, the HG / rest of the Godhead see everything everyone does, sexually or other, throughout all of time, regardless of people's lives are being lived. How do you know what the HG thinks?
thesometimesaint Posted January 12, 2017 Posted January 12, 2017 16 hours ago, Tacenda said: I agree! At first I thought it a little strange, equating purity with sex. My mentality I guess. But as I listened to most of her talk, I like what she said, and saw what it meant. I think it's vital to have a good relationship out of bed in order to have a good intimate one. When I say good, I lack the ability right now to come up with better descriptive words. Lack of sleep all week ha ha, wish that was the whole reason. Just plain don't have that ability or memory right now. Anyway, I like what she said. On that we agree.
Recommended Posts