The M-Word

[jkwilliams]

3 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Or pretty far along the autism spectrum.

I don’t know. My son is on the autism spectrum, and this just doesn’t sound like anything I’m familiar with. 

[BlueDreams]

37 minutes ago, pogi said:

This is a really interesting thread for me to read.  I am surprised at how open and honest people are about M...that is a good thing.  As a recovering porn addict myself, the two (M and P) are inseparable actions and are analogous in function.  One will always be a trigger for the other, therefore M is not an option for me anymore, as I do my best to avoid all triggers.  It feels like the majority here agree that P is bad and harmful, but that M is spiritually neutral and physiologically good and healthy.  This is a little hard for me to wrap my head around quite honestly.  Let me explain.  

If we list all of the reasons as to why P might be spiritually damaging, the list might include -  lust, objectification of women, unhealthy coping mechanism, etc.  If P is bad for these reasons, I am having a hard time understanding why M would not be a spiritually questionable practice for the same reasons.  Let's be honest, how many guys can successfully arouse themselves sufficiently to perform M without using lustful thoughts/fantasy in thinking about the act (thus objectifying women in their minds), and just as P can be used as an unhealthy coping mechanism, so too can M (not arguing that it always is thought).  Maybe that is just me, with my messed up addict mind, but somehow I suspect that very few, if any, guys are capable of arousing this physiological response without getting a little lustful.  Am I crazy?  I am open to be corrected on this, but it just seems...unlikely.  So, how does one condone M without condoning lust?  It is true that M is not forbidden in the scriptures,, but lust is... is M not simply a more physical indulgence in lustful thinking? 

I think that people are wrong to conflate spiritual boundaries (rules/commandments) with toxic shame.  One can create healthy boundaries and expectations without inflicting toxic shame.  And contrary to popular belief, one can be happy and fulfilled without M.  I am happier and more spiritually/emotionally connected in recovery, then I ever have been.  

I agree that M should not be included in bishop interviews, but I don't think it should be taken out of the FTSOY pamphlet.  There is such a taboo about it in families and church...that is harmful.  We need to feel free and open about discussing it, fully appreciating the fact that most people will practice it at some point in their lives.  That is ok.  We all make mistakes, we don't need to beat ourselves up about it with self-loathing and toxic shame. 

I do understand the argument that it is healthy for human sexuality in preparation for marriage, but aren't those things that we can learn along the way in marriage?  Those that seem to run into problems with sex in marriage come from families where sex is taboo and forbidden to discuss, potentially leading to toxic shame and unhealthy perspectives about their bodies and sex.  The problem is when people believe that sex/sexuality is dirty/bad/evil before marriage, then suddenly it is beautiful, pure, and holy after marriage.  That doesn't work!  We can teach that it is good, holy, and beautiful and that there is nothing dirty about their body parts etc. but that we are counseled to bridal those healthy passions until marriage.

I can understand the confusion. From a porn addiction standpoint, few can masturbate without potentially triggering desires for porngraphy. Whether early on in life or later down the road, graphic sex images were overlayed on their own sexuality. It's similar to why a binge eater can just have a little cake without the of triggering a binge. Or why recovering anorexics shouldn't every go on diets. There's nothing horribly wrong with the behavior, but it's become a triggering point for when life feels in someway out of control or difficult. It's been interpreted by the individual in a way that leads to automatic responses. 

I respect your perspective.....but I would like to point out that you have only described a) male perspectives and experiences with masturbation and b) males who have been frequently exposed or sought out pornography. These are not the only people who experience masturbation and not everybody files the experience as some form of lust, objectification, or unhealthy coping tools. 

I'm running out of time again, but to the bolded question.....no. It's not that easy. Sexuality isn't a light switch that can be turn on and off. Sexuality is (or at least should be) an integral part of being human and more capable to function in relationships in healthy ways. Take that principle to other aspects. What happens if we taught that you needed to only practice charity and kindness when you're married? Before then you'll likely make mistakes, but try not to serve and show kindness to your fellow man. Once you are married, you should now be kind, generous, and other-oriented to be able to share a collaborative and loving relationship. How many are really going to be able to pull that off? Maybe they could...but likely it's going to be a struggle. I have more to say, but my next client is up!

 

With luv,

BD

[Gray]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

I do understand the argument that it is healthy for human sexuality in preparation for marriage, but aren't those things that we can learn along the way in marriage? 

I've read before that women who abstain from masturbation before marriage often have a lot of trouble with orgasms once they're married. Masturbation seems to be an evolved/beneficial behavior in some contexts and in moderation, and therefore not sinful in accordance with the principles taught by Jesus on recognizing the difference between good and evil teachings.

 

Edited March 30, 2018 by Gray

[Gray]

59 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I, for one, look forward to death. This world has not been so kind to me that I would regret leaving it.

I keep flip flopping on that issue. I'm about halfway done with life. I'm starting to think boredom and tiredness are going to play an increasingly important role in making me ultimately be okay with my own death. Not quite there yet though.

[jkwilliams]

Just now, Gray said:

I keep flip flopping on that issue. I'm about halfway done with life. I'm starting to think boredom and tiredness are going to play an increasingly important role in making me ultimately be okay with my own death. Not quite there yet though.

I dunno, I might have felt that way until I started having grandchildren. It makes getting old a lot more fun. 

[SamuelTheLamanite]

56 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I still think he might just be mentally disabled or just stupid.

The mentally disabled are not inferior. There is nothing wrong with having a disability.

2 hours ago, The Nehor said:

He is way off generally. I suspect he is confusing porn work with studies on prostitution and even there the sex trafficking kind. He and reality are not really on speaking terms.

 Our prophet Spencer W Kimball taught "“It i ridiculous to imply that pornography has no effect. There is a definite relationship to crime. Murder, robbery, rape, prostitution, and commercialized vice are fed on this immorality. Sex crime statistics seem to reflect a relationship between crime and pornography." 

Was Spencer W Kimball mentally disabled or just stupid? He couldn't tell the difference between his stupid ideas and spiritual revelation?

59 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

It’s either satire or a 14 year old boy who’s been reading too much Joseph Fielding Smith. 

Was Joseph Fielding Smith 14 years old when he was our living prophet?

 

 

[jkwilliams]

3 minutes ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Was Joseph Fielding Smith 14 years old when he was our living prophet?

I don’t think he was. Or are you saying you really are 14 years old?  I’m not trying to be mean, but your posts are so over the top they are hard to take seriously. 

[Kevin Christensen]

1 hour ago, BlueDreams said:

I think there is a wide world between shame and enabling in reactions towards masturbation, pornography, and sexuality. And sexual addiction is more likely to be bred in silence about their sexuality with sporadic shame messages about their budding sexuality than it is in a household that openly discussed sex. I haven't read the thread very thoroughly (I probably shouldn't be on right now...busy day...like all my days lately ) , but I haven't seen anyone suggest that they should allow any sexual behavior from their children to be promoted and given a slide. Masturbation is not the same as sex addiction. Not even close. And it has benefits in developing sexuality and overall sexual health. 

On a physiological side, I've found that people who've masturbated are more likely to orgasm with their sexual partners. It leads to smoother transitions to a sexual relationship in marriage, because they know their body, arousal patterns, and what they generally prefer. 

On a psychological side, masturbation and body exploration help people feel less grossed out and nervous around their body. Many of the women I work with who have never masturbated or masturbated with a ton of personal same toward the experience, have a difficult time accepting their sexual arousal process. They are often leery of their body, don't take ownership of their sex organs, and are uncertain about what arouses them.

On a relational level, masturbation can teach ownership of ones own pleasure and - when taught right - the idea of sharing oneself with your partner. 

It can have spiritual benefits as well, as they are more likely to accept their body's experiences and learn to cherish it (again, if masturbation is not done with shame and is taught in a proper context of body consciousness and self-pleasure....not hijacked by early exposure to porn)

I'm not mentioning all of the potential pluses to masturbation, but I hope this gives an idea about what masturbation can be to an individual and subsequently, a marriage's health.

Though Patrick Carnes and others have given a lot to help treat sexual behavior that's leading to addictive symptomology....their models of treatment still has some holes IMO. 2 Small examples:

- the models that I've seen treating sex addiction acknowledges the need for learning healthy sex, but often neglects said development. I've seen people where drying up the porn or sex addiction also dried up their libido. That's a big problem to me.....like if we had a binge eater go into treatment and end up an anorexic. 

- Their means of diagnosis is too broad.  I was curious when I found a questionnaire from a reputable sight, whether I would qualify for  a sex addiction. Sure enough I did....even though I had never had sex and never viewed pornography and deeply valued my sexuality and expressed it congruent to my relational and personal patterns. I have had clients that believed and were told that they had a porn or sex addiction, only to have me explore their constructs and realize they didn't really have one. I was often the first to say so after years of treatments and talking to ecclesiastical leaders. That's a problem.

 

fun fact. I went to UCAP recently, and they talked about how the disease model to sex addiction (and addiction in general) is being replaced by a learning disorder model. Which, IMO, fits more what I see with sex addiction cases. They're not sick in the classic sense of the word, they've learn sex as a coping tool to pain with little/no ability to face their emotional traumas or struggles. Any deep emotions are difficult for them to process...even joy....so porn or sex is a way to remain in homeostasis. Again, masturbation as a neutral construct means that parents and society would have to teach proper behavior and place for masturbations. Placing boundaries about where, when, and how one masturbates as well as teaching children how to recognize and healthily emotionally regulate, would easily reduce the concerns for possible addiction states. 

 I believe sexuality is fundamental to healthy human development. Not all forms of sexual expression are made equal and one doesn't need a specific sexual expression to be healthy or centered in their sexuality. But sexuality to me is not an option. And it's a concern for me with addiction models to sexual behaviors that they may inadvertently be throwing the baby out with the bathwater about this.

Well I should probably do my day now....

With luv,

BD

Good diagnosis is not the same thing as willy nilly throwing around labels.  As it happens, I had one therapist in California give me the MMPI and commented that I just happened to be in the higher range of interest in sexuality and probably had a rich fantasy life.  That was personally reassuring and not at all shaming, but I notice that I got worse afterward in the years after those sessions (it's a progressive disease).  Another one around the same time bluntly stated, "If you don't want a fat wife, get a skinny one."  I never went back to him.  At one point, I talked a friend of mine out of going to 12 step group, arguing that sexuality is natural and "not at all like putting narcotics into the body."   (Making amends for that particular blunder took me years, but I have done so.  I have a quote in my essay on the natural opiates involved.)   And later, in 2003 after I finally read Carnes's Out of the Shadows and I clearly recognized my addiction for what it was, and not just a social label applied to behavior that a particular social group disapproves of.  Around that time I had a Stake President who is a wonderful man and a trained psychologist, tell my wife that 12 step groups like SA are for people with worse problems than mine.   (This was before the LDS ARP took hold.)  Well, a few years later, I decided to go to 12 Step Groups, and found that not only was the group helpful, but that I was extremely helpful to the group.  And I've my been called to serve with the LDS ARP for several years now, based on Stake leaders seeing what I was doing before I was called.  I've read several books on the topic by a range of authors and watched people in recovery groups for well over a decade.

You could label, from the outside, what I personally experienced as a "learning disorder" rather than addiction consisting of increased craving and impaired judgement.  But with recovery I've seen and felt the difference and the change from the inside.  My brain works differently now.  Years before I got into recovery, I have a vivid memory of my wife causally commenting that she liked the anticipation of once a week, and feeling a rising panic that she could see on my face.  During the course of recovery, I have gone a year or more without at least three times.  Easily, and with no panic.  Perhaps that is not the romantic ideal I envisioned when I got married, but I now have two granddaughters who would not be here had I not been willing to make choices between what is desirable and what is most important.  And my wife did offer me a way out at one point, a choice.  What I saw at the end of that choice had all the subtly of a Jack in the Box popping to say, "And then you could do whatever you want," and I saw it for a lie.  So I stayed and did everything I had to back the choice to stay with meaningful action.  And I can look at other families where I have helped, and count other babies who have fathers at home, rather than elsewhere.  It's not all about me, and what I might want, and demonstrably never has been.  And part of what makes Trump so distinctly Trump is that as far as he is concerned, it is all about him.  Sacrifice is for other people.  Losers.  Would you diagnose him as having a learning disorder or sex addiction? 

And what is desirable, what is a romantic and social ideal, is not the same as dealing with unexpected realities that force you to choose between what is desired and what is most important.  In Vindication of the Rights of Woman, Mary Wollstonecraft said that sexuality should be the fire on the hearth, something that nurtures the home. I like that image.  Fire out of the hearth though can cause lots of damage.  And what happens to ideal sexual expression when there are unexpected complications in the form of migraines, pregnancy, weight gain, depression, PSTD, endometriosis, having to work different shifts, or to travel for work, or children with high needs, physical injury and ailment, all sorts of personal stress and frustration, let alone plain old meeting someone at work or online who unexpectedly lights a fire out of the hearth?  For richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, for better or for worse, unless someone makes me a better offer?

Good and healthy sexual development is important, yes.  But there is a difference between healthy sexuality and compulsive sexuality, just like this is difference between desired and undesired encounters. (See the MeToo movement.)   And as important as good healthy sexual development is, human development will probably at some point, offer opportunities and challenges that require us to demonstrate what is most important to us.  In the face of such challenges, following the example of the President or Harvey Weinstein, or Kevin Spacey, or many others, may not lead to the best results for the couple the family, and the larger society.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

[mfbukowski]

On 3/29/2018 at 2:55 PM, HappyJackWagon said:

Can't touch others. Can't touch self. This may be the only answer

Nobody should be ridiculed for having a strong religious opinion.

Like fasting learning self-control over bodily appetites is a strong necessity in achieving righteousness in my opinion.

I see no reason to get overly preoccupied by it but in general I think saying no to masturbation is better than saying yes.

There is a reason why the Yogi's of the East practice self control and it's not even about Sin.

[SamuelTheLamanite]

1 hour ago, BlueDreams said:

What is your evidence that masturbation is toxic to spiritual health? I gave evidence to my assertions. Simply making an assertion does not naturally make it true.

I believe our heavenly father is guiding his church through revelation.  Our prophets are experts in spiritual revelation so that means they can tell the difference between their own thoughts and the spirit.  The church and the prophets have made it very clear about masturbation. If masturbation was good our loving heavenly father would have told us by now. 

1 hour ago, BlueDreams said:

 It irritates me that porn is at a point that people often experience explicit distorted sex images before they've even experienced their own sexuality in any way.

All porn is bad including graphic sex education, romance novels, and magazines with women in two-piece swimsuits.

1 hour ago, BlueDreams said:

That said, not all porn is made equal either. If a married couple likes to send sexual images to each other of themselves as a means to maintain a sexual relationship over long distance or just to play, that's not "opposite to the gospel." Even though they're sending things "meant to arouse" (ie the broad definition of pornography).

That practice is unacceptable because it opens the door to pornography. If a spouse happens to be 17 it would be a serious felony.  All married couples should stay away from that practice because it sends the wrong message to younger generations.

 

 

 

 

Edited March 30, 2018 by SamuelTheLamanite

[jkwilliams]

3 minutes ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

I believe our heavenly father is guiding his church through revelation.  Our prophets are experts in spiritual revelation so that means they can tell the difference between their own thoughts and the spirit.  The church and the prophets have made it very clear about masturbation. If masturbation was good our loving heavenly father would have told us by now. 

All porn is bad including graphic sex education, romance novels, and magazines with women in two-piece swimsuits.

That practice is unacceptable because it opens the door to pornography. If a spouse happens to be 17 it would be a serious felony.  All married couples should stay away from that practice because it sends the wrong message to younger generations.

 

Shark officially jumped. 

[SamuelTheLamanite]

28 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I don’t think he was. Or are you saying you really are 14 years old?  I’m not trying to be mean, but your posts are so over the top they are hard to take seriously. 

I am just following the words of my prophets. The foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom. I am not the only crazy one here, brother Hansen pointed out "This describes half the posters here".

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/70261-the-enemies-of-the-church-are-wrong-again/?page=5

 

[jkwilliams]

1 minute ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

I am just following the words of my prophets. The foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom. I am not the only crazy one here, brother Hansen pointed out "This describes half the posters here".

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/70261-the-enemies-of-the-church-are-wrong-again/?page=5

 

Yeah, but some posters are more interesting than others. I just don’t find bad satire worth engaging. Carry on. 

[SamuelTheLamanite]

3 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Shark officially jumped. 

What does that mean? Whatever I will continue to defend the truth of God.

16 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Nobody should be ridiculed for having a strong religious opinion.

You are saying the right words at the right time.  

[BlueDreams]

32 minutes ago, Kevin Christensen said:

Good diagnosis is not the same thing as willy nilly throwing around labels.  As it happens, I had one therapist in California give me the MMPI and commented that I just happened to be in the higher range of interest in sexuality and probably had a rich fantasy life.  That was personally reassuring and not at all shaming, but I notice that I got worse afterward in the years after those sessions (it's a progressive disease).  Another one around the same time bluntly stated, "If you don't want a fat wife, get a skinny one."  I never went back to him.  At one point, I talked a friend of mine out of going to 12 step group, arguing that sexuality is natural and "not at all like putting narcotics into the body."   (Making amends for that particular blunder took me years, but I have done so.  I have a quote in my essay on the natural opiates involved.)   And later, in 2003 after I finally read Carnes's Out of the Shadows and I clearly recognized my addiction for what it was, and not just a social label applied to behavior that a particular social group disapproves of.  Around that time I had a Stake President who is a wonderful man and a trained psychologist, tell my wife that 12 step groups like SA are for people with worse problems than mine.   (This was before the LDS ARP took hold.)  Well, a few years later, I decided to go to 12 Step Groups, and found that not only was the group helpful, but that I was extremely helpful to the group.  And I've my been called to serve with the LDS ARP for several years now, based on Stake leaders seeing what I was doing before I was called.  I've read several books on the topic by a range of authors and watched people in recovery groups for well over a decade.

You could label, from the outside, what I personally experienced as a "learning disorder" rather than addiction consisting of increased craving and impaired judgement.  But with recovery I've seen and felt the difference and the change from the inside.  My brain works differently now.  Years before I got into recovery, I have a vivid memory of my wife causally commenting that she liked the anticipation of once a week, and feeling a rising panic that she could see on my face.  During the course of recovery, I have gone a year or more without at least three times.  Easily, and with no panic.  Perhaps that is not the romantic ideal I envisioned when I got married, but I now have two granddaughters who would not be here had I not been willing to make choices between what is desirable and what is most important.  And my wife did offer me a way out at one point, a choice.  What I saw at the end of that choice had all the subtly of a Jack in the Box popping to say, "And then you could do whatever you want," and I saw it for a lie.  So I stayed and did everything I had to back the choice to stay with meaningful action.  And I can look at other families where I have helped, and count other babies who have fathers at home, rather than elsewhere.  It's not all about me, and what I might want, and demonstrably never has been.  And part of what makes Trump so distinctly Trump is that as far as he is concerned, it is all about him.  Sacrifice is for other people.  Losers.  Would you diagnose him as having a learning disorder or sex addiction? 

And what is desirable, what is a romantic and social ideal, is not the same as dealing with unexpected realities that force you to choose between what is desired and what is most important.  In Vindication of the Rights of Woman, Mary Wollstonecraft said that sexuality should be the fire on the hearth, something that nurtures the home. I like that image.  Fire out of the hearth though can cause lots of damage.  And what happens to ideal sexual expression when there are unexpected complications in the form of migraines, pregnancy, weight gain, depression, PSTD, endometriosis, having to work different shifts, or to travel for work, or children with high needs, physical injury and ailment, all sorts of personal stress and frustration, let alone plain old meeting someone at work or online who unexpectedly lights a fire out of the hearth?  For richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, for better or for worse, unless someone makes me a better offer?

Good and healthy sexual development is important, yes.  But there is a difference between healthy sexuality and compulsive sexuality, just like this is difference between desired and undesired encounters. (See the MeToo movement.)   And as important as good healthy sexual development is, human development will probably at some point, offer opportunities and challenges that require us to demonstrate what is most important to us.  In the face of such challenges, following the example of the President or Harvey Weinstein, or Kevin Spacey, or many others, may not lead to the best results for the couple the family, and the larger society.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

Kevin, usually I can follow you pretty well, but I'm a little confused by your post as to which response is to what part of mine. On many points I agree, but they're often beside the point in regards to what I was trying to express. Which is that masturbation is a neutral. Pointing out the severe negativity to me, doesn't necessarily change that point to me. I also find sex a neutral behavior. It CAN be good and beautiful and wonderful. It can also be a tool for severe manipulation and violation of human dignity. I'm not trying to negate that masturbation can be fuel for terrible sexual behaviors and disorders. But I'm not willing to throw masturbation under the bus when I've also seen how it can be a positive and enriching experience in people's lives. For me, it has been the perk of being a sex therapist. I've gotten to see the interaction of addiction, need-based sex beliefs, sexism, abuse, and other nasty societal factors on the disruption of healthy and beautiful sexual relationships. I've also gotten to see how a variety of sexual expression, in the proper frame work and with certain boundaries, can make a marriage and person flourish and grow. Not just in their relationship, but with their bodies and God. I believe that the stories from the addicts/recovering addicts here and that I know shouldn't be discredited. There should be boundaries, there should be greater emphasis on consent, there should be greater dialogue and having moral parameters around sex, there should be a change in the focus of one specific type of sexual expression as the true and only way one can be happy. But I don't think that the voices of addicts should be the only voice in deciding what can or can't happen with sexuality. And when those voices are added to the equation, masturbation is just not the boogeyman we've made it to be culturally.

Other notes:

• Learning disorder doesn't remove the idea of addiction. It actually is more likely to expand the construct to other behaviors (such as sex or porn) that are currently not considered an addiction by the general psychological community. The medical model has limitations that actually make it hard to treat addiction. But it was an aside. I found it interesting from a therapist stance. 
• Technically I would put Trump as exhibiting narcissitic and sociopathic personality disorder tendencies. His sexual behaviors, in said construct, would be one of many indications of said disorders. Out of control sexual behaviors can have varying branches that they stem from. Obviously I do not find his behavior or conduct healthy in the least...though I cannot technically diagnose from afar.
• I don't believe in the ideal sexual expression as a specific physiological act. I have known couples with a beautiful healthy and sacred sex life that couldn't have intercourse for medical problems. I've known couples who could have intercourse that I don't envy in the least for their sexual expression. The ideal is a spiritual/emotional construct that informs how they interact in a sexual relationship. And sexual expression for me is any form of physical acts that increase a sense of deeper bonding. So what happens when a couple experiences XYZ problems? Their sexual expression ideally would have the flexibility to change to the concerns and needs of their relationship. I hate the romantic ideals we've promoted on TV and society at large. It's not realistic and it can inadvertently leave large swaths of people thinking their sexual life is abjectly deficient.

 

 

With luv,

BD

Edited March 30, 2018 by BlueDreams

[SamuelTheLamanite]

8 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Yeah, but some posters are more interesting than others. I just don’t find bad satire worth engaging. Carry on. 

For the 1000th time I am not a troll, but you are not obligated to have a conversation with me.

There is an "ignore" option. You can use it.

Edited March 30, 2018 by SamuelTheLamanite

[BlueDreams]

21 minutes ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

I believe our heavenly father is guiding his church through revelation.  Our prophets are experts in spiritual revelation so that means they can tell the difference between their own thoughts and the spirit.  The church and the prophets have made it very clear about masturbation. If masturbation was good our loving heavenly father would have told us by now. 

All porn is bad including graphic sex education, romance novels, and magazines with women in two-piece swimsuits.

Okay.... Again you've given no evidence. Just basic assertions stated as fact and circular reasoning. That's not helping.

Quote

That practice is unacceptable because it opens the door to pornography. If a spouse happens to be 17 it would be a serious felony.  All married couples should stay away from that practice because it sends the wrong message to younger generations.

That their parents and old people enjoy their sexuality in their marriage????.......

 

Until you give more definitive and thought out answers, I'm going to call this done on my end.

 

With luv,

BD

[jkwilliams]

11 minutes ago, BlueDreams said:

Kevin, usually I can follow you pretty well, but I'm a little confused by your post as to which response is to what part of mine. On many points I agree, but they're often beside the point in regards to what I was trying to express. Which is that masturbation is a neutral. Pointing out the severe negativity to me, doesn't necessarily change that point to me. I also find sex a neutral behavior. It CAN be good and beautiful and wonderful. It can also be a tool for severe manipulation and violation of human dignity. I'm not trying to negate that masturbation can be fuel for terrible sexual behaviors and disorders. But I'm not willing to throw masturbation under the bus when I've also seen how it can be a positive and enriching experience in people's lives. For me, it has been the perk of being a sex therapist. I've gotten to see the interaction of addiction, need-based sex beliefs, sexism, abuse, and other nasty societal factors on the disruption of healthy and beautiful sexual relationships. I've also gotten to see how a variety of sexual expression, in the proper frame work and with certain boundaries, can make a marriage and person flourish and grow. Not just in their relationship, but with their bodies and God. I believe that the stories from the addicts/recovering addicts here and that I know shouldn't be discredited. There should be boundaries, there should be greater emphasis on consent, there should be greater dialogue and having moral parameters around sex, there should be a change in the focus of one specific type of sexual expression as the true and only way one can be happy. But I don't think that the voices of addicts should be the only voice in deciding what can or can't happen with sexuality. And when those voices are added to the equation, masturbation is just not the boogeyman we've made it to be culturally.

Other notes:

• Learning disorder doesn't remove the idea of addiction. It actually is more likely to expand the construct to other behaviors (such as sex or porn) that are currently not considered an addiction by the general psychological community. The medical model has limitations that actually make it hard to treat addiction. But it was an aside. I found it interesting from a therapist stance. 
• Technically I would put Trump as exhibiting narcissitic and sociopathic personality disorder tendencies. His sexual behaviors, in said construct, would be one of many indications of said disorders. Out of control sexual behaviors can have varying branches that they stem from. Obviously I do not find his behavior or conduct healthy in the least...though I cannot technically diagnose from afar.
• I don't believe in the ideal sexual expression as a specific physiological act. I have known couples with a beautiful healthy and sacred sex life that couldn't have intercourse for medical problems. I've known couples who could have intercourse that I don't envy in the least for their sexual expression. The ideal is a spiritual/emotional construct that informs how they interact in a sexual relationship. And sexual expression for me is any form of physical acts that increase a sense of deeper bonding. So what happens when a couple experiences XYZ problems? Their sexual expression ideally would have the flexibility to change to the concerns and needs of their relationship. I hate the romantic ideals we've promoted on TV and society at large. It's not realistic and it can inadvertently leave large swaths of people thinking their sexual life is abjectly deficient.

 

 

With luv,

BD

Nothing to add except how much I appreciate your contributions to this thread. More than makes up for the attempts to drag the conversation into a cheap parody of LDS teachings. 

Edited March 30, 2018 by jkwilliams

[pogi]

1 hour ago, BlueDreams said:

I can understand the confusion. From a porn addiction standpoint, few can masturbate without potentially triggering desires for porngraphy. Whether early on in life or later down the road, graphic sex images were overlayed on their own sexuality. It's similar to why a binge eater can just have a little cake without the of triggering a binge. Or why recovering anorexics shouldn't every go on diets. There's nothing horribly wrong with the behavior, but it's become a triggering point for when life feels in someway out of control or difficult. It's been interpreted by the individual in a way that leads to automatic responses. 

I respect your perspective.....but I would like to point out that you have only described a) male perspectives and experiences with masturbation and b) males who have been frequently exposed or sought out pornography. These are not the only people who experience masturbation and not everybody files the experience as some form of lust, objectification, or unhealthy coping tools. 

I'm running out of time again, but to the bolded question.....no. It's not that easy. Sexuality isn't a light switch that can be turn on and off. Sexuality is (or at least should be) an integral part of being human and more capable to function in relationships in healthy ways. Take that principle to other aspects. What happens if we taught that you needed to only practice charity and kindness when you're married? Before then you'll likely make mistakes, but try not to serve and show kindness to your fellow man. Once you are married, you should now be kind, generous, and other-oriented to be able to share a collaborative and loving relationship. How many are really going to be able to pull that off? Maybe they could...but likely it's going to be a struggle. I have more to say, but my next client is up!

 

With luv,

BD

Thanks for your reply. 

That is an interesting comment about the "light switch".  I am conflicted on this.  I see what you are saying, but I don't see a way to nurture sexuality and self-simulated sexual experiences in youth without indulging in a healthy(?) dose of lust.  Is it really possible, if so, how?  I imagine that the male sex is not alone in using fantasy and lustful thinking in order to elicit and fuel this physiological response - isn't that kind of the point of it, to have a sexual experience in your body and mind?  Can one have a sexual experience without including the mind?

It seems like most people do it in response to lustful thinking, boredom, or stress.   In which case it is either a sinful physical indulgence in lust, or could easily turn into an unhealthy coping mechanism.  Does anybody really do it without one of those elements triggering it?

[SamuelTheLamanite]

13 minutes ago, BlueDreams said:

Okay.... Again you've given no evidence. Just basic assertions stated as fact and circular reasoning. That's not helping.

 How can I prove that masturbation is bad? Steve Densley Jr explains what is wrong with masturbation. You can read many stories online such as "My story, goals and side effects from excessive masturbation." There are recovery from masturbation forums. Blue Dreams, what evidence can I possibly share to convince you? Think about it. You are asking me to do the impossible.

Edited March 30, 2018 by SamuelTheLamanite

[ALarson]

9 minutes ago, pogi said:

That is an interesting comment about the "light switch".  I am conflicted on this.  I see what you are saying, but I don't see a way to nurture sexuality and self-simulated sexual experiences in youth without indulging in a healthy(?) dose of lust.  Is it really possible, if so, how?  I imagine that the male sex is not alone in using fantasy and lustful thinking in order to elicit and fuel this physiological response - isn't that kind of the point of it, to have a sexual experience in your body and mind?  Can one have a sexual experience without including the mind?

It seems like most people do it in response to lustful thinking, boredom, or stress.   In which case it is either a sinful physical indulgence in lust, or could easily turn into an unhealthy coping mechanism.  Does anybody really do it without one of those elements triggering it?

Do you believe it's always wrong to feel lust?  (Honest question...).

How about when it's feelings or desires for your spouse?

I don't see this definition as being a sin and would hope that most couples could feel this for each other:

Quote

 

Lust

ləst/

noun

1.

very strong sexual desire.

 

verb

1.

have a very strong sexual desire for someone.

 

 

Edited March 30, 2018 by ALarson

[pogi]

37 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Do you believe it's always wrong to feel lust?  (Honest question...).

How about when it's feelings or desires for your spouse?

I don't see this definition as being a sin and would hope that most couples could feel this for each other:

There is nothing wrong with feeling it, especially with your spouse - that would be a serious problem otherwise.  

I think feeling it is one thing (unavoidable if you are human) but endulging in it and exploring it beyond the passing feeling to the point of fantasy, undressing someone in your mind, or imagining the act with someone other than your spouse is a whole other thing.

How else could you explain Christ’s teachings on it?

I think there is a big difference between feeling a sexual attraction and actively pursuing and engaging in lustful thoughts.

Edited March 30, 2018 by pogi

[bdouglas]

I am haunted my “Michael” (not his real name). I went on a mission at 19, most of my friends did also, but Michael didn’t. Michael was one of our group, perhaps the most religious of all of us, but when he turned 19, he didn’t go on a mission. When I asked another friend (one who, like me, was just going into the MTC) why this was, he said, laughing, “I’m pretty sure he whacks, and so his stake prez won’t let him go.”

When I came home from my mission two years later, I started school at BYU, and in the summer I went on a six month Semester Abroad. Michael was in my group i.e. he was part of the same Semester Abroad. He still had plans for a mission, even though he was now 21. Michael would fast once a week, and sometimes these fasts went on for, not 24 hours, but 48 hours. One time he fasted for 36 hours, taking only water——all done, I think now, looking back on it all, in an effort to "subdue his flesh".

Michael never went on a mission, and I have lost touch with him.

I’m guessing Michael was highly sexed; on a scale of 1 to 10, he was probably a 10 plus. This was in the 1970s, the era of BKP, Mark E. Peterson, Vaughn J Featherstone, “Miracle Of Forgiveness”, etc. Not every church leader hammered on M, but many did. It was a cultural taboo far more than it was ever a Gospel taboo, but some people, like Michael, didn’t make that distinction.

Anyway, reading this thread, I remembered Michael, and I wondered how many other Michaels there are out there.

 

Edited March 31, 2018 by bdouglas

[bdouglas]

9 hours ago, Kevin Christensen said:

And there is this, that I wrote a few years back, which has more details, and case studies and sources.

http://squaretwo.org/Sq2ArticleChristensenRashomon.html

It took a while to find a place to publish, and I prepared myself for a storm of criticism that never came.  I think because even entering the discussion involves a challenge to a social order that does not want to even raise the question.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

 

I liked your essay "A Mormon Rashomon" very much. I read it twice, and then emailed it to a couple of friends. One of these friends (actually my brother) emailed me back about it, after reading it.

[CA Steve]

My mom was addicted to genealogy. She would work on it when other things needed doing like laundry and cooking. She would go hide in her room looking at data bases and emails when the rest of us gathered for family reunions. She made my dad bring a small portable desk with them in their RV so she would have a place to work on her genealogy   even when they were camping. The one time she visited the house I currently live in, she spent most of the time here doing genealogy and the night before they were going to leave she place that desk in front of our front door blocking it, just to make sure my dad would not forget the desk.

Anything carried to excess is unhealthy.  But I do not use her as an example to caution people to not do genealogy. I recognize the difference between normal behavior and obsessiveness regardless of the activity.

Edited March 30, 2018 by CA Steve