Stake Conf. Topic: Sexaul Intimacy
 

The SP was the concluding speaker during the Saturday evening adult only session and his topic was Sexual Intimacy. Difficult for anyone to address this topic in a Church setting. I don't recall all of what he said, but, my take on his remarks is simple, be nice and you will get more action.

Interestingly, he mentioned that this topic will be further addressed in future RS meetings in all wards in the stake, but, no mention was made of following up in the Priesthood meetings.

Why the follow up with the RS and not the Priesthood? Any Ideas?

Yes because men aren't typically the sexual camels in the relationship.

Don't you think sexual desire (or lack thereof) is fairly deep-rooted? I'm curious to see how helpful a talk in RS will be.

It won't be. Guilt is not an aphrodisiac.

I agree. Will this become the equivalent of the men's Pornography talk? I'm imagining the elderly ladies in R.S. looking supremely uncomfortable in the back row.

If it's handled in the sense that lack of sexual desire is a condition that can lead to problems and requires professional help, it may be beneficial. I somehow don't see it going down like that, however.

Maybe I'm being cynical. Wouldn't be the first time.

Conversely, I am purposely NOT trying to imagine the elderly ladies in R.S.

Maybe they have finally identified the reason the pornography talk is needed and are opening another front on the war against porn. I'm only half kidding.

Very astute. I'm not certain what religious leaders should actually do, if anything.

My only suggestion is to take away guilt for having these feelings and encourage adults to understand, even as youth, that it's part of being human. The goal should be to encourage healthy relationships, and a healthy interchange requires healthy relationships.

Frankly, I don't know another way to handle it.

Actually, this brings a recent experience to mind. Since no one knows me here (and DDD is the only one I know...), I think I can share it.

I'm the youngest guy in my group by a good ten years. We have a PA who's about my same age who works with us on the weekends. The other day, during a semi-slow shift, she says, "Can I ask you something? Are there ever times when you're just not in the mood?" We get talking for a little bit, and it turns out that she has not been interested in sex for about the last 18 months. Not once. In fairness, she gave birth about nine months ago, had a fairly rough pregnancy, and her child still doesn't sleep through the night. But she also said that her husband's let himself go, and she's wondering if she should say something to him. I told her to get her kid sleeping through the night, get enough rest, then see where she stands, but if at that point, she still isn't interested, she should say something. I know I'd want to know.

Anyway, judging from the guys I see in my ward, I wouldn't be surprised if this is the problem at least some of the time.

Isn't that pretty much what they are apparently trying to do?

Yeah, but at this point, they're way too late in the game. I'm with Arch--this has to start at least in the teens.

It sounds like it. There really isn't much they can do, other than to subtly change the cultural repression. In reality, they should probably consult psychologists and family therapists to ask what they should be saying in order to send positive, non-threatening messages which will actually help.

Just come right out and say it...She wants to do you.

I agree.

Problem is the church has always shied away from dealing with the subject and instead used an approach strongly based in guilt mongering...which ends up creating an army of sexual camels with major issues to overcome later on.

So you think that would overcome the deep rooted set point you originally posted about?

After all the comments I have read from this group over time on this and simialr topics I find it amusing that you are so quick to be critical of this effort. I applaud the effort and imagine it cannot lead to harm and may lead to benefits. Why not?

Ideally it starts with the families, but should be reenforced within the faith community but subtle and direct messages.

Proper "intimacy" starts with intimacy of feelings between the membership of a couple. And if teens see it modeled by parents, it would be helpful.

And then there should be no embarrassment discussing it, even if discussions are reserved for a rare few. Many within our culture don't know where to get help, and it's sad, very sad.

Many marriages could be saved if this issue were addressed more delicately but effectively. It's obviously not the only issue, but it's a major issue.

And how do you start this effort? This is exactly what they are doing here. THe church can't win for losing around here.

Leadership shies away from the topic because leadership is unqualified to address it sociologically or professionally, for the most part. We would have to lean on professionals, not something the lay leadership is wont to do. And that's the problem. If lay leadership can learn to trust good professionals, progress for the benefit of the flock can be made.

what is it you are saying is the major issue? lack of sex in marriages?

Is that what you all are suggesting would be the topic in RS?

Sorry, I should have left out my cynical comment above. I did give some hope that if they emphasized that professional help is often needed, this could be a useful discussion. They're doing this with the porn problem, so I should be more hopeful.

No I applaud any effort, any effort but much more needs to be done. And speakers on this sensitive subject need more education and counseling so as to not give bad advice or to deliver it badly.

That's a good point. Hopefully, they're at least planting seeds for the next generation.

I guess I forgot to mention...in the midst of the conversation, I did her in a patient room.

Details, details....

In our culture, sexuality is repressed, not celebrated, which leads to sexual dissatisfaction by both partners, causing many dysfunctions. And while men have their dysfunctions manifest in ways which are easily identified, women, a portion of them, will have their dysfunctionality manifest in ways which are more subtle and less addressed.

Men are told to curb their appetites. And I know it's a gross overgeneralization, but I did ask a counselor once, what percentage of your practice involves male and female frigidity in marriage. Answer a lot. What percentage of it is male and what percentage is female? Answer, only one man in 25 years, the rest, 1000s, female. These were almost exclusively LDS.

So obviously our marriage relationships are not fulfilling a significant purpose, attributable in no small part to the difficult to experience meaningful intimacy in our culture.

I don't know any adulterous doctors. Maybe you know a different DDD.

Yes you do. We all are. Haven't you ever seen ER, Gray's Anatomy, Scrubs?




Because sarcasm doesn't always come through on here, and my wife occasionally reads the board, for the record, I did NOT do her. Nor did I have any desire to (do her). Nor her for me (to do her). No doing or being done occurred. Or ever would occur.

So you're not Dr. McDreamie stimulating the unstimulated? How unfortunate for your patients.

being honest here, but I have never seen an entire episode of any of those shows. I say "entire" because several years back, I did see part of an ER episode at someone's house.

I will throw in the west wing also....never saw once episode.

I agree, the lay leadership in the Church, for the most part, is not qualified to address this issue and other issues sociologically or professionally. Back when I was the local ward mullah, I replaced a man who was a professional counselor. So those individuals that were seeing him on a regular basis received the benefit of not only spiritual direction, but benefitted from his professional background. When I came on board, I was young, had a business professional background, and immediately my credentials began to be questioned by the regulars. For some, I never replaced that bishop, they followed him to his professional practice for continued guidance. For others, they recognized my position and gladly continued to work with me through the spiritual matters but sought professional help elsewhere. However, there were some that despite their ability to seek professional help, they continued to see me and we worked through their issues. I never discouraged people from seeking professional help and for some I encouraged them to do so. I could help them work through their spirituality, but, for some members (yes more than one) who were contemplating suicide, or had sexuality dysfunctions, etc...I recognized my limitations and recommended they see a professional counselor.

I appreciate the SP addressing this issue that he desribed being the cause of divorces in our stake. I am just curious about why the follow up with the RS sisters and not the Priesthood bretheren. I will wait for my wife's report after the meeting takes place.

I question how much sexual intimacy would be "the cause of divorce," but it's probably a likely factor in many cases. I also agree that the topic of sexual intimacy is probably a topic that should be addressed more openly and frequently. Although frankly, I don't want to hear the faith-building personal stories most of my RS sisters might have to share.

And I also wonder what the difference would be with a follow-up with the women. You said the theme was "be nice and you'll get more action" (or something like that). From what I gather, this would probably not be the theme of the lesson to the women. And yet I have trouble imagining it would be "put out more."

Anyway, if we believe that LDS marriages need more sex, ironically, maybe we should start counseling people to stop having so many kids. That seems like an extremely common barrier for an active sex life.

That caused me to laugh.

I'm going to go wayy out on a limb here and suggest that a ten minute pep talk is not going to counteract twenty or forty years of negative messages the church has been sending.

I detect an oxymoron alert.

I agree and that a 10 minute pep talk is not going solve the problem...but, please explain...what negative messages?

Are you serious?

<gives imaginary high five to ERCougar>

Yes, I am serious. During his talk the SP repeated several times that this issue is rarely discussed in a Church setting and I agree. Up until Saturday, I don't recall ever receiving messages, counsel, or direction on this subject other than your typical "husbands be considerate of your wives" or the "it is a wonderful thing when expressed between a man and woman in love and married".

What negative messages?

Just a bit of unsolicited advice: I'd cut the conversations off first thing. Nothing positive can come from having these discussions with a married woman at work.