LDS women's attitudes toward conjugal relations

[Archaea]

but the repressive attitude is responsible for mutual sexual dissatisfaction.

You tell girls, no, no, no.

What are they supposed to think after marriage? Icky.

A large of women in the Church don't seek after sexual satisfaction or even sexual enjoyment. That's because the positive aspects of sex are not talked about.

Men don't know how to have a positive sexual relationship with their wives, Hollywood and pornography misinform, and women are also left out in the cold.

You'd be surprised how many miserable marriages out there exist, solely or primarily due to a lack of sexual understanding of the needs of each other.

[tooblue]

The responsibility to educate young men and young women about sex belongs to parents, not the church. What's more, sexual repression is not merely an issue of the church but of American society in general. It is far too easy to blame the church for said repression.

Boys are told no no no, but the harsh reality is objectification permeates our male dominated society and is in fact celebrated. The result is men who do little to truly engender intimacy in their relationships and instead belittle their spouse by telling them they are inadequate, when in fact the man himself is inadequate.

A large of women in the Church don't seek after sexual satisfaction or even sexual enjoyment. That's because the positive aspects of sex are not talked about.

I don't believe it is as large a number as you suggest ... fear fuels this idea and provides young men justification for a myriad of behaviours.

[Archaea]

Sexual dysfunction is very high among our church members. In sexually repressive societies, this is not surprising.

The Church has some good stuff, but it needs to counterbalance the abstinence talk. And frankly some of the talk is misinformed and childish. It is an area many of our leaders have no good information, because the subject is taboo.

[ute4ever]

I know people who say they don't have a porn problem or a habit of looking at women's revealing areas as they walk by, etc.

They say usually the only times they think of porn and those problems are when they are at church, because it is talked about and talked about to death. So yes it is a problem that exists, but do you think perhaps it would be reduced if it wasn't brought up so often?

Imagine every Sunday hearing "more and more people are smoking pot." After a while wouldn't that barrage be counterproductive, peaking the curiosity of the masses?

[MikeWaters]

Maybe they should encourage people not to read the BoM. Make it scandalous. Then you have to be a rebel to read it.

[FarrahWaters]

first of all, thanks to tooblue for his comments, they put into words a lot of what I was thinking when I read the following post.

Originally Posted by Adam

But the husbands of the beautiful girls on the street will be happy and sexually fulfilled. They won't have a porn problem. They will be one with their wives. The YW's future husbands will be frustrated and lonely. They will be constantly tempted to turn to porn because their wives will have no idea of how to be a happy healthy sexual partner. They have this 13 year old approprate level of sexuality hammered into them and never are able to mature beyond it to normal healthy rightous sexuality. I've see it too often.

How refreshing it would be hear one of these women stand up and talk about how wonderful sex can be and how much YW should look forward to giving their beautiful bodies to their husbands in rapturous sexual union. It will never happen.

A message to YW that the only way they're going to have happy, sexually fulfilled husbands is to "give their beautiful bodies to their husbands"? Let's also continue to tell the YW, that they don't need to worry about getting a higher education, their only goal in life should be to get married in the temple. Some misguided leader tried to hand my Beehive class that bunk once, but we didn't buy it.

Did you notice the number of General Conference talks in recent years about how men should respect women more in general, and their wives more specifically-- how we should be treated as equal partners? Perhaps this is addressed so much because of problems that have become increasingly known to church leaders.

When I was a teenager, I didn't get a negative view of sex from church.
I don't recall ever being taught in church that sex was bad, bad ,bad. I remember being taught that sex before marriage was bad, but that sex after marriage was a wonderful thing. Any negative views of sex were actually what I heard about rape and pornography as a young girl. This objectification of women frightened me. The bottom line for me became: I don't want to be treated as an object of sex. I want mutual respect with my husband.

I apologize for this post not being very focused (my son is vying for my attention here), but my main point is that we should teach our YW to respect themselves and expect their future husbands to do the same.
Sex education is not the job of the church, its the parent's job. And then later in life, perhaps engaged couples should take some sort of pre-marital counseling session together that encompasses, among other things, what sex is going to be like.

[MikeWaters]

Listening to Bateman is a trial of my faith.

I guess I can respect him as a 70 but despise him for what he did to BYU.

[Brian]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Listening to Bateman is a trial of my faith.

I guess I can respect him as a 70 but despise him for what he did to BYU.

Did anyone else see the little guy surfing on that nice wave on his head?

Regards,
Brian

[Archaea]

respect.

Complete respect includes a healthy respect for our sexual selves.

What I disagree with is that a Church which emphasizes complete abstinence and chastity before marriage also bears some responsibility to counterbalance that notion for after marriage, namely, that marriage partners are given a great blessing, which is to be enjoyed and to produce marriage fulfillment.

I have seen counseling of numerous Church women who refuse to become sexually fulfilled, who have sex once or twice per year, and loathe their husbands for every wanting to share physical love. Yet these women are RS presidents and consider themselves righteous wives. I remember one women specifically who derided her husband publically and refused any contact sexually for three years. She was proud of that fact, yet held positions and temple recommends. She later divorced him, he remarried, baptized his new wife and was sealed in the temple.

My negative view through counseling is that the church members suffer many times over from sexual dysfunction, men through pornography, women through just refusing to partake. Yet the Church stands idly by.

An organization cannot preach chastity and abstinence, thereby creating repression and then expect no consequences.

[Brian]

There is a good book my wife found called "And they were not ashamed" by Brotherson, who is a counsellor.
It very frankly discusses this problem.
My wife grew up in a very "victorian" home, which luckily she was able to see through and adapt to live life more fully.
However, her little sister, who just got married this summer was not so lucky. She was terified of sex and was trying to figure out how to no feel guilty the morning after. She gave her this book and it seemed to help a little. However, the little sister still told her husband that she just wanted to cuddle on the first night. I told my wife it was a good thing she didn't pull that one on me.

Anyway, the book discusses the whole gamut: emotional and physical intimacy, how husbands can learn to provide and enjoy the emotional side of sex and how women can learn to give and enjoy the physical side of sex. Interesting book.

Regards,
Brian