Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I love what’s been said and also have come to a point in my life that I just give thanks. When I feel the need to express myself to my “higher power”, I like just talking out loud or writing it down. Much like posting here, I don’t really know any of you exist but I like the exchange of ideas, both from you all and that I can give too. That’s crazy wendell because this week I had a very similar experience with my in-laws. Of course, my DW would be the one in your shoes since they’re her parents (and they’ve pretty much disowned me at this point for resigning from the church). I will say that in my DW’s case, her parents continuous trampling of boundaries essentially boils down to a lack of open and honest communication. There are a lot of things that my DW has not shared with her parents, mostly because she doesn’t trust that they will be able to handle it in a respectful way. Of course, then when things happen, like this week, the floodgates open again and they’re all back at square one.
I’m definitely not implying that you should do this but my DW and I have decided that we’re going to just have to rip the bandage off. There’s no point in having these massive blow-ups every six to twelve months, smooth them out and then go on pretending that everything’s exactly like everyone wants it to be.
Also, to Ray’s point, I’m sure they have the best intentions at a conscious level but, based on what you’ve said and based on the experience with my in-laws, the concern is actually much more about their own image than it is about my “salvation”. My in-laws will say the right things to defend their position but there’s so many holes in their logic that it becomes oh-so-obvious that that is just a cover for the true feelings/intentions, which is to save their own image, both self-image and the image they project to their close friends and family members.
I’m a big believer in the concept of there being a season for everything. And for us, the season of finally and completely removing ourselves from her family’s system has arrived. This doesn’t mean that we don’t have to have a relationship. It simply means that the future of our relationship will be built on respect, trust, honesty, and open communication. And, of course, appropriate boundaries as these relationships evolve. Based on where we are today (after a troubling phone conversation) this relationship re-building process will take years, possibly decades. Scary and exciting all at the same time.
I too, would love to hear what others have to say about this since I’m still processing in my own mind how we’re going to proceed with my in-laws.
I agree that there is no defense of hard-core porn. It panders to the absolute worst in any of us. I will say however, that from my experience, and I’ve been very close to this in ways similar to what Ray has mentioned, that it’s not the porn but the forbidden nature of porn and the taboo nature of sexuality in general that have led to most abuses.
Traumatic childhood experiences which involved some form of sexual abuse has been the biggest “trigger” for those whose paths led to abuse. But the way in which sexuality is treated in the church and the church culture has been the next biggest “trigger”. I would put porn in the category of accelerant, not “trigger” in all of the cases that I’m familiar with that led to abuse. And, I’m including emotional abuse with the other forms of abuse, like sexual and physical, all three of which tend to go together when left unchecked.
Right now I’m way into: The Killers (they’re kinda nom)
The Strokes
Arctic Monkeys
Band of Horses
I wish some ward would have the cajones to do the hymn “Ring Out Wild Bells” at New Year. It rocks! Yes, even for a hymn.
Loved your intro, Martine!! Welcome! And, absolutely loved, loved, loved what Rix said. I can sense that “God” is unchanging but we aren’t and so our relationship to “Her/Him” is what changes.
I haven’t weighed in on this yet, but… The more that porn is pounded as the great evil the more of a problem it will become. The lack of any real discussion about root causes for porn addiction will make it impossible to overcome. It’s not like substance addiction where you just “stop”. We need to have intimacy which, for most men and many women, includes a healthy sexual relationship. For a healthy intimate sexual relationship to happen, for many, this will include “self-love”, ie masturbation. To pretend that what’s good for the goose is good for the gander, is naive and destructive.
In my marital relationship, we call this “taking care of ourselves”. And, this does not just mean masturbation. It means asking for what we need instead of hoping the other wants what we want. If the other doesn’t want “it”, without any possibility of that experience, we will get resentful and the downward cycle begins. Taking care of oneself includes being open, honest, direct, loving, and accepting. If I’m going to be home really late and my DW needs to go to bed before I get home, we’re on our own. She can take care of herself, I can take care of myself. What that means or what it looks like (sorry, don’t visualize
😳 ) could be vastly different or exactly the same.I think that the lack of openness and honesty around this issue for almost all religions will continue to leave marriages in disrepair. If a wife thinks her husband’s a perv because he masturbates, well, it’s game over.
Ironically, or not, when a couple can “take care of themselves” there is a level of intimacy and self-expression that is intensely different than a couple that hopes the other will take care of them.
Sorry for the thread-jack but I just see this question of porn as being a part of the bigger issue of intimacy. In that vein, I agree with those who stated earlier that without the religious taboo, porn is pretty uneventful. Though I do agree with Ray that the messiness of getting 18 year old girls into porn production is tragic and damages all of our humanity.
That is really great insight and I see it coming out in one of two ways based on personality type. Those who seek “certainty” will suffer from confirmation bias and will get the prescribed “answer”.
Those who seek “community” will suffer from the guilt of the community until they can allow their personal journey to trump the community’s prescribed journey. Of course, the possibility exists that the elevation of the personal journey may at some level look the same as the prescribed journey, just reached in a different way.
cwald wrote:swimordie wrote:I’ll be the nay-sayer…
Think of your contribution as if you were not a part of a religion-led scout organization. A week of camp for 200 bucks?? I’d kill for that if I was a secular scout parent.
200 bucks? Ha! You didn’t use your calculator either!
Based on your post you pay 100 to FoS, plus 324 for two boys for a total of 424. 212 per boy? That’s what I was basing it on. I know a week at a sports camp, for example, is north of 400 bucks.
I totally empathize with the passive aggressive style fundraising, guilting someone into doing anything will always create resentment.
brynngal wrote:I am not sure what I will say to the bishop, I am not sure what he wants.
I don’t want to misinterpret this so take it for what it’s worth…
In thinking about creating boundaries, we can’t really concern ourselves with “what he wants”. We shouldn’t bend our own feelings/beliefs to work with what the other “expects”. We share lovingly what we want, what we want out of the relationship, what will work, what won’t work. If this is not something they want to hear or if they try to manipulate us to think/feel differently, then we know we must create a boundary that this is unacceptable.
We won’t be manipulated into doing/thinking what they want us to do/think. Manipulations come in the form of guilting, shaming, scaring, threatening, etc. You’re not a bad person just because you don’t meet someone else’s expectations. Their expectations are their problem. Not ours. We do the best we can wherever we are on our current journey and we don’t allow others to affect the love we have for ourselves and the confidence we have in our own journey. It’s our journey after all, not theirs. We have to live with ourselves and love ourselves without being affected by others thoughts/words/deeds.
I know, easier said than done, I’m exhibit A…
🙄 I’ll be the nay-sayer… Think of your contribution as if you were not a part of a religion-led scout organization. A week of camp for 200 bucks?? I’d kill for that if I was a secular scout parent.
I love what cwald said. I think it’s personal. As one examines the core concepts of personal spiritual belief, one can recognize the validity of all belief as equal. In that light, one can empathize and sympathize with those whose beliefs differ. I think from that perspective, with love and respect, any two people can have a cordial conversation wherein no one feels attacked.
This is the ultimate, being able to express and acknowledge the equality of belief, thought and spirituality. Even when the other doesn’t reciprocate. One must remember the end goal, to acknowledge and accept, even if the other is unwilling to loosen their grip on certainty.
Heber13 wrote:Does that mean you have to stand up to intolerance of others? Does that perpetuate intolerance to do so?
Good point, heber.
I think there is an element of reinforcement when you stand up to intolerance. I think that it’s personal, that you have to define for yourself what is acceptable or not and what actions are to be taken. Does that reinforce the intolerance? Probably, but knowing what’s right, feeling what’s right does compel the actor to do what’s right.
Not in the sense of hoping that the intolerant change but rather that the ethical position is unchanging.
Part of my transforming world-view is an understanding and acceptance that there is a personality type out there that will always be intolerant. So, it really doesn’t matter whether there are mormons or non-mormons; there will always be an intolerant faction. The practical difficulty with all of this in the present church is the overwhelming white-washing of EVERYTHING. It’s not just that all previous modern prophets are taught as being essentially perfect, but current leadership is allowed to pass as essentially perfect. You never, ever hear a GA speak about personal challenges overcome in adulthood. And, I mean, spiritual/worthiness challenges, not life challenges. My parents grew up in the fifties and they believe that all of the modern prophets were essentially perfect, so either this has changed in their lifetimes and they’ve changed with it or else it’s been like this since at least that time period. They have similar views of the founding fathers: that they were essentially perfect men, called of God, revered much the same way that JS, BY, et al are currently revered in the church.
Having said that, I think that this is at the heart of why Bushman’s concept is almost impossible to embrace from a practical standpoint. While I think it’s a fantastic way to look at anyone, prophet or otherwise, it’s simply not a part of the modern church. At least in the ETB and GBH eras there seemed to be a removal of nuance when it came to personality, growth, perspective, etc. of the previous modern day prophets.
As example, it seems in any discussion of JS, after his 14 yr old vision, he essentially never sinned. I get the paradigm: to a current TBM, the experience of actually seeing God not only means you are perfect in that moment but that you have a perfect knowledge that will never allow you to “go astray”. “How could you possibly sin after seeing God?” I know no one here really agrees with that but I don’t know any TBM’s that disagree with this conceptually.
I get that what I’m saying is a rash generalization but I’m just explaining why I think Bushman’s perspective is not and can not be embraced by the current church, leadership included.
