Sex and the Singles Ward

[UtahDan]

Okay, normally I put these all in the same thread, but I couldn't resist having a thread with that title.

34: The Epic Sex Series Part 3 – Sex and the Singles Ward


Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 1:23:16 — 57.2MB)
Greg and Amy host a discussion with Sonya, Angie and Dan about sex as a Mormon “single” and how being a single person in the LDS Church has affected their personal sex lives and their opinions about sex and sexuality.
Listen to Angie’s Voices Interview here.
Listen to Sonya’s Voices Interview here.

Enjoy.

[Devildog]

OK Dan, with a title like Epic Sex Series... I gave it a shot.

I don't know man...

Maybe my sordid youth corrupted me beyond repair. But it was a little dry for me. Maybe it was the lack of strippers.

[UtahDan]

OK Dan, with a title like Epic Sex Series... I gave it a shot.

I don't know man...

Maybe my sordid youth corrupted me beyond repair. But it was a little dry for me. Maybe it was the lack of strippers.

You are a man of the world brother. Also, this is the singles episode. It might be less epic than the other two installments of this series.

[wuapinmon]

There is singles ward sex so not exquisite, if you knew what you were missing you'd be crushed by the empathetic response of despair for those who partake of his/her flesh.

[Sullyute]

I am only part way thru the podcast but I have some issues already. I think that it is funny that the panel is making fun of the parties and games that single mormons do but then insinuate that if drinking were involved in those same activities that it would then be cool enough to participate. I have a hard time following that logic. So far the podcast feels like a group of ex-mo talking about how much cooler they are now that they can drink. I hope that it gets better...

[Ex'dute]

I am only part way thru the podcast but I have some issues already. I think that it is funny that the panel is making fun of the parties and games that single mormons do but then insinuate that if drinking were involved in those same activities that it would then be cool enough to participate. I have a hard time following that logic. So far the podcast feels like a group of ex-mo talking about how much cooler they are now that they can drink. I hope that it gets better...

I don't know if drinking makes one "cooler" or not, but I will say from experience that it can make things more tolerable. Take sacrament meeting as an example. That usually mind-numbing experience can be downright entertaining if you just take three or four shots of booze in the parking lot just before it starts. Try it sometime. You'll thank me later -- especially if it is testimony meeting or high council week.

[Dawminator]

I am only part way thru the podcast but I have some issues already. I think that it is funny that the panel is making fun of the parties and games that single mormons do but then insinuate that if drinking were involved in those same activities that it would then be cool enough to participate. I have a hard time following that logic. So far the podcast feels like a group of ex-mo talking about how much cooler they are now that they can drink. I hope that it gets better...

More or less my thoughts.

[stretchiute]

Agreed

I have enjoyed some of the podcasts, but the panels appear to more and more jaded and less and less balanced. I would have loved to hear a believing single mormon in their late twenties/early thirties talk about how the faith impacts their life, the advantages of celibacy etc. These folks ALL seemed to have transgressed the commandments of the LDS church, before having serious doubts, and as a result of apparent cognitive dissonance chose to justify their actions, rather than deal with their choices while remaining in the faith. ie. The hyperbole like 'everyone in provo is doing "it" and they go to these clinics and nobody knows. Well if you work at a clinic, those are the people you are going to see, but it is not representative of the society as a whole.

I am all for allowing people to share their experiences, but I find that it is only truly valuable if there is multiple perspectives. This is true and goes both ways. However, I have listened to several episodes and this one was the least balanced and others were more fair. I say this because it was such an interested topic, missed opportunity.

[stretchiute]

Just started the conference review. One of the first phrases. "We are three non-believers and if you want any believer perspectives, you will not get them here, but we will try to be civil."

The motto/mission of the podcast:
Exploring all aspects of Mormonism, leaving no stone unturned. Even the rolling ones.

I feel like you have fallen short of your mission. "All aspects" from a critical viewpoint.

[UtahDan]

Agreed

I have enjoyed some of the podcasts, but the panels appear to more and more jaded and less and less balanced. I would have loved to hear a believing single mormon in their late twenties/early thirties talk about how the faith impacts their life, the advantages of celibacy etc. These folks ALL seemed to have transgressed the commandments of the LDS church and as a result of apparent cognitive dissonance chose to justify their actions, rather than deal with their choices while remaining in the faith. ie. The hyperbole like 'everyone in provo is doing "it" and they go to these clinics and nobody knows. Well if you work at a clinic, those are the people you are going to see, but it is not representative of the society as a whole.

I am all for allowing people to share their experiences, but I find that it is only truly valuable if there is multiple perspectives. This is true and goes both ways. However, I have listened to several episodes and this one was the least balanced and others were more fair. I say this because it was such an interested topic, missed opportunity.

I'm glad there was something for you in some of them. Balance is tough to get and we hope that we are getting it in the big picture, though episode to episode we take heat for being either too critical or not critical enough. The conference reviews definitely end up being more critiques, though at least in the ones I do I always try to say a few things positive about each talk (though I am certainly irreverent). Keep in mind also that it is not easy to get true believers to come on the podcast. You can't often get the relief society president on with an apostate and have them really say what they both think. I think the balance we have ended up with is more a balance of believers and non-believers, all of whom are at least conversant with tough issues. Anyway that is what we try for. I do sincerely appreciate the constructive comments.

[stretchiute]

Thanks for your response. I can see the difficulty in getting the balance, particularly on the touchier issues. However, I bet a post on here or other forums may get a response.

[LA Ute]

I doubt it's possible to deliver a podcast that will attract both faithful Mormons and non-believers/apostates. You really have to pick a target audience and go for it.

This reminds me of The Foyer on the old CUF. It failed, mainly because at the end of the day cats and dogs have a tough time living together. Only a few are willing to make the effort, especially on the believer side of the discussion. For example, a critique of General Conference requires an entirely different approach to that experience than most faithful believers will choose to take, or even feel comfortable with. Over time even those relatively few believers who try to participate will peel away and the group becomes more and more an echo chamber.

[DrumNFeather]

Agreed

I have enjoyed some of the podcasts, but the panels appear to more and more jaded and less and less balanced. I would have loved to hear a believing single mormon in their late twenties/early thirties talk about how the faith impacts their life, the advantages of celibacy etc. These folks ALL seemed to have transgressed the commandments of the LDS church, before having serious doubts, and as a result of apparent cognitive dissonance chose to justify their actions, rather than deal with their choices while remaining in the faith. ie. The hyperbole like 'everyone in provo is doing "it" and they go to these clinics and nobody knows. Well if you work at a clinic, those are the people you are going to see, but it is not representative of the society as a whole.

I am all for allowing people to share their experiences, but I find that it is only truly valuable if there is multiple perspectives. This is true and goes both ways. However, I have listened to several episodes and this one was the least balanced and others were more fair. I say this because it was such an interested topic, missed opportunity.

I think there are missed opportunities all over these types of podcasts. The problem though, as UD points out is that the intended audience isn't necessarily looking for a thoughtful, critical discussion, but rather an echo chamber to reinforce their cynicism...that's one of the (many) reasons why Dehlin got so strongly criticized by both sides. He tried to truly cater to both sides of the fence in the Mormon world, and as all of these other off shoot podcasts prove...you just can't do that. So, echo chamber it is! You'll likely never convince either side that your motives are noble (and that goes for the church as well), so at some point you gotta pick a direction and go. I think that's what they've done here.

[UtahDan]

I think there are missed opportunities all over these types of podcasts. The problem though, as UD points out is that the intended audience isn't necessarily looking for a thoughtful, critical discussion, but rather an echo chamber to reinforce their cynicism...that's one of the (many) reasons why Dehlin got so strongly criticized by both sides. He tried to truly cater to both sides of the fence in the Mormon world, and as all of these other off shoot podcasts prove...you just can't do that. So, echo chamber it is! You'll likely never convince either side that your motives are noble (and that goes for the church as well), so at some point you gotta pick a direction and go. I think that's what they've done here.

I agree that the lines are just in different places for people and it is very hard to not have anyone think you have crossed them. For the record, I liked Uchtdorff's talk and actually have implemented something Sis. Wixom recommend. Thought Monson looked and sounded better than I have seen him in a long time and that he was very funny. I also have all sort of quibbles with the other things that were said. That is my approach, take it like anything else I might read or hear. Critically examine it (which is different than being cynical), keep what is good and chuck the rest. But a lot of people would be put off enough by my disagreements that the agreements would get lost. And I understand that.

I think it is probably fair to say that most of the audience is exmo or has serious doubts they are living with (though I have no way of knowing). Still, the podcast that was our predecessor had a level of vitriol towards the church we have tried not to replicate. I recognize that might be too fine a distinction for some. I think the most believer friendly things we have done are probably the historically oriented ones (Porter Rockwell, Mark Hoffman) and the sports ones I have done.

[UtahDan]

Thanks for your response. I can see the difficulty in getting the balance, particularly on the touchier issues. However, I bet a post on here or other forums may get a response.

Sounds like someone wants on.

[UtahDan]

I doubt it's possible to deliver a podcast that will attract both faithful Mormons and non-believers/apostates. You really have to pick a target audience and go for it.

It's really a tiny niche within a tiny niche. We have discussed internally on many occasions that there really is no such thing as a fixed exmo audience anyway. There is a window of a few years where people have an interest in that which seems to almost invariably close as they lose interest in Mormon topics. Though people who have not choice but to be immersed in it seem to keep interest muhc longer.

[Dawminator]

This reminds me of The Foyer on the old CUF. It failed, mainly because at the end of the day cats and dogs have a tough time living together. Only a few are willing to make the effort, especially on the believer side of the discussion. For example, a critique of General Conference requires an entirely different approach to that experience than most faithful believers will choose to take, or even feel comfortable with. Over time even those relatively few believers who try to participate will peel away and the group becomes more and more an echo chamber.

I think that is something that I have not been good at in the past, but I hope I am getting better at. I think, for me at least, any uber-defensiveness on my side has been a reflection of my own lack of confidence in my spirituality at the time. The past conference was eye opening for me in a lot of respects and helped me feel comfortable with my testimony, while acknowledging that others experiences are different from mine. Those differing experiences don't lessen the validity of my own, and I just needed to remember that.

So with that in mind, I thought I would leave some comments on the Sex in the Singles Ward podcast thread. I am one of the faithful (well...I try), single, LDS folks in his late 20's that stretchie was referring to in his post. I had virtually the same thoughts he did. I think I actually asked out loud why my thoughts were not being represented. But then I asked myself if I would have been willing to go on the podcast...probably not. But the thing that stood out to me in that podcast that I vehemently disagreed with was the notion that it is IMPOSSIBLE (her words not mine) to be happy and single in the LDS church. True, I have not always been happy as a YSA. I have had my fair bouts with feeling lonely and isolated from the church body. But the older I have gotten and the closer I am to being 30 and single the more I have realized that if I am unhappy, it has nothing to do with the church or its doctrine. I once decided to make a conscious choice to be happy. I no longer defined myself through the spectrum of my marital status and I became much happier. Perhaps not all that surprisingly, as soon as I did this I found the women I associate with at church responding much more positively to me. I am currently dating a great girl and I can honestly say that while I am happy with her, my happiness is not contingent upon the success of our relationship.

Chastity and sexual purity is difficult for any red blooded human being. But, it is possible to have a fun, healthy, and exciting relationship without breaking those commandments. I say that from experience as a person who is very aware of his own hormones.

Just my thoughts. I appreciated the podcast because it got me thinking and strengthened my own perspective, even if I didn't agree with hardly a word that was said.

[UtahDan]

I think that is something that I have not been good at in the past, but I hope I am getting better at. I think, for me at least, any uber-defensiveness on my side has been a reflection of my own lack of confidence in my spirituality at the time. The past conference was eye opening for me in a lot of respects and helped me feel comfortable with my testimony, while acknowledging that others experiences are different from mine. Those differing experiences don't lessen the validity of my own, and I just needed to remember that.

So with that in mind, I thought I would leave some comments on the Sex in the Singles Ward podcast thread. I am one of the faithful (well...I try), single, LDS folks in his late 20's that stretchie was referring to in his post. I had virtually the same thoughts he did. I think I actually asked out loud why my thoughts were not being represented. But then I asked myself if I would have been willing to go on the podcast...probably not. But the thing that stood out to me in that podcast that I vehemently disagreed with was the notion that it is IMPOSSIBLE (her words not mine) to be happy and single in the LDS church. True, I have not always been happy as a YSA. I have had my fair bouts with feeling lonely and isolated from the church body. But the older I have gotten and the closer I am to being 30 and single the more I have realized that if I am unhappy, it has nothing to do with the church or its doctrine. I once decided to make a conscious choice to be happy. I no longer defined myself through the spectrum of my marital status and I became much happier. Perhaps not all that surprisingly, as soon as I did this I found the women I associate with at church responding much more positively to me. I am currently dating a great girl and I can honestly say that while I am happy with her, my happiness is not contingent upon the success of our relationship.

Chastity and sexual purity is difficult for any red blooded human being. But, it is possible to have a fun, healthy, and exciting relationship without breaking those commandments. I say that from experience as a person who is very aware of his own hormones.

Just my thoughts. I appreciated the podcast because it got me thinking and strengthened my own perspective, even if I didn't agree with hardly a word that was said.

Have you put your comment on the website? Any chance I could get you to? All perspectives are appreciated, and while I think LA is right that conflict breeds some fatigue, I believe there is always something to be learned from hearing other perspectives. It is always productive for everyone if they keep an open mind, even if, as you say you don't agree with the other guy at all. At least know you understand him better and that is worthwhile, right? Thanks for your feedback. Seriously appreciated.


http://mormonexpositor.com/34-the-ep...-singles-ward/

[LA Ute]

Have you put your comment on the website? Any chance I could get you to? All perspectives are appreciated, and while I think LA is right that conflict breeds some fatigue, I believe there is always something to be learned from hearing other perspectives. It is always productive for everyone if they keep an open mind, even if, as you say you don't agree with the other guy at all. At least know you understand him better and that is worthwhile, right? Thanks for your feedback. Seriously appreciated.


http://mormonexpositor.com/34-the-ep...-singles-ward/

I may venture over there and spout off. Right now I'm just too fatigued. What can I say? You wear me out.

[Dawminator]

Have you put your comment on the website? Any chance I could get you to? All perspectives are appreciated, and while I think LA is right that conflict breeds some fatigue, I believe there is always something to be learned from hearing other perspectives. It is always productive for everyone if they keep an open mind, even if, as you say you don't agree with the other guy at all. At least know you understand him better and that is worthwhile, right? Thanks for your feedback. Seriously appreciated.


http://mormonexpositor.com/34-the-ep...-singles-ward/

I probably won't. Especially because its this topic. Here, I feel like I am with friends.

[Rocker Ute]

I think that is something that I have not been good at in the past, but I hope I am getting better at. I think, for me at least, any uber-defensiveness on my side has been a reflection of my own lack of confidence in my spirituality at the time. The past conference was eye opening for me in a lot of respects and helped me feel comfortable with my testimony, while acknowledging that others experiences are different from mine. Those differing experiences don't lessen the validity of my own, and I just needed to remember that.

So with that in mind, I thought I would leave some comments on the Sex in the Singles Ward podcast thread. I am one of the faithful (well...I try), single, LDS folks in his late 20's that stretchie was referring to in his post. I had virtually the same thoughts he did. I think I actually asked out loud why my thoughts were not being represented. But then I asked myself if I would have been willing to go on the podcast...probably not. But the thing that stood out to me in that podcast that I vehemently disagreed with was the notion that it is IMPOSSIBLE (her words not mine) to be happy and single in the LDS church. True, I have not always been happy as a YSA. I have had my fair bouts with feeling lonely and isolated from the church body. But the older I have gotten and the closer I am to being 30 and single the more I have realized that if I am unhappy, it has nothing to do with the church or its doctrine. I once decided to make a conscious choice to be happy. I no longer defined myself through the spectrum of my marital status and I became much happier. Perhaps not all that surprisingly, as soon as I did this I found the women I associate with at church responding much more positively to me. I am currently dating a great girl and I can honestly say that while I am happy with her, my happiness is not contingent upon the success of our relationship.

Chastity and sexual purity is difficult for any red blooded human being. But, it is possible to have a fun, healthy, and exciting relationship without breaking those commandments. I say that from experience as a person who is very aware of his own hormones.

Just my thoughts. I appreciated the podcast because it got me thinking and strengthened my own perspective, even if I didn't agree with hardly a word that was said.

I haven't listened in a while, so maybe I should, but I think some of the things that you say are interesting. Particularly the different experiences that people have. I am repeatedly in awe at what some people experience as fully active members of the church that are so different than mine or people I know. For example, Puget Ute over on UF.N talked often about some licked cupcake analogy that he said was common analogy for lost virginity in the church back in the day (and maybe even currently). I hadn't heard that analogy, nor my wife or the few others I asked about it. Apparently it was prevalent.

So, I often keep that in mind with both active and non-members. Like you Dawm, I had a very happy single life in the church, with moments of isolation that I believe are probably common among all single people. However, that time in my life was in many respects some of the best times of my life. My wife and I abstained until marriage, and for us it has been a source of trust which is a basis for any sound marriage in my humble opinion, life isn't always so ideal though.

Conversely, I've found that many people who have left the church have been traumatized by it, or feel they are victims. I'm not saying all feel that way, nor am I saying that those feelings are unfounded. For believers, it seems all too easy to point to something in their life that isn't congruent with standards and ideals set by the church and decide that is what caused them to 'fall away.' However, I think the damage isn't so much with that, but the missed mark of 1. Others being too hard on people and 2. People believing that the standards are impossible to attain. Ironically, isn't that so the opposite of what the Atonement is supposed to be about?

From that point, it becomes the life of an ex-lover. Funny all the faults my ex-girlfriends have now, isn't it? Same with the church. I have someone very close to me who is no longer a 'believer'. All she can see is the bad now and that is all she wants to talk about. She'll focus in like a laser when someone in the faith has done her wrong, but I witnessed her just this last week dismiss the 7 different people in her ward who came and took her kids to their homes while she is supposed to be on bed rest. Conversely, those 'believers' will ignore the obvious warts.

That's ramblin, the point being, people tend to see what they want to on both sides, and both sides tend to feel like their viewpoint is enlightenment and freedom. The quicker we can come to terms with these limitations and the limitations of all of humanity the quicker we'll be able to work together and heal.

[USS Utah]

Conversely, I've found that many people who have left the church have been traumatized by it, or feel they are victims. I'm not saying all feel that way, nor am I saying that those feelings are unfounded. For believers, it seems all too easy to point to something in their life that isn't congruent with standards and ideals set by the church and decide that is what caused them to 'fall away.' However, I think the damage isn't so much with that, but the missed mark of 1. Others being too hard on people and 2. People believing that the standards are impossible to attain. Ironically, isn't that so the opposite of what the Atonement is supposed to be about?

Some excerpts from a talk I gave in church on Easter Sunday 2012:

One summer day when I was 17, I had a little bit of a meltdown at a church softball game; and as it happened, my father was there to see it. When I went to bed that night I found a note on my pillow suggesting that I read Ether 12:27:“And if men come unto me I will show unto them their weakness. I give unto men weakness that they may be humble; and my grace is sufficient for all men that humble themselves before me; for if they humble themselves before me, and have faith in me, then will I make weak things become strong unto them.” I had plenty of weaknesses, but the question now was how to humble myself and have faith. To find the answer I started reading The Book of Mormon.

At times I felt that it was a struggle to exercise faith, but there were also days when the Lord answered my prayers with needed help and with needed answers to some difficult questions. There were certain things that I stopped caring so much about, and an amazing thing happened. Some of those good things I worried about because they were not happening, started to happen. I had faith in Jesus Christ, I knew that my Heavenly Father loved me, I loved both of them, and this brought happiness.

Still, there were some lessons that I needed to go on a mission to learn. Those who go on missions have an amazing opportunity, they can humble themselves, have faith, and through the grace of their Savior, they can have their weaknesses become strengths. What is really amazing is how much they can learn in just two short years. I learned more in my two years than in all the years before or since, though I am still learning. Those who did not have the opportunity to serve a mission, as well as those who did serve and have returned home, still have this amazing opportunity. They still have opportunities to serve the Lord, to humble themselves, have faith and have their weaknesses become strengths. Some return missionaries may be surprised to find that there is still a need for this kind of opportunity; they may be surprised that there is still much to learn, that there is still a strait and narrow path to walk and much more yet to be endured.

No matter how much adversity one has experienced, or how much one has learned, they are still human and will continue to fall short of perfection because of their weaknesses and inadequacies. The good news is that the Atonement is there for them, even if their failings are not great sins. There will always be the the opportunity to humble ourselves and have faith in Christ and to be lifted by His grace.

Everyone has down times occasionally, and everyone experiences feelings of inadequacy – though they may have experienced a mighty change of heart, they don't always feel like singing the song of redeeming love. This is in no small part due to the conditions we face here in mortality and the ideals or teachings we aspire to live by. Elder Bruce C. Hafen of the Seventy has written that there is a gap between reality and the life we strive to live in keeping the commandments and following the Savior's example. We are commanded to “be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect” and yet we keep falling short.

Some people respond by discarding the ideal. They say it is too hard so why even try; we will be much happier if we accept reality and do not try to live an impossible ideal. Others ignore reality and say that they have already reached the ideal, even as they continue to fall short just like the rest of us. Falling short does not mean that we are willfully rebelling against God, it only means that we are human. The Atonement is not just for sinners – though as Paul said, “For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God” -- it is also for those striving for perfection; for those who have gone from bad to good and are trying to go from good to better.

We strive, we stretch, we reach, and still we fall short; yet by humbling ourselves and having faith in Christ we can by lifted by His grace. We stretch and struggle, but as we humble ourselves and have faith our weakness becomes strong unto us through the grace of Christ.

Some of the worst things that happen to us are the things we do to ourselves; the doubts we entertain, the grudges that we carry, the habits we pick up and the sins we commit. Nephi saw the Son of God, yet he felt to say once “O wretched man that I am” because of the sins and temptations which so easily beset him. We may sometimes feel as Nephi did; if so we should say as he did “Awake, my soul! No longer droop in sin. Rejoice, O my heart, and give place no more for the enemy of my soul. . . . Rejoice, O my heart, and cry unto the Lord, and say: O Lord, I will praise thee forever: yea, my soul will rejoice in thee, my God, and the rock of my salvation.”

[NorthwestUteFan]

I haven't listened in a while, so maybe I should, but I think some of the things that you say are interesting. Particularly the different experiences that people have. I am repeatedly in awe at what some people experience as fully active members of the church that are so different than mine or people I know. For example, Puget Ute over on UF.N talked often about some licked cupcake analogy that he said was common analogy for lost virginity in the church back in the day (and maybe even currently). I hadn't heard that analogy, nor my wife or the few others I asked about it. Apparently it was prevalent.

I will just drop this story about Elizabeth Smart here. JoBro nails it. (pun intended)

http://www.religiondispatches.org/di...sity_audience/

She recalls that a teacher once held up a chewed up piece of used chewing gum and compared it to a young woman who lost her virginity. And after surviving sexual assault during her captivity, Smart recalls:

“I thought, ‘Oh, my gosh, I’m that chewed up piece of gum, nobody re-chews a piece of gum, you throw it away.’ And that’s how easy it is to feel like you know longer have worth, you know longer have value,” Smart said. “Why would it even be worth screaming out? Why would it even make a difference if you are rescued? Your life still has no value.”

In my class, it wasn’t chewing gum. It was the rose damaged by be the circle--its petals browned and limp. Other Mormon women remember mangled cupcakes and donuts. Who, after all, would want to actually eat the donut that had been passed around?

[LA Ute]

NWUF, I wish whoever is responsible for such things would put instructions in the correlated manuals not to use those analogies. It would change the discussion in important ways.

[Scorcho]

NWUF, I wish whoever is responsible for such things would put instructions in the correlated manuals not to use those analogies. It would change the discussion in important ways.

that analogy completely contradicts Isaiah's analogy, "though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be white as snow"

[LA Ute]

that analogy completely contradicts Isaiah's analogy, "though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be white as snow"

Yes it does. As I've said before, there is a little Pharisee inside of every one of us, struggling to get out. We should all try to keep him in.

[Scratch]

Yes it does. As I've said before, there is a little Pharisee inside of every one of us, struggling to get out. We should all try to keep him in.

I prefer to release my internal Pharisee strategically at opportune moments. It's way too much fun to not let him out once in a while.

[Sullyute]

Yes it does. As I've said before, there is a little Pharisee inside of every one of us, struggling to get out. We should all try to keep him in.

Is this another analogy or are you actually saying there is a jewish midget inside one of my body cavities?! :dunno:

[NorthwestUteFan]

NWUF, I wish whoever is responsible for such things would put instructions in the correlated manuals not to use those analogies. It would change the discussion in important ways.

I think it is a cultural thing, not necessarily a lesson in the manual.

Most boys and girls will hear something like this and either ignore it, or call BS on it. But for those who seriously take it to heart, it can be very damaging to them psychologically.

Especially when their first sexual encounter does not happen by choice.

[LA Ute]

I think it is a cultural thing, not necessarily a lesson in the manual.

Most boys and girls will hear something like this and either ignore it, or call BS on it. But for those who seriously take it to heart, it can be very damaging to them psychologically.

Especially when their first sexual encounter does not happen by choice.

Right. I still think a warning/admonition to teachers not to make such analogies would do a world of good. BTW, in the last 8 years of attending YW meetings in my ward I've never heard that one.