If you religiously oppose masterbation... - Page 3 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#61 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 12:57 AM
 
klg47's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Utah
Posts: 1,635
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aura_Kitten View Post
can we all please get over our bodily hangups and realize that pleasurable things aren't evil? or at least, stop teaching children to feel ashamed and Bad and Wrong and Evil about it--? the fact that * I * was taught those things was a huge contributing factor to MAJOR psychological and emotional issues while i was growing up and it took YEARS for me to become comfortable with sexual partners, and even with MYSELF, along with a lengthy bit of counseling as well.
I'm not sure why you think that those of us against masturbation would teach our children to feel ashamed/bad/wrong/evil. That just isn't how most of us work. Many people think that this is how organized religions operate, but if you look at the actual doctrine, it simply isn't so. Yes there are many misguided teachers or leaders who will teach things in this manner, but they're almost never following the actual doctrine.

I am LDS - a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. We're probably one of the most strict religions where chastity is concerned. I was always taught that the proper place for expression of sexual desires was within marriage. Any other expression of sexual desires (masturbation, viewing pornography, making out, groping, french kissing before marriage, fornication, etc.) was simply not OK. So it seems that based on what you said, I would be a prime candidate for sexual problems. Not so. When I got married, I jumped in with both feet and haven't had any problems at all. My dh had to convince me to slow down a little our first night
klg47 is offline  
#62 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 01:21 AM
 
ananas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,988
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aura_Kitten View Post
:Puke
this is indeed the original reason that circumcision was made routine in the United States (that and cornflakes ~ yes really!!
Whoa, huh, wait. What now?

Newly single, chronically sleep deprived mama to my little wild thang wild.gif, born 11/17/12 

fly-by-nursing1.gif

ananas is offline  
#63 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 01:27 AM
 
lilyka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Sioux Falls, SD
Posts: 18,301
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
There is a really really great movie called . . . oh crap what was it . . . . Road to Wellville that explains it all.It is by no means a documentry but I have heard it is pretty accurate. If nothing else it is hilarious. Some choice quotes:

Chew chew chew .. it is the thing to do (Do you masticate?)

"An erection is the flagpole on your grave"

:

seriously . . .rent it

The truest answer to violence is love. The truest answer to death is life. The only prevention for violence is for the heart to have no violence within it.  We cannot prevent evil through any system devised by mankind. But we can grapple with evil and defeat it, but only with love—real love.

lilyka is offline  
#64 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 01:28 AM
 
Paddington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Happy ;-)
Posts: 13,910
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I don't think the teaching of the church on masturbation is actually going to help your friend. Yes, you can say the teaching of the Church is opposed to masturbation but no where in my references does it say so to prevent it cut off his foreskin. Maybe you should instead focus on the scripture references in the New Testament that tell you Christians are not called to circ, we instead have baptism and no longer have a blood sacrifice.

Lots of info on these threads:

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...40&postcount=6

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...d.php?t=516756

Good luck convincing your friend....

Ange. Mama to boys. Yup. All Boys. All Intact. A bunch of other NFL, crunchy credentials too.
Paddington is offline  
#65 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 01:31 AM
 
Paddington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Happy ;-)
Posts: 13,910
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ananas View Post
Whoa, huh, wait. What now?
http://www.historyofcircumcision.net...d=19&Itemid=50

Quote:
So why did circumcision become so prevalent in Christian countries in the 19th and 20th centuries? It seems we have to thank for it the sexual repression of Victorian England. During the reign of Queen Victoria, circumcision was very widely practised, and the main reason for it was to "cure" masturbation. Masturbation, or the "secret vice" was an enormous worry in both England and America at that time. According to the experts of the day, it was responsible for sleeplessness, night terrors, frequent urination, bed-wetting, epilepsy, St Vitus's Dance, kidney disease and insanity. Dr Kellogg, of Cornflakes fame, listed 38 suspicious signs by which habitual masturbators could be detected, and recommended the eating of his breakfast products to effect a cure.

Ange. Mama to boys. Yup. All Boys. All Intact. A bunch of other NFL, crunchy credentials too.
Paddington is offline  
#66 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 05:20 AM
 
lolar2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 6,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Dr. Kellogg worked at a 7th-day Adventist college called Battle Creek College in Michigan, which later moved to nearby Berrien Springs and changed its name to Andrews University. When I lived in the area, I took a few (secular) classes at Andrews and worked at the cafeteria. The cafeteria contracted for cereals with... Post. I thought that was just wrong.

Back to your regularly scheduled thread.
lolar2 is offline  
#67 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 09:03 AM
 
Cassiopeia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,059
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Cassiopeia is offline  
#68 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 09:16 AM
 
cappuccinosmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: SW Pennsylvania
Posts: 5,628
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
can we all please get over our bodily hangups and realize that pleasurable things aren't evil? or at least, stop teaching children to feel ashamed and Bad and Wrong and Evil about it--?
*sigh* Nobody has posted here believing that circ stops masturbation, first of all.

And then....None of us have posted that pleasure=evil, either.

What some of us do believe, however, is that sex is a wonderful gift from God and needs to be enjoyed in the context He intended for it, for best results. Which is what we teach our children.

Giving them no information except "Dont do it and if you do SHAME SHAME SHAME" would be wrong. Presenting it the way some of the ladies here have is something we will do when our own children are old enough to understand.
cappuccinosmom is offline  
#69 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 09:27 AM
 
Changed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 7,419
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The whole treating it like nose picking is what got me. It's nasty, go wash your hands. That is shaming and disrespectful imo. Now I would feel differently if someone said for example, we teach our children why we feel it's against Gods wishes and then without guilting or judgment, we let them make their own decisions and keep our mouths shut.
Changed is offline  
#70 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 10:40 AM
 
lilyka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Sioux Falls, SD
Posts: 18,301
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
well if your hands are in your pants they need to washed. I don't care what they are doing in there. its the same place. end of story. and by comparing it to nose picking I mean it is just an undesirable habit. not the end of the world.

I am not going to debate weather or not my beliefs are right or wrong. I am not asking anyone to change their beliefs about masturbation.

I was thinking about the friend in the OP. Perhaps, besides enlightening her to fact that circed men masturbate on a regular basis, perhaps ask her where we should stop to prevent our children from sinning. would we cut of their hands to stop them from stealing? would we give them a lobotomy to keep them from thinking wrong things? cut out their tounge to keep them from lying? gouge out their eyes to keep them from looking at things they shouldn't? of course not. then why would we cut off their penis to keep them from masturbating? Even if it did work. Amputation will not replace teaching and encouraging them to holiness. even if we could cut something off to keep them from sinning where would it stop? would the one sin not just be overtaken by the next? if we are going to dismember our children to keep them from sinning should we even bother having them? The whole thought of cutting off their legs or arms is just ridiculous and gruesome. but it might help her see the reality of circumcision to reduce masturbation is absurd and pointless.

The truest answer to violence is love. The truest answer to death is life. The only prevention for violence is for the heart to have no violence within it.  We cannot prevent evil through any system devised by mankind. But we can grapple with evil and defeat it, but only with love—real love.

lilyka is offline  
#71 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 11:02 AM
 
Changed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 7,419
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I don't disagree you should wash your hands after handling your girly bits. I disagree that it's an undesirable habit.

Perhaps the op could enlighten her friend a little and help her become comfortable with her own body. I hope it works out and she doesn't feel the need to mutilate or shame her son.
Changed is offline  
#72 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 06:27 PM
 
Brigianna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: who knows?
Posts: 9,522
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I brought this up on another thread, but I might as well ask here too--why is it that teaching a kid a parent's beliefs about sexual conduct is automatically assumed to be "shaming" or "hangups" or "unnatural," but teaching about other things is not? Those of you who are "sickened" at our beliefs about masturbation and sex, do you not ever teach your kids to abstain from any natural impulses--greed, eating candy before dinner, whatever? If you can teach whatever you believe to be appropriate behavior without "shaming" or force, why do you doubt that we can teach our beliefs about appropriate sexual behavior with the same gentle-discipline methods?
Brigianna is offline  
#73 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 06:34 PM
 
Kelly1216's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,014
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brigianna View Post
I brought this up on another thread, but I might as well ask here too--why is it that teaching a kid a parent's beliefs about sexual conduct is automatically assumed to be "shaming" or "hangups" or "unnatural," but teaching about other things is not? Those of you who are "sickened" at our beliefs about masturbation and sex, do you not ever teach your kids to abstain from any natural impulses--greed, eating candy before dinner, whatever? If you can teach whatever you believe to be appropriate behavior without "shaming" or force, why do you doubt that we can teach our beliefs about appropriate sexual behavior with the same gentle-discipline methods?
Thank you! I was wondering the same thing!

Wife to D (12/03) and totally smitten Mama to DD (4/05) DS (2/09) and expecting DD#2  6/23/11
Kelly1216 is offline  
#74 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 06:46 PM
 
eightyferrettoes's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,804
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I would venture to guess that it is because at no time in our American history has sex been viewed in a truly positive light, and that most religious teaching about sexuality has been quite negative and repressive.

To ask all posters who have made the break from thinking that masturbation="impurity" to blithely ignore a couple centuries' worth of religio-historical precedent is a little disingenous, IMO. Seems that Christianity has always been deeply invested in controlling sexual expression through shame and guilt.

Though not particularly interested in controlling the gluttony and consumer- consumption of its congregants. The day I hear preachers calling upon congregations to forever abstain from masturbatory consumerism at Wally World will be the day I fall completely out of my chair.

But hey, that's just me.
eightyferrettoes is offline  
#75 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 07:02 PM
 
boingo82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: A new-to-us house!!
Posts: 10,125
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jörð View Post
The whole treating it like nose picking is what got me. It's nasty, go wash your hands. That is shaming and disrespectful imo. Now I would feel differently if someone said for example, we teach our children why we feel it's against Gods wishes and then without guilting or judgment, we let them make their own decisions and keep our mouths shut.
That's funny, because I am pro-masturbation and pro-sex before marriage and I was still going to treat masturbation like nosepicking.

Not, "that's nasty, go wash your hands"...

but "there's nothing wrong with doing that, but it's not polite to do at the dinner table / library / etc, so please do it in the bathroom or your bedroom and remember to wash up afterwards"
boingo82 is offline  
#76 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 07:08 PM
 
Brigianna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: who knows?
Posts: 9,522
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by eightyferrettoes View Post
I would venture to guess that it is because at no time in our American history has sex been viewed in a truly positive light, and that most religious teaching about sexuality has been quite negative and repressive.

To ask all posters who have made the break from thinking that masturbation="impurity" to blithely ignore a couple centuries' worth of religio-historical precedent is a little disingenous, IMO. Seems that Christianity has always been deeply invested in controlling sexual expression through shame and guilt.

Though not particularly interested in controlling the gluttony and consumer- consumption of its congregants. The day I hear preachers calling upon congregations to forever abstain from masturbatory consumerism at Wally World will be the day I fall completely out of my chair.

But hey, that's just me.
You should come to our church, then. Consumerism, and resistance thereof, is a common theme. It is not shameful though.
Brigianna is offline  
#77 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 07:15 PM
 
klg47's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Utah
Posts: 1,635
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelly1216 View Post
Thank you! I was wondering the same thing!
I was going to say something like that too!
klg47 is offline  
#78 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 07:17 PM
 
Amris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I am loving and being loved.
Posts: 2,197
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brigianna View Post
I brought this up on another thread, but I might as well ask here too--why is it that teaching a kid a parent's beliefs about sexual conduct is automatically assumed to be "shaming" or "hangups" or "unnatural," but teaching about other things is not? Those of you who are "sickened" at our beliefs about masturbation and sex, do you not ever teach your kids to abstain from any natural impulses--greed, eating candy before dinner, whatever? If you can teach whatever you believe to be appropriate behavior without "shaming" or force, why do you doubt that we can teach our beliefs about appropriate sexual behavior with the same gentle-discipline methods?
I also don't agree with teaching children that things are "bad," and instead teaching them that "this is not considered appropriate, and may have consequences that you won't like."

There's a huge difference between teaching children that they're a "sinner" (which translates to 'bad') if they do something, and teaching them logically about consequences.

To teach my child table manners, for example, I will not say, "it's bad to put your elbows on the table," I will teach her, "it's good to keep your elbows off the table, because most people percieve that to be more polite. This doesn't make it true, but there are times when people's perception of you can impact your life, so it's a good habit to get into and keep."

Instead of teaching them to be ashamed, teach them the good reasons.

If you want to teach against masturbation, teach the benefits of refraining from it. "Dear, we choose to keep our body pure, because it brings us closer to God. It helps us to have a better relationship with him and with our spouse. Our body is also healthier and our soul feels better when we are closer to God and being pure. It is of great benefit in many ways to make this choice."

It can be done without saying, "Oh, and masturbation is a sin, too. If you do it, you are sinning." Sinning is synonymous with being 'bad,' and I fail to understand why anyone wants their child to think they're bad.
Amris is offline  
#79 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 07:17 PM
 
eightyferrettoes's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,804
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brigianna View Post
You should come to our church, then. Consumerism, and resistance thereof, is a common theme. It is not shameful though.
Thanks for the invite. I think I'll stick with my Unitarian church, though. Those people see bottled water as a crime against the divine, (and against commone fiscal sense) but I've heard nary a word about wanking.

At least the latter is ecologically friendly.
eightyferrettoes is offline  
#80 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 07:21 PM
 
eightyferrettoes's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,804
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
And WTF is up with the weird "purity" language? Is one "impure" just because of jackin' off? Only if you forget to wash your hands afterward?

Is there a statute of limitations on the duration of the icky ritual impurity? Does it matter if you fantasize about your church-sanctioned-domestic-partner-of-the-opposite-sex? Does phone sex with the aforementioned CSDPOTOS count?

:mumbling: Surely God sanctions phone sex...
eightyferrettoes is offline  
#81 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 07:30 PM
 
artgoddess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Suburban hell
Posts: 13,774
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by klg47 View Post
I'm not sure why you think that those of us against masturbation would teach our children to feel ashamed/bad/wrong/evil.
I just don't see how you possibly avoid it. How do you teach someone that feel good by pleasuring themselves is a sin without making them feel sinful?
artgoddess is offline  
#82 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 07:30 PM
 
Brigianna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: who knows?
Posts: 9,522
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amris View Post
I also don't agree with teaching children that things are "bad," and instead teaching them that "this is not considered appropriate, and may have consequences that you won't like."

There's a huge difference between teaching children that they're a "sinner" (which translates to 'bad') if they do something, and teaching them logically about consequences.

To teach my child table manners, for example, I will not say, "it's bad to put your elbows on the table," I will teach her, "it's good to keep your elbows off the table, because most people percieve that to be more polite. This doesn't make it true, but there are times when people's perception of you can impact your life, so it's a good habit to get into and keep."

Instead of teaching them to be ashamed, teach them the good reasons.

If you want to teach against masturbation, teach the benefits of refraining from it. "Dear, we choose to keep our body pure, because it brings us closer to God. It helps us to have a better relationship with him and with our spouse. Our body is also healthier and our soul feels better when we are closer to God and being pure. It is of great benefit in many ways to make this choice."

It can be done without saying, "Oh, and masturbation is a sin, too. If you do it, you are sinning." Sinning is synonymous with being 'bad,' and I fail to understand why anyone wants their child to think they're bad.
I am not exactly sure what you're talking about here, but I agree that it's better to emphasize the positive rather than the negative. And I would never tell a child that he/she was "a sinner." We do talk about good and bad actions, but with a reason. With table manners, we approach it much the same way you do. Sexual issues are not different.
Brigianna is offline  
#83 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 07:37 PM
 
Amris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I am loving and being loved.
Posts: 2,197
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brigianna View Post
I am not exactly sure what you're talking about here, but I agree that it's better to emphasize the positive rather than the negative. And I would never tell a child that he/she was "a sinner." We do talk about good and bad actions, but with a reason. With table manners, we approach it much the same way you do. Sexual issues are not different.
I was answering the question of "if you think teaching a child that something is a sin is sickening, how would YOU teach them not to do something they shouldn't do?"

And that's my answer. By teaching them about consequences, and turning the focus onto why it's good to do the alternative action that is better than the one that has negative consequences.

I would teach my child that it's possible that, if she lacks table manners, others might think less of her before bothering to get to know her. Then, I'll focus hard on the benefits of abstaining from putting one's elbows on the table, and the benefits of keeping one's mouth closed while chewing.

The point being that shaming someone with words like "sin" isn't necessary. And there's just no getting around the shame associated with being a sinner. It's MEANT to shame, and it does that job well.
Amris is offline  
#84 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 07:41 PM
 
klg47's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Utah
Posts: 1,635
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by artgoddess View Post
I just don't see how you possibly avoid it. How do you teach someone that feel good by pleasuring themselves is a sin without making them feel sinful?
It's pretty much like Amris said. You teach them the natural consequences of masturbation and the positive reasons why we wouldn't want to do it. I would be sure to acknowledge that Heavenly Father gave them those strong feelings in their bodies for a reason, so they don't believe that they're bad for feeling them.
klg47 is offline  
#85 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 07:48 PM
 
klg47's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Utah
Posts: 1,635
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amris View Post
And there's just no getting around the shame associated with being a sinner. It's MEANT to shame, and it does that job well.
My religion actually focuses on "godly sorrow", which is more complex than simple shame or guilt over "getting caught".

Regardless, I'm not sure that negative feelings (such as shame or guilt) should always be avoided. I would liken it to pain. Pain is a wonderful thing. It teaches us that we should stop doing what we're doing and avoid doing it again. You've probably seen the stories of people who grow up without pain. It's a terrible existence for them. Feeling bad over an action (whether we call this feeling guilt, or shame, or godly sorrow, or something else) does the same thing for our souls.

How do you teach your kids that it's not OK to call people names or hurt them physically? Even if you don't use the word "sin" to describe those actions, surely you believe they're wrong? We don't use the word "sin" either when we teach about those things. We explain that it's not OK to do it, we talk about how the other person feels when that happens, we talk about how we would feel if it happened to us, and we do say that Heavenly Father loves all of us and wants us to be nice to everyone else. I'm just trying to use an example here that everyone can agree is wrong, and show how we teach against it in a religious context without shaming. You can surely find inconsistencies if you try to make it an analogy for masturbation.
klg47 is offline  
#86 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 07:50 PM
 
eightyferrettoes's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,804
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Well, yeah, because there isn't some other vulnerable person who is being harmed by the action.

I don't get how one can reconcile the attment to repress solo sex with also forbidding marriage to kids. Not that I'm in favor of marrying off 12-year-olds, but... sexual needs are real needs, too, y'know.

I just can't see blissfully and guiltlessly enjoying sex with my husband while my 14 year old writhes in unfulfilled sexual desire in the next room.
eightyferrettoes is offline  
#87 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 07:51 PM
 
Brigianna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: who knows?
Posts: 9,522
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by eightyferrettoes View Post
Thanks for the invite. I think I'll stick with my Unitarian church, though. Those people see bottled water as a crime against the divine, (and against commone fiscal sense) but I've heard nary a word about wanking.

At least the latter is ecologically friendly.
Actually, I don't think I've ever heard a sermon about masturbation. That is a myth, I think, that traditional churches spend all their time talking about sex. But, hey, at least we can all agree about bottled water.


Quote:
Originally Posted by eightyferrettoes View Post
And WTF is up with the weird "purity" language? Is one "impure" just because of jackin' off? Only if you forget to wash your hands afterward?

Is there a statute of limitations on the duration of the icky ritual impurity? Does it matter if you fantasize about your church-sanctioned-domestic-partner-of-the-opposite-sex? Does phone sex with the aforementioned CSDPOTOS count?

:mumbling: Surely God sanctions phone sex...
People are not impure. People are creations of God and can never be impure. Only actions can be impure.

I don't know what phone sex is.
Brigianna is offline  
#88 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 07:54 PM
 
Brigianna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: who knows?
Posts: 9,522
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amris View Post
I was answering the question of "if you think teaching a child that something is a sin is sickening, how would YOU teach them not to do something they shouldn't do?"

And that's my answer. By teaching them about consequences, and turning the focus onto why it's good to do the alternative action that is better than the one that has negative consequences.

I would teach my child that it's possible that, if she lacks table manners, others might think less of her before bothering to get to know her. Then, I'll focus hard on the benefits of abstaining from putting one's elbows on the table, and the benefits of keeping one's mouth closed while chewing.

The point being that shaming someone with words like "sin" isn't necessary. And there's just no getting around the shame associated with being a sinner. It's MEANT to shame, and it does that job well.

Oh, sorry, that wasn't what I meant to ask. I didn't mean teaching negatively vs. positively. I meant, for those who find teaching chastity in and of itself sickening, why wouldn't they feel the same way about teaching to refrain from other natural behaviors. Not how it's taught. Does that make sense?
Brigianna is offline  
#89 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 07:55 PM
 
boingo82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: A new-to-us house!!
Posts: 10,125
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by eightyferrettoes View Post
And WTF is up with the weird "purity" language? Is one "impure" just because of jackin' off? Only if you forget to wash your hands afterward?
boingo82 is offline  
#90 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 07:55 PM
 
Amris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I am loving and being loved.
Posts: 2,197
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by klg47 View Post
My religion actually focuses on "godly sorrow", which is more complex than simple shame or guilt over "getting caught".

Regardless, I'm not sure that negative feelings (such as shame or guilt) should always be avoided. I would liken it to pain. Pain is a wonderful thing. It teaches us that we should stop doing what we're doing and avoid doing it again. You've probably seen the stories of people who grow up without pain. It's a terrible existence for them. Feeling bad over an action (whether we call this feeling guilt, or shame, or godly sorrow, or something else) does the same thing for our souls.

How do you teach your kids that it's not OK to call people names or hurt them physically? Even if you don't use the word "sin" to describe those actions, surely you believe they're wrong? We don't use the word "sin" either when we teach about those things. We explain that it's not OK to do it, we talk about how the other person feels when that happens, we talk about how we would feel if it happened to us, and we do say that Heavenly Father loves all of us and wants us to be nice to everyone else. I'm just trying to use an example here that everyone can agree is wrong, and show how we teach against it in a religious context without shaming. You can surely find inconsistencies if you try to make it an analogy for masturbation.
We'll never agree on the value of shame and guilt. I believe both have no value whatsoever. And I have every intention of teaching without them, to the best of my ability.
Amris is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off