Back in 1982 the FP came out with a decision that oral sex
between a married couple was a big no-no and unworthy. Some
bishops took this seriously and started asking married couples
if they included oral sex in their antics. This lead, a few
months later, to a clarification that Bishops and SPs were NOT
supposed to pry into any details of a couple's sexual lives.

So oral sex being sinful has not been formally rescinded, but
it is no longer mentioned in any official LDS context. This is
interesting since, according to surveys of sexual behavior,
oral sex has skyrocketed in popularity since 1981. So it
appears that the Morg is backing off from fighting sin to keep
appearances.

Is the same thing happening with masturbation? Are Bishops no
longer asked to question the youth about masturbation? Is the
"just ask generalities" as was done with oral sex in TR
interviews being applied to youth interviews?

I haven't been to Church in years so I'm unaware of any subtle
changes in the way things are done these days. However, I
recall being specifically asked as a kid if I masturbated by a
BP who was obviously embarrassed that he had to ask it.

If you marry yourself, then any sex you have with yourself is okay!

That would be same sex marriage and while you can be married to yourself, you can have relations.

I don't make the rules and I don't follow them either.

Possibly their way of dealing with public shaming of bishops' invasive questioning. The LDS church gets a lot of unwanted press attention these days. It makes the old men squirm.

I don't care what the ruling may be, I'm still going to ask "Hey, Bob, what are doing under the table!?"

I've never understood that concept. I get why a bishop might ask, but why would I ever tell. Unless to elicit an embarrassing stammering response from said bishop.

Sir, I've been wondering. Does Jesus cry when I tickle my perineum when I stroke my penis?

It seems that there must be a lot left up to the individual bishop. I think some are more realistic than others, probably based on their experience or lack thereof. As a therapist in Utah County, I meet with many people who are into porn and masturbating. Some are very open about it, some are full of shame or embarrassment. Many are trying to stop or reduce their frequency. Most have a very hard time changing their behaviors. I had one report that ten years ago the bishop required that he not take the sacrament for a time, and then also not go to the temple for a time. Also not hold a church job. Now, the bishop(different one) only asks him if he is doing his best to avoid it, no mention of sacrament, temple or calling. Another reported to me that his bishop still requires some sacrament and/or temple consequences. These are all collage age or above, not sure what the teens are going through. I think the more lenient bishops realize that they couldn't afford to have half or more of their ward not taking the sacrament of going to the temple, not to mention having to function without people in their callings.

None of their fucking business.

RB

"Howdy Bishop Burr!"
"Howdy yourself, Boner! It's been a couple of weeks since I saw you, how's the work on exterminating the nasty vile habit coming along?"
"The nasty vile habit is no more bishop!"

(Bishop Burr's eyebrows raise, he pats his mustache)

"fascinating, Boner, tell me more..."
"It's no more, Bishop! No more Hallmark Channel movies, ever!"
"fascinating..."
"Yep, I quit the movies, yessir!"
"Fascinating..."

(The Boner starts getting wiggley)

"No more movies, Bishop, I promise! Not one! No more Walker's shortbread cookies and milk, ether! I promise!"

(Pause....more wiggles...)

So, how's the other issue coming along, Boner?"
"Other issue?"
"The OTHER issue..."
"What other issue, Bishop?"
"The issue of your issue, Boner..."
"The issue of YOUR issue, Bishop?"
"Don't get smart with me, Boner! The issue of YOUR issue!"
"Oh, THAT issue...it's not a problem! No sir!"
"Fascinating, Boner...you quit issuing an issue, huh?"
"There's no issue from that issue, sir..."
"Fascinating...and here I thought maybe you were polishing the banister, strangling the chicken, bopping your bologna, shining the bishop's mitre...you know what I'm asking, Boner."
"Are you asking me if I MASTURBATE BISHOP,"
"No, I am not able to ask you if you masturbate...do you?"
"Oh bishop! I confess, I jack off while watching Hallmark movies! Have mercy on me."
"Go and issue no more, Boner."
"Is that all? Bishop Burr? Are you okay? You didn't cuss at me once."
"Well, Boner, I've received some sensitivity training recently from the stake president."
"Really, Bishop?"
"Yes, Boner. I've learned to say that's fascinating rather than you're a goddam fucking liar."

(Sigh)

"Okay, Bishop, I'll go buy the beer..."
"Damn straight, Boner. And remember the shortbread. There's a movie starting in about 30 minutes. We can wrap this up and go over to my place to watch it!"
"Fuck yeah, Bishop!"
"No, Boner, remember to say, fascinating."

Fascinating!

I am fascinating, indeed!

I'm fucking gobsmacked, Boner!!

RB

I don't think we teach that. I don't know much about it. I don't think we touch that area anymore.

As of several years ago, masturbation fell (on a church-wide level) squarely within the realm of "we won't explicitly teach against it, but behind closed doors we'll bring it up." I can personally attest to the fact that in 2008, it was standard practice for all new missionaries in the MTC to be pulled aside by a branch presidency member and asked if they had fully repented of masturbating. It wasn't just my MTC branch; my MP later referred to the practice in a zone conference and shared the same SWK quote which was shared with missionaries individually in the MTC.

The little guy isn't talking. Should I beat it out of him?

I was never asked about it. And thank goodness because I masturbated constantly.

My understanding was that the "Is there anything in your conduct relating to members of your family that is not in harmony with the teachings of the Church?" question was supposed to be a round-about way of asking a husband if he was coercing his wife into oral sex in any way. - But since naturally I've never seen any official statement on it, that could just be one of those mormon urban legends.

I believe they added, "Is there anything unholy, unnatural or
worthy of repentance in your intimate relationship with your spouse?"

If the answer was "yes," then they were instructed not to pry
into what it was but tell them to fix it and come back later.

However bishops pry into the intimate relationship a youth has
with himself. If anything should be private, I think it's that.

The damage that was inflicted upon so many people, so many minds, so many pysches...

So many peoples' mental health.

"Back in 1982 the FP came out with a decision that oral sex
between a married couple was a big no-no and unworthy. Some
bishops took this seriously and started asking married couples
if they included oral sex in their antics. This lead, a few
months later, to a clarification that Bishops and SPs were NOT
supposed to pry into any details of a couple's sexual lives."


Which is simply further proof (if more were needed) that 'they' are just making it up as they go along.

But the damage done to human relationships in the process is something which is morally unconscionable. Not that such things matter to those at the top of the tree in SLC, of course.

And then there is masturbation. A normal, natural and very healthy activity; it's been naturally observed amongst pretty much every species of primate. Also, it has been determined that, from a biological point of view, masturbation releases 'feel good' chemicals into the brain (sorry, I don't have a citation for this assertion, but I'm sure it's googleable).

What is totally uncoscionable is the Church's propagation of guilt amongst people, and children (especially male children) in particular. From personal experience, I recall being a 12(ish) boy, masturbating and then praying for ages before falling asleep in the depths of misery; praying that I didn't die until I had been able to 'repent' of my 'sins'.

Now, the fostering of attitudes such as these is really child abuse. There really is no other term for it. Packer and Peterson are responsible for a great deal of misery (which almost makes me wish that a Hell did exist, so they could rot in it!)

The thing is, those right at the very top could do so much good if they were to suddenly say "Masturbation Is Ok, Folks!" It's within their power and within their grasp to do so.

Would that they will.


Addendum: I have heard that a very good book to read on the subject is "Sex For One" by Betty Dodson; a very masturbation-positive book. Although I haven't had chance to read it myself yet I have heard very good reports about it.

(sarcasm ON)

The prophet & GAs are 'responsible' (ha ha) for teaching & exampling good & bad, Right & Wrong in the world, for the good of the people (especially members); if people don't pay attention, they've done their job.

/sarcasm


We all know it's a Croc, but they still Gotta keep up appearances to keep the $ rolling in (without any sort of transparency, of course!)

So, I think it's impossible to have any semblance of religion (not that it's needed) without guilt/shame.

Isn't Buddhism horribly watered down, along with being a Unitarian?

What's the point if 'U' as a minister/pastor/bishop/Pope don't teach people that:

a) Right & Wrong are valid constructs

b) Teach the people the difference (Although Mormonism certainly doesn't!)

/sarcasm

I've asked this before, so sorry for repeating myself, but ...

Are you, by any chance, a PROLOG programmer?