BYU new "soaking" loophole exposed!

http://www.tmz.com/2011/07/13/tmz-live-woman-cuts-off-husbands-penis-kieu-becker-brooke-mueller-not-crack-pipe-marijuana-pipe-dog-the-bounty-hunter-fight-video/

Anagrammy



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/15/2011 12:13AM by anagrammy.

Absolutely ridiculous. I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this. When this was posted in an earlier thread sounded like it was just as they put it 'marianating the meat'. Thought these women are supposed to be virgins and some dude is not going to just stick his junk in w/o some pregame warm-ups. So no matter what the guy will have some pre-ejaculate that will also be 'marianated with the meat'. But watching this they are doing some oral then 'marianating the meat'. So I guess she is now getting the post-ejaculate.

Sounds perfectly logical.....WTF?

I'm still confused on what "soaking" is exactly?

The guy puts his penis in the woman's vagina and stays there. No thrusting.

Also known in YBU dicrles as "floating."

I went to BYU and always had condoms on hand. My loophole was I would wear a condom and it really wasn't sex because our junk wasn't really touching. The whole thing is they want to be assured what they are doing isn't a sin. Plus, it's just a good idea to suit up when having recreational sex.

I had condoms around in case I decided to continue. The more I think about it, Mormons are really living dangerously with these ridiculous ideas about what is and is not sex. What does it matter what sex is? It's like they're trying to find a way to expose themselves to STDs and unwanted pregnancy without actually enjoying themselves. WTF?

Makurosu Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The more I think about it, Mormons are really living dangerously with these ridiculous ideas about what is and is not sex.

I couldn't agree more. They're fooling themselves if they think this isn't sex. It just isn't very good sex.

Back in my day, girls who wanted to remain "virgins" sometimes had their boyfriends engage in "tipping" -- i.e partial sex. We were specifically warned about this in Sex Ed, that you could still get pregnant engaging in this activity. Kids who want to fool themselves will always find some justification for what they're doing.

But at BYU, as at Bob Jones and Oral Roberts, the only thing worse than pre-marital sex is safe pre-marital sex. On accounta of how it shows it was premeditated. At BYU, NOBODY has safe sex.

PS: I would assume that at Oral Roberts, the preferred method would be... You know.

Rubicon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I went to BYU and always had condoms on hand. My
> loophole was I would wear a condom and it really
> wasn't sex because our junk wasn't really
> touching.

Your conclusion that wearing a condom would mean that "it really wasn't sex because our junk wasn't really touching" is actually in line with ultra-Orthodox Jews, who have decided the same thing...but, for them, based on Talmudical reasoning.

I have heard of this happening only in an Israeli, ultra-Orthodox context (it is, evidently, fairly common in the super-Orthodox communities in Israel)---though I wouldn't be surprised if this was also considered normative for ultra-tending Orthodox males in the U.S. as well...(for example, in ultra-Orthodox communities in the USA like those in Monsey, New York).

(I don't know if this ultra-Orthodox Jewish reasoning is considered Jewishly-relevant to gay sex or not, but I would think this reasoning would naturally be used as a practical, and "religiously" guilt-free, way for gay ultra-Orthodox men to have sex with other men, because the Talmudical reasoning would be exactly the same, regardless of the gender of the other person the ultra-Orthodox Jewish male was having sex with.)

20Wo unto them that call evil good, and good evil, that put darkness for light, and light for darkness, that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

21Wo unto the wise in their own eyes and prudent in their own sight!

2 Nephi 2:
5And men are instructed sufficiently that they know good from evil.


Seriously, if a guy is placing his penis anywhere on or in another person, can he really claim that he is following the moral code?

And can a woman claim her purity if she is letting him relieve himself on or in any part of her body?

Does it really ONLY count as immorality if you have regular intercourse?

But look at the bright side- these folks who graduate from BYU will be the pick of the litter when it comes to being called as Bishop. And if you get pregnant, you'll be disfellowshipped by a guy who only came inside his dates armpit...'cuz he's righteous.

Especially when its secondary concern is what you drink for breakfast and how much you "contribute" to the keepers of the code.

Let's be honest. Mormonism is about control. The top leadership want obedient puppets. Guilt and fear is how they keep the puppets in line. Of course this control goes against natural human emotions and the freedom of choice everyone deep down craves.

People want to have sex and the more repressed and controlled the more a person is screwed up in the head.

All these silly loopholes are a result of repression vs natural human desire. It's a battle. As long as the kids can have justification in their head it keeps the guilt away.

Also, you either stay in the church because you believe it, it would be too much of a bother to leave, or you are getting something from staying in. Some stay in to manipulate others.

Ok, dear wife and I tried this early this morning. Sorry, can't do it. Just start in to humpin' and grindin', and shazzam. Oops.

The people who called-in who knew about it at BYU said that it had to be preceded by "oral is moral" or "hand jobs" which was performed until climax. Then the soaking came afterwards as a means of getting to know how each other felt. This makes it a lot more believable. A caller even said that BYU "looks the other way" when it came to cases of just oral sex or assisted masturbation. It's a fact that many, if not most BYU students masturbate at least alone, confess it, and aren't disciplined. There does seem to be a tolerance, anyway, for lesser-degrees of sexual activity.

Supposedly "soaking" is what Brandon Davies did to get kicked off the basketball team. And to think that if he had only gotten a blow-job to climax he may have still been on the team! It's absurd.

Really? Am I the only male that loses his erection after climax. Kind of like shooting pool with a rope.

You don't remember 18?

Turnaround time was like 2 minutes, most times none.

Those were the days my friend, we thought they'd never end...

Never saw that particular orifice called a "loophole" before.

:)

"Loophole" ? -yah, if you were Joe Smith or Brigham Young you could screw just about any underling you felt like doing.

Gordon Hinckley could have done Sheri Dew .... but both of them were gay..... (& utterly repulsive) so it didnt work out so well.

The actions of misguided church members give the religious organization a bad name. This heinous act is immoral, plain and simple, and if the authorities in the church knew it was happening those committing this act would be disfellowshipped from the church.

The actions of misguided religious organizations give church members a bad name. This heinous act is immoral, plain and simple.

Ah, that's better than a soak.

Not just a Mormon thing. YouTube search "the loophole by Garfunkel and Oates" Hilarious but definitely adult. Watch with caution and don't watch if your easily offended.
Seems like I seen it mentioned in a previous thread here but couldn't find it.

So if I buy my coffee from a country that spells it "café", and the word " coffee" isn't on the label anywhere I'm OK?

goddam kids and their soaking... why can't they just dry hump, like ghawd intended? Guys soon learn to stuff a couple of McDonald's napkins down their jeans before starting... foreplay, as it were.

Face it Dawg, we're old men! Levi loving is passé. Many young kids don't see oral as sex. Amazing what a sexually-repressed culture encourages in trying to follow the letter of the law! Da Bone.

blame bill clinton for that - he swore under oath that he did not have sex with 'that woman' - she only sucked him off and he used a 'cigar'. Ergo, a living past president has described oral as 'not sex'.

Do the girls get as much attention as the boys?

Wonder if this kind of hair splitting is applied to same sex interactions?

Hmmm... By this definition, Bednar is right--there are no homosexuals in the church, because it's impossible for two people of the same sex to even have sex!

The church's rules on premarital sex are absurd. Almost all males masturbate, so why torture these young men with guilt for doing what nature has programmed into their DNA. Likewise, a large number of dating couples or even casual acquaintences engage in sexual activity. This can run the gamut from regular intercourse and oral sex to so-called "soaking". Lets face it, humans are sexual beings and they will a myrid of ways t osatisfy their sexual urges.

If there is a God, she created us as sexual creatures. It is downright cruel for such a God to instill such strong desires in her creations and then to command them to ignore these impulses until some old fart with bad breathe at an altar pronounces them married. You would think that God would have much more important problems to worry about than Jack and Diane getting it on in the back seat of the old chevy. Let them work out their "night moves", so long as they are properly protected.

Sex has always been with human race. Contrary to LDS "common wisdom", neither society nor the family is going to fall apart if people engage in sexual activity outside of marriage. But there is a clear and present danger when religious zealots try to force their own religious beliefs on everyone else.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/17/2016 07:29PM by merryprankster123.

These loopholes appear wherever there's abuse. For example, Japan is one of the most patriarchal nations in the world and prostitution is defined as ONLY penetration. All the brothels that perform other "services" are therefore legal.

That has to be a Darwin Award "Honorable Mention" -- with Oak Leaf Cluster!

(People who permanently removed themselves from the gene pool --i.e., death--get Darwin Awards. Those who lose their capability to reproduce get Honorable Mentions.)

Prior to the change cera 1990 the law of chastity was this:

The sons of Adam and the daughters of Eve shall not have intercourse with any save their lawfully married spouses or words to that effect.

So as far as we were concerned decades ago, everything outside of tab A inserted into slot B was fair game.

Where exactly is the loophole? Is it near the other holes?

The Mrs. and I use vaseline sometimes. Should we put vaseline on the loophole, or is it one of those self-lubricating gizmos?

Every repressing culture wil develop their loopholes. I know so many muslima who are "technically still virgins" because they only let the guy enter the "backdoor" it's considered "haram" of course but the girl keeps her virtue. Thats twisted like soaking, marinating, oral is moral amd armpitjobs. Seriously especially the last one - how could it be done without bursting out in laughter and whats the enjoying part for the girl on it when her armpit is only full of ...urrgs. Nopenopenepedynope. BF and I tried to "sosk" once just to see how it works. Didn't work. And I think it doesn't work for the majority of people. The will start humping andmoving. And how again can someone have the idea that putting part A in part B is not damaging "her virginity" and is not actually totally miserable sex?