Comments on: Advice from the armchair marriage counselor

By: Jonathan Blake

Jonathan Blake — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 16:06:57 +0000

Porn addiction is real and it has real consequences. For me, the causes were 90% psychological based on my religious upbringing. Once I let go of the inculcated shame and fear, the addiction dissipated like a mirage.

0 likes

By: JulieAnn

JulieAnn — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 11:34:25 +0000

Jeez….I am SO LATE to this party.
I just have one thing to add–while this little back ‘n forth was going on last year, I was getting happily married to what some (especially his ex-wife) people would call a porn addict. But that isn’t the case.
He likes porn, and so do I. You don’t believe there’s such a thing as porn addiction? Try being married to a porn addict. See, I was for 10 years. It didn’t matter that he couldn’t stop; it didn’t matter that he wouldn’t stop. It didn’t matter whether it was porn or booze…here is the point of it: When you are married to an addict, they are not participating in the relationship, and YOU ARE ALONE. You FELL alone, you parent alone, you are lied to, you are isolated and you are alone. Do you know how many times I said to him “Go ahead and look at it, I don’t care! Just BE with me. Join the party. Don’t lie about it–we can look together or separate, but I need you to be here emotionally.”

It didn’t happen because it can’t happen. When you are addicted to something–anything, you can’t be fully present in a healthy normal relationship. The fine line between addiction and reeeeeally reeeeeally liking something is this: Can you stop and will you stop if the outcome and reverberations of your actions cause harm to the most important people in your life? If the answer is no, then….there you have it. THe problem was not with me. Just ask my husband, who enjoys porn with or without me and tells me every delicious detail. I get really tired of people stomping their foot and claiming reverse feminism because someone believes in porn addiction. D&M feminism has nothing to do with it. Postulate and theorize all you want; but honestly? TRY IT. Try being married to one. THEN we can talk.

0 likes

By: mormonzero

mormonzero — Wed, 28 May 2008 22:44:48 +0000

BTW, If I remember correctly my direct source was during a leadership training meeting to which I no longer have access to the proceedings…The general message was/is essentially the same.

0 likes

By: mormonzero

mormonzero — Wed, 28 May 2008 22:41:39 +0000

GNPE : Well, I perhaps misquoted BKP there and I was unable to find MY direct source.

However, I did some digging and did find this comment…”True doctrine, understood, changes attitudes and behavior. The study of the doctrines of the gospel will improve behavior quicker than a study of behavior will improve behavior.” (BKP Liahona, May 2004, 77â€“80)

0 likes

By: Guy Noir Private Eye

Guy Noir Private Eye — Wed, 28 May 2008 20:27:51 +0000

mzero: mind giving us the cite for your (quote)? I googled, can’t find it.
Sounds like a concept, though.
Did I think GAs were ‘concept capable’?
Hmmmm… I’ll have to cogitate on that one for a while….

and BTW… is it still ‘true’ that Only males masturbate in Morland?

0 likes

By: Wayne

Wayne — Wed, 28 May 2008 16:01:00 +0000

Chanson-

As per usual, Dan Savage offers sane relationship advice in a hip way. (Bishops take note) Every time I have read him he always comes back to pointing out that communication is the way to a healthy relationship.

0 likes

By: chanson

chanson — Wed, 28 May 2008 15:34:00 +0000

Eugene — Yeah, that’s probably a big part of it. You see, if they want untrained, unqualified amateurs giving marriage advice, they should be asking me!!! The armchair marriage counselor!

Update Newsflash for all:

This isn’t just a Mormon anti-porn issue! None other than Dan Savage has just written a column giving his advice for one of the problems I defined in comment #100. And, astonishingly, his advice is (a little) closer to the Mormons’ than to mine!

And what’s with the passive voice? You “find [yourself] masturbating.” How does that work exactly? You jump into a time machine, travel to your bathroom an hour in the future, and discover your future self jerking it? Sorry, RHM, but masturbation isn’t something that happens to youâ€”it’s not a tax audit or a flat tire or a meteor strike. It’s something you decide to do.

Read the whole thing!

0 likes

By: Eugene

Eugene — Wed, 28 May 2008 14:58:13 +0000

This micromanagement arises out of the fact that at the local level the church is run by amateurs. So when a bishop playing marriage counselor gets beyond his depth, his only recourses are to refer to LDS Family Services and/or shoot the matter up the chain of command. Only the latter if he thinks that shrinks are for wussies.

So all these complaints collect in a GA’s inbox in Salt Lake (unless somebody has a hot line to the top). At some point the most qualified flunky in Correlation is tasked to compose an all-encompassing answer, which then by default becomes the “official” blanket solution to said problem.

Which eventually gets turned into a catechism in General Conference, so all the sinners know what the “problem” is and all the bishops know what the “solution” is, and the two get repeated over and over in a kind of morality play until everybody gets bored of it and it’s replaced by a newer, juicer sin.

0 likes

By: mormonzero

mormonzero — Wed, 28 May 2008 05:12:43 +0000

I lean toward chanson’s side on this one. I don’t see porn or the church being oppressive in the general sense…I do see instances where ppl in the porn industry perhaps are oppressing or taking advantage of someone unjustly and I have also personally seen this in the church.

In regard to BiV’s questions…I believe the church should stay out of ppl’s personal lives as much as possible. The more you define, the more the dominoes continue to fall and expectations are created where the church populace expects the church to answer every question and then you get questions like, “Is it okay to do this if we’re married?” or “If you do this do you need to go to the bishop?”

As for a template for teaching this I would look no further than Matt 5, Jesus’ sermon on the mount. He emphasizes doctrinal principles in relation to human emotions and desires rather than the behaviors themselves. Thus, a person receives the necessary knowledge they need to make right decisions; for this to truly work we would have to emphasize the don’t judge part as well, so as to avoid serious conflict when two persons apply the same principles but acquire different answers–hopefully creating a spiritual environment of empathy and understanding but unified in faith, hope, charity, doctrine (i.e. Godhead, Atonement, Fall, etc.), and also sacred ordinances.

Fits quite well w/ BKP’s comment where he said…”Teaching doctrine will change behavior faster than teaching behavior will change behavior.”

The whole concept probably seems too simplistic to be effective but I believe that w/ proper emphasis and direction this could work quite effectively not just in dealing w/ sexuality but w/ any other behavior(s) in the church. It might actually create more bridges between the church and potential investigators, converts, etc as people gradually become more interested in Mormonism’s unique doctrines rather than Mormonism’s unique behaviors.

Just a thought.

0 likes

By: Guy Noir Private Eye

Guy Noir Private Eye — Tue, 27 May 2008 18:32:34 +0000

thanks dude.

0 likes