Stake Conf. Topic: Sexaul Intimacy

[cougarobgon]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Leadership shies away from the topic because leadership is unqualified to address it sociologically or professionally, for the most part. We would have to lean on professionals, not something the lay leadership is wont to do. And that's the problem. If lay leadership can learn to trust good professionals, progress for the benefit of the flock can be made.

I agree, the lay leadership in the Church, for the most part, is not qualified to address this issue and other issues sociologically or professionally. Back when I was the local ward mullah, I replaced a man who was a professional counselor. So those individuals that were seeing him on a regular basis received the benefit of not only spiritual direction, but benefitted from his professional background. When I came on board, I was young, had a business professional background, and immediately my credentials began to be questioned by the regulars. For some, I never replaced that bishop, they followed him to his professional practice for continued guidance. For others, they recognized my position and gladly continued to work with me through the spiritual matters but sought professional help elsewhere. However, there were some that despite their ability to seek professional help, they continued to see me and we worked through their issues. I never discouraged people from seeking professional help and for some I encouraged them to do so. I could help them work through their spirituality, but, for some members (yes more than one) who were contemplating suicide, or had sexuality dysfunctions, etc...I recognized my limitations and recommended they see a professional counselor.

I appreciate the SP addressing this issue that he desribed being the cause of divorces in our stake. I am just curious about why the follow up with the RS sisters and not the Priesthood bretheren. I will wait for my wife's report after the meeting takes place.

[RedHeadGal]

Originally Posted by cougarobgon

I appreciate the SP addressing this issue that he desribed being the cause of divorces in our stake. I am just curious about why the follow up with the RS sisters and not the Priesthood bretheren. I will wait for my wife's report after the meeting takes place.

I question how much sexual intimacy would be "the cause of divorce," but it's probably a likely factor in many cases. I also agree that the topic of sexual intimacy is probably a topic that should be addressed more openly and frequently. Although frankly, I don't want to hear the faith-building personal stories most of my RS sisters might have to share.

And I also wonder what the difference would be with a follow-up with the women. You said the theme was "be nice and you'll get more action" (or something like that). From what I gather, this would probably not be the theme of the lesson to the women. And yet I have trouble imagining it would be "put out more."

Anyway, if we believe that LDS marriages need more sex, ironically, maybe we should start counseling people to stop having so many kids. That seems like an extremely common barrier for an active sex life.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by RedHeadGal

I question how much sexual intimacy would be "the cause of divorce," but it's probably a likely factor in many cases. I also agree that the topic of sexual intimacy is probably a topic that should be addressed more openly and frequently. Although frankly, I don't want to hear the faith-building personal stories most of my RS sisters might have to share.

And I also wonder what the difference would be with a follow-up with the women. You said the theme was "be nice and you'll get more action" (or something like that). From what I gather, this would probably not be the theme of the lesson to the women. And yet I have trouble imagining it would be "put out more."

Anyway, if we believe that LDS marriages need more sex, ironically, maybe we should start counseling people to stop having so many kids. That seems like an extremely common barrier for an active sex life.

That caused me to laugh.

[BarbaraGordon]

I'm going to go wayy out on a limb here and suggest that a ten minute pep talk is not going to counteract twenty or forty years of negative messages the church has been sending.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by RedHeadGal

Anyway, if we believe that LDS marriages need more sex, ironically, maybe we should start counseling people to stop having so many kids. That seems like an extremely common barrier for an active sex life.

I detect an oxymoron alert.

[cougarobgon]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

I'm going to go wayy out on a limb here and suggest that a ten minute pep talk is not going to counteract twenty or forty years of negative messages the church has been sending.

I agree and that a 10 minute pep talk is not going solve the problem...but, please explain...what negative messages?

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by cougarobgon

I agree and that a 10 minute pep talk is not going solve the problem...but, please explain...what negative messages?

Are you serious?

[smokymountainrain]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

I guess I forgot to mention...in the midst of the conversation, I did her in a patient room.

Details, details....

<gives imaginary high five to ERCougar>

[cougarobgon]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

Are you serious?

Yes, I am serious. During his talk the SP repeated several times that this issue is rarely discussed in a Church setting and I agree. Up until Saturday, I don't recall ever receiving messages, counsel, or direction on this subject other than your typical "husbands be considerate of your wives" or the "it is a wonderful thing when expressed between a man and woman in love and married".

What negative messages?

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

I'm the youngest guy in my group by a good ten years. We have a PA who's about my same age who works with us on the weekends. The other day, during a semi-slow shift, she says, "Can I ask you something? Are there ever times when you're just not in the mood?" We get talking for a little bit, and it turns out that she has not been interested in sex for about the last 18 months. Not once. In fairness, she gave birth about nine months ago, had a fairly rough pregnancy, and her child still doesn't sleep through the night. But she also said that her husband's let himself go, and she's wondering if she should say something to him. I told her to get her kid sleeping through the night, get enough rest, then see where she stands, but if at that point, she still isn't interested, she should say something. I know I'd want to know.

Just a bit of unsolicited advice: I'd cut the conversations off first thing. Nothing positive can come from having these discussions with a married woman at work.