Jazok

President Kimball said a lot of stupid things about chastity, sex within marriage and masturbation including that a girl doesn't have to masturbate becasue she has a period. No, it doesn't make ansy sense, but it's found its way into the church's dreadful booklets on sex. This also misses the entire point. Are you really proposing that if one spouse doesn't want sex, the other has to remain completely celibate? Are you proposing that a women struggling with learning how to orgasm should just suffer? What about a woman who can only orgasm with oral sex? YOu forbidding that to? I don't see it. All I see is a generic path to repentence manual that has very little to do with addiction. Moreover, to presuppose that looking at pornography and masturbating are addictions in general is completely and provably absurd. (There is compulsive masturbation, but there is almost always childhood sexual abuse at the root.) Simply making stuff up about sex based on your own biases is not serving members of the church at all. Unfortunately, I don't see this changing any time soon despite the efforts of many LDS scientists, psychologists, therapists and counselors. Not a fan of Dr. Laura at all, but your assumption of such dovetails your inability to understand what I wrote. I never wrote what you state. There is no vibe there; there is the FACT that marital problems are not the fault of any single person and to pretend they are doesn't do anything to solve the root problem. What I see all too often is a couple having problems. It comes out that one or the other masturbates occasionally and/or looks at pornography occasionally and those entire subsume the entire process. Suddenly accusation of addiction are thrown about. Same thing used to happen with alcohol (and still does to an extent.) My entire point is that whether either are sins or not are almost entirely besides the point for the vast majority of marriage which are having problems. Your final statement is simply clueless. The inability of the hard core mormon crowd to open their vistas and be compassionate rather than judgemental isn't helping anyone. I don't know why I or anyone though asking for advise on this board would actually be productive. Unless, of course, your goal is to be put down, be accused of being a pervert and being told you are scum. So in that; congratulations.

My point about premarital counseling is to have someone with no axe to grind, objectively assess both of you. Among other things, to see if your expectations line up. (I believe all couples should do this.) That said, pushing someone to take lessons in any religion as an implied condition of commitment is a VERY bad idea. (And wouldn't it only be fair if you took lessons from the Jehovah Witnesses?)

Divorce rates for temple marriages are lower than that for non-temple marriages (but are higher than you may realize) but it's not primarily because of the temple marriage, but because both people who get married in the temple take marriage seriously enough to work through problems that break up other couples. I do believe there is a temple marriage effect for active Mormons in that divorce just feels so wrong. Unfortunately, this sometimes keeps couples together who should not be (I'm thinking of physically and emotional abusive marriages.) @FormalMan: one idea is to court this other woman and go to premarital counseling with an objective counselor.

Again, I think you are overgeneralizing. The statement that men lied to go on missions may be true for a small minority of men, but is not reflective of them as a whole, even those who have masturbated. Masturbation is primarily a problem because some people say it is. In reality, it is a natural process of growing up. The vast majority of men and most women have masturbated. This doesn't mean they have a problem with it. That is unmitigated nonsense. It is hysteria. The general authorities have stated quite a bit of total misinformation about sex, masturbation is no different. Did you not read anything I wrote or attempt to understand it? I stated quite clearly that there are a very, very small minority of men who engage in highly destructive activity. To generalize that all men is absurd and factually incorrect. The vast majority of men who have viewed pornography or masturbated don't go to strip clubs, pay for porn, download megabytes of videos, hide it in their cars or any such nonsense. Same with women. Finding scary anecdotes proves nothing. I know of bishops, young adults leaders, etc who had affairs--shall we now suggest that if people of the opposite sex interact, they will have an affair? Using nothing but edge cases is highly useless. In all the anecdotes provided, I can guarantee that pornography was a contributory factor and not a causative one. What you have are personality disorders where there is far more wrong than what is stated. Odds are the male is also drinking, may be gambling, probably has had affairs and/or has used prostitutes. The behavior with pornography is the tip of the proverbial iceberg, but the most obvious one the spouse would notice. You also misinterpret the notion of accountability for blame. I know several men who began drinking heavier when their marriages went on the rocks. The man was responsible for his own actions, but the drinking itself was only a symptom of the problems, not the problem. This also doesn't mean it's the woman's fault--it means there are marital problems that go far deeper than the symptoms and simply addressing the latter doesn't address those problems. If spouse finds out their partner (whether husband or wife) is looking at pornography and/or masturbation, jumping to the conclusion of addiction fails to address the problem and it's rarely going to be pornography and/or masturbation (again, if it is, there is going to be whole lot more there; at the very least infidelity.)

Absolutely not. In the best of circumstances, both spouses would know that this happens in general, however rocky marriages are rarely under the best of circumstances.

I believe you are making a fantastical leap here and many assumptions that simply aren't true. Men and women may have low sex drives for a large number of reasons, one of which is that they simply have a low sex drive (I believe this is the most common and attempts to add pathology to it helps no one, though admitting its true is extremely helpful.) Likewise a high sex drive may be due to many reasons, most commonly that the person simply has a high libido. Nothing more. I reject the notion of addiction to pornography or masturbation. At best it can be a compulsion and even then with masturbation, it's extremely rare. That aside, labeling it either way doesn't help anyone. Beyond the definition (I was raised in an artistic home by genuinely very activd LDS parents and never saw the human nude as pornographic, whether it be in sculpture, paintings, pictures or real life.) Second there are significant differences between some who occasionally looks at nude pictures, someone who views videos of people having sex for hours every day and someone who spends every waking moment viewing, downloading and storing pornography. (Again, we can substitute alcohol for pornography--there is a difference between someone who drinks a shot of whisky every night and someone who sneaks into the bathroom every few hours to down a fifth.) To simply cast a finger and accuse someone of being "addicted to" pornography because they look at a nude magazine once is no more helpful than to accuse any woman who doesn't fulfill every sexual demand of their husband as being frigid (which is no more helpful as accusing anyone who drinks any alcohol as being an alcoholic.) While it may be true in some circumstances, even then it rarely actually helps anyone. Another important point is that stating there is a causative or contributory effect on someone's behavior, doesn't excuse that behavior, but it doesn't let the other people off the hook either and I've found that to be a very pernicious result of the pornography hysteria. It allows one spouse to utterly destroy the other (without even being specific.) I maintain my point that if you find a spouse who views pornography, you will find other, more serious issues in the relationship that precede or for which the pornography is entirely incidental. (In decades past, "the demon rum" was often used in this manner.) The point being that even if you solve "the porn problem", you really haven't solved anything. You probably made the relationship worse since the man will now see that everything is stacked against him. (This happens a lot in affairs--affairs rarely "just happen"--yes the adulterer is at fault, but the spouse very often contributed to the problem. Perhaps they simply worked long hours or put everything but their spouse first. Again, this DOESN'T excuse the adulterer, but simply castigating him or her doesn't help the marriage any and if a divorce happens [and I'll never understand how it wouldn't] it doesn't really help either person going forward.) PS. I'll wager that if you polled married, temple recommend holding LDS members, you'd find that a majority masturbate at least occasionally. I believe you'll also find that as long as this doesn't interfere with the intimate marital relationship, most people are fine with this, but prefer a policy of don't ask, don't tell. You'll also find that the majority willingly do things in the privacy of their sexual relationship that are disapproved of by official church statements.

I disagree and believe this is a convenient excuse women tell themselves to alleviate any responsibility on their part. On what planet? Seriously, I rarely hear this. The inability of Mormon women to understand their husbands needs for intimacy is destroying plenty of marriages, no need to get porn involved by any party (it's all too often the go to excuse for any behavior.) You also never hear at conference, "Women, get off your butts, look good for your husbands and make them happy in bed." (It doesn't help that porn is used as a blanket label meaning "anything the speaker disagrees with." Thus I've heard the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition described as porn.)

In a relationship, any large differences will be a source of friction. While couples may be able to put this aside for a while, during times of stress, they can become something much bigger. Also ask yourself how you will react if your spouse asks that your child not be blessed. Or baptized. Just as you are returning to the LDS church, what if your wife has a personal witness and decides to become active in the Jehovah Witnesses? Are you willing to give up birthdays and Christmas? Finally, there is a reason this woman is an ex. Are you sure you remember all the negatives, or are you glossing over them because the positives were so good?

There is a difference in assessing how someone may view you and stating that's what you are. I took particular offense because I have dealt with a wife who has stated repeatedly throughout our marriage that I'm a pervert for having normal sexual desires. Unfortunately, I know far too many devoted Mormon males who fall into this category and have found that the attitudes of the church itself supports this. However clumsy a husband may be when trying express affection for his wife, to be called a pervert is extremely offensive and very painful. It denigrates that person and creates a bitterness which is hard to overcome. It is also my experience and observation that for many Mormon husbands, pornography did not become a problem until they were humiliated, deprived of sexual intimacy with this very accusation being core. To be blunt, rather than have an affair, they resorted to porn. (Yes, there are those who have compulsions or, if you prefer, addictions, but that's true for everything. Most people who drink do so without any problems, but some have a compulsion and others have a physical addiction [there is a difference.] Such people are in the minority, not the majority and the causes are generally different. My comments above may have some relevance to this group as a triggering effect, but pertain mostly to the normal people out there who, using the alcohol example, bing or have a recurring consumption. To call someone who drinks a beer a day an alcoholic is patently absurd, the same with any other compulsion, including pornography.)

sweetiepie, my wife and I have seriously mismatched libidos with her having close to none. I've learned that people who haven't experienced this have no idea how crushing this is; how much it eats away at you; over time you will feel like it's destroying your soul. (Before anyone writes and pontificates; if you haven't been through this, please don't.) One thing that still startles me is the pain and jealousy of hearing about couples with fulfilling sex lives. The problem is that the lower libido spouse rarely sees the problem at all and often simply sees sex as just a fun thing--they attach no meaning to it. Ironically, in many ways this makes the issue all the more painful (because your spouse simply doesn't and can't empathize with you.) This is very important: the lower libido spouse may say they understand and think they do, but they don't. With this in mind, if you don't start handling the issue directly, it will destroy your marriage. It is very embarrassing to say that your marriage is unraveling because of lack of intimacy (I chose that word deliberately since that's what it is, not simply the lack of sexual congress) but that is the reality. Expect to be severely judged by those who don't understand the issue and expect advise from the silly to the extremely offensive from well meaning people, including church leaders. I can't say counseling will work since my wife and I are going tomorrow for the first time after years of her resisting (often very angrily.) She's convinced it won't do any good and she's probably right, but my motivation isn't to fix her, but to help me regain my sanity. My point here isn't to scare you per se, but to advise you to find professional help and start working on this now before your marriage is about to end as mine is. (Several people here have advised being more erotic, for lack of a better word. While this is good advise for sexually healthy relationships it may be very hurtful and damaging since you will likely still be rejected and your spouse may grow resentful. And, Viagra, Cialis and Levitra don't give you more desire by themselves; they simply increase blood flow to the penis. For those of us struggling with ED, they may give desire since they help remove the mental stress of performance. Unfortunately, they all give me a headache and work only sporadically. My wife often does or says something to destroy the mood and add the stress back.)

I am not saying a 12 year old cannot be coached but to assume he is because the father disagrees with what he says is insulting to the child and shows a massive disrespect on part of the father. Fathers can be every bit as manipulative as mothers, to assume otherwise isn't just naive is plain stupid. A father who puts church above the welfare of his own son is a self-righteous twit. I've a divorced colleague with a ten year old who has said almost exactly the same words about the rare times he has to work on the weekends when he has her. There is no coaching; it's a ten year expressing her desire to see and be with her father. That is natural and normal for a child. In this case, the words used by the boy may be something he heard his mother say, but to disregard his sentiments shows a frightening cluelessness. Family DOES come first and missing meetings in favor of retaining a bond with one's children is worth the sacrifice. Pushing your children away by sticking to dogma isn't.

Since you don't have children, I believe you should leave and have no further contact. You openly state that you married the wrong man; you can change that and must for your own health. Do not fall into the trap of thinking that religion, faith and love will make it work out. It won't. Praying won't work because the person you are dealing with has their own free will and God can't make them do what they don't want to do. You must also protect yourself by making sure your finances are separate from his. I've learned from sad experience that keeping a marriage going because everyone else thinks you should and because the church teaches that you should do "everything" is a horrible idea. What are you going to do if you have a child and your husband goes off on a real bender? Worse, what if he starts borrowing money from the wrong people? Do you really want to subject yourself and your children to that (when you have children, everything you thought about protecting someone else goes out the window. I didn't believe that either until my children were born; suddenly your options and outlook completely change. In your case, don't be forced to let your husband have visitation only to have him leave his kids while he goes gambling.)

I am married because I thought I met a woman who would give me the emotional intimacy that I desired. I stayed married because I took the counsel of church leaders who insisted that having faith and being active would make it work. I'm staying married because of my kids, especially my youngest--a teen--with whom I've finally been able to build a relationship. ryanh was speaking for me--I've actually said this in almost the same way to confidantes: To which I would add to be more specific: I did not understand that sexuality during courtship (in the context of two temple worthy members) is not predictive of sexuality after marriage. Ultimately, I am heading for divorce because it's become just too obvious that my wife is incapable of genuine intimacy, both physically and emotionally. To most people, my wife is extremely nice and giving, but she's largely shut me off emotionally to the point where it's become abusive. Looking back I can now see there were warning flags during our courtship. They weren't obvious, but they were there. Had we dated longer, I'm sure they would have grown too large to ignore. At the very least, we would have worked out several issues before we were married and not tried to after. I've become one of those who believes all couples should see a truly objective marriage counselor before becoming officially engaged.

For the most part, you'll be accepted. However, there exceptions. If you end up in such a ward/stake, move.

A marriage can cost the price of a marriage license in many places. In many jurisdictions you can get your license and married right then and there. (When I married in California years ago, you had to get a blood test, but when I got the marriage license, the clerk said we could get married right then and there for no additional fees.) I'm going to heartily disagree with that web site posted above. To a child, there is no distinction between mommy and daddy being married and not. The harm in cohabiting parents is that it makes it much easier for one to walk away and harder for the child's caregiver to obtain child support. (The authors of the web site confuse correlation with causation--the fact is that many cohabiting parents have many other issues in their lives, are accidental parents and/or simply are much less fit to be parents.)

The leap that a mother is coaching a twelve year old is rather paranoid and even offensive. At twelve, I was quite aware that despite questions about Mormonism, I sure as heck knew all other religions were bogus. By 12, my own children had formed pretty solid opinions about religion--except for my oldest, i was inactive by then, though my wife wasn't, and we very deliberately made sure that they could choose what path they wanted with their agency (this was something I resented as a child that age--my parents and the church gave lip service to free agency, but didn't seem to actually grant me any.)

You are on different levels. He's repenting, you're not. For the posters that are blasting the poor guy, my take is entirely different. I see OP as feeling guilty for not starting the repentance process and projecting her guilt onto her boyfriend. You don't have to wait for records to arrive to repent; you just have to go to your bishop and start. Unless you don't really want to.

I am going to keep this short; please keep your advice to my specific questions. My temple marriage of 25 years is on the rocks. Why isn't relevant, though some hints lie within. In the past two years, I have suggested to my wife several times that we get marriage counseling. My wife has vehemently rejected this every time. I recently brought this up again and suggested that she pick the marriage counselor. She said that she's afraid that I'm not going to get out of what I think I am. I said that's fine, it's still worth a try. She said no. After ten years of inactivity for me and eight for my wife, she has returned to church (I'm fine with that.) I've wondered if using LDS social services marriage counseling will make her feel more at ease. At the same time I fear that I'm not going to be given close to a fair shake, which is fine up to a point where it becomes "blame the inactive husband" or resorts to "listen to Lord" and "feel the spirit." Been there, tried that. We have deep problems that go back 25 years and aren't going to resolved with cliches. FYI, we life in Utah County. My questions are: 1) How good is LDS social services marriage counseling? 2) How objective are they? 3) Is everything approached from a gospel standpoint or a neutral standpoint? 4) If this is advisable, can I get a referral from the bishop even though I'm inactive, but my wife isn't? 4a) If the answer is no, should I talk to the bishop anyway in hopes that he'll talk to my wife?