Backroads

Yes, but many of those passages of hardening people's hearts are considered incorrectly worded. If you are going to argue against Mormons, you also need to accept that we believe in some changes.

And that's the type of thing that can't be helped, of course. From the sounds of your posts now, it seems you really did not expect him acting this way. If you had known, would you have married him? So let's focus on answers describing what you can do now.

I wouldn't categorize Twilight as LDS fiction, though. I'm referring to a book idea my sisters and I are messing about with. In a perfect world, we would sell it to an LDS fiction publisher... and we just don't want it ripped from the Deseret Book shelves by order of the first presidency just because it has supernatural creatures in it. Mind you, this is to be a humorous type of book.

I'll skip right to the point with a vague question: Is it okay to stick werewolves/vampires/etc in blatantly LDS fiction?

I don't think anyone is against condemning child molestation and its ilk, but many members of the FLDS church are very happy and satisfied in their beliefs.

I will not argue anything against e-readers, but on pure preference I like a good ol'fashioned book in my hands and my only arguments for that is nostalgia and greater comfort in holding a book. I guess I also like the look of a bookshelf. I feel giddy going into libraries, bookstores, etc. I almost passed out at a bookmobile sale because I refused to leave the stuffy heat of the trailer. I love books. I don't think I'll ever invest money in an e-reader, at least not in the forseable future. But I have nothing against them and find them to be a brilliant idea. My mother also prefers a good bound book, but bought herself a Kindle because it really is easier for her to read.

Get a civil marriage. I think that sometimes LDS culture puts too much focus on the "temple marriage" for your original ceremony when it's really the sealing that counts. If anyone asks why you are getting married civilly, it's none of their business unless you and your boyfriend choose to make it so.

My concern is him respecting your feelings, him wondering if you are respecting his. I had an interesting discussion on this nature with my sisters today. We all grew up in the Mormon bubble of Utah, and one sister spent the summer working at Philmont Scout Ranch where she suddenly found herself not only the minority, but the dreaded Utah Mormon. In conversation with the few other Mormons there, she found herself feeling a little bad about some of the things she did watch/play. Personally, I apply more discretion to my entertainment than mere ratings. I have watched Rated R movies and I do play some M-rated video games. I put this with the good, better, best. The conversation today made me wondering that even though I deem these activities "all right' they're probably not the best use of my time. You may have brought up every reason under the sun, but did that list include how the movies make you feel? Do you trust him to set standards for himself using his own intelligence? If so, does he know that?

I'm putting my money on cold feet here. Your posts reveal that you are in so many ways okay with her past. Engagement time is often a time of panicking. Pray and ponder this. Is it just nerves, that little voice reminding you to be 100% sure of the girl you are going to marry and you wondering if you are 100% sure? Or is it this a real problem for you?

My random thoughts: I do believe you are either masculine or feminine. The eternal soul is one or the other. That being said, I do believe this is sometimes the case for people who don't feel right about their genders. I know of a girl who was born with male genitilia. She was thus raised as a boy for a good chunk of her childhood. Acted quite girly. Turned out, chromosome-speaking, she was female with a birth defect. I understand that she has been married in the temple.

Do we really expect God to be a babysitter, a fairy godmother? Those are often wished to be the nature of God, but I think we can all agree that God is neither. There is no magic machine where we put in good works, prayers, etc, and a perfect life pops out. Yes, I am well-aware of the scriptures stating about praying and receiving. Are we somehow misinterpreting those? Are we expecting too much? If people did good, prayed, etc. and thus received blessings, would faith increase in God? Or would a happy life just become the new low standard? Who are we to define God by what we want, or even by the scriptures, which, as holy as they are, are not God. I don't think we receive all desired blessings. I don't think good things always happen because we do good things. I do think all prayers are answered, but "no" is often the answer. I don't think God is ready to step right into the world and clean everything up. God is real and does listen to prayers, but that does not change the fact that we are living in an imperfect and fallen world where bad things are all too often a part of life.

All has been said, but I do want to emphasize that you have every right to mention his pornography in your letter to the first presidency when the time comes for it. As has been said, don't be "tattle telling", just say the issues. The First Presidency does want him to be worthy to be sealed to another woman. If he has dealt with his pornography, this won't make a difference; but you do seem to be worried if he lied. If so, this will bring up a few more questions. Either way, just be honest, don't be overly mean, and don't worry about it. If he is worthy, a timely letter will be a blessing to him and his fiance and doesn't cost you anything.

I would so drown in my husband's garments... I remember one time he thought I had taken them. He had forgotten I had purchased a new material.

I'm awful. When I see this sort of situation my first thought is "Did she get dressed in the dark and not look in the mirror?" Though I do guess in that situation I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt...

Okay, we all agree that women should dress modestly. I don't think anyone (here, anyways) will argue that. So that point is established. I do not wear low-cut tops nor do I think I wear any particularly tight shirts. So I don't think I'm emphasizing them. However, I do think it's important to look good. So I do think my upper body looks good most days. Is that emphasizing them? I'm having trouble seeing the de-emphasizing as anything but pretending I don't have them. The bolded statement...I think that's a hard connection to make. You seem to be saying Big boobs automatically means an inclination toward immodest clothing. Here's another possibility: Big boobs. A woman isn't completely happy with the size, but deals with it, is happy with other beautiful parts of her body, and dresses modestly. A woman is quite happy with the size and does think they contribute to her beauty. Is that taking pleasure in them? I guess so. But this woman continues to dress modestly because of a host of other reasons.

I'm glad because that would be creepy. Don't be one of those people that love women's hearts so much he collects them in jars in his basement.

Why should I work to make my breasts look smaller? Why can't I just buy a good bra that supports me and makes me look nice? I'm DD, that's a fact, and I dress modestly.

I know of a few people who do. I have memories of a primary teacher who was a cop and had to come to church in uniform. She always brought her gun. It was so cool.

Online, yes. I've yet to get one in reality.

Most awkward bishop meeting. Ever. Seriously, what about people who don't mind big breasts? I am getting a vibe from this thread that being larger than a b cup is a tragedy that cannot be helped.

I'll clarify that my earlier post was not referring to feeling good about our bodies in the privacy of marriages/homes. We all should have the right to feel good about our bodies all the time, public or private. In no way should the self-confidence be reserved for homes and marriages. Now, if you mean we have the right to be a little more sexy and whatnot in a marriage in a home, then yes, I full-heartedly agree with you. But I believe I do have the right to appreciate my body at all times. I believe I have the right to look good whether I'm at home with my husband or at work or at the grocery store. I think it's a worthy goal to want to be attractive and moderately proud of my body at all times--not being immodest, but still taking some reasonable pride in my body. I believe it is quite possible to be publicly attractive, feminine, and modest at the same time.

I attended BYU-Idaho which really ended my shorts career. 4 years there and they no longer appeal to me. When renting shorts in the gym I had issues because they were the "old style" which were ridiculously short and I was thrilled when they started selling a longer style. When working at Boy Scout camp I wore Scout/Venturing shorts because a) too hot for pants and b) The Scouting outfitters have yet to make women's pants that are flattering. When I became Aquatics director I spent most of the day in a pair of men's swim trunks. All shorts here I felt were modest. During this time I had ONE pair of shorts that were mid-thigh. They were shorter than anything else I had but modest by the fingertip rule. I felt I looked great in them, but I gave them to my little sister when I received my endowments. But as far as excercise clothing... all of my pants are at least knee-length. I no longer own exercise shorts because a) I'm no longer attending BYU-I with the gym's uniform and b) My preferred exercises are yoga/pilates/similar and I just don't feel as comfy in shorts for such exercises.

Does modesty mean reducing the appearance of large breasts or simply not flaunting them? Because I am getting the impression that large breasts = bad.

Thanks for this. I very well may have been taking your comments to the extreme. However, you did have me thinking a little more. I took the liberty of highlighting what sparked my thoughts. I do understand what you mean by women taking advantage of a larger chest size. I agree that is wrong. Yes, showing cleavage is immodest. I also found myself in swimming/lifeguarding situations where I had to remove my tanktop in order to get into the water to help a swimmer. Since I don't spend outrageous amounts of clothing on swimsuits (plus my staff swimsuits were given to me) I was probably showing a bit of cleavage. My other thought is that yes, I like being "well-endowed". I like being curvy. I feel pretty, feminine, and yes, even sexy. While I could stand a little more exercise and toning, I do make an effort to take care of myself and for the most part I feel I have a beautiful and attractive body. I don't think it's wrong to feel good about my body or to even feel that it's sexually attractive. For clarification's sake... do you think it's wrong to be somewhat proud of an attractive body? Is it one or the other? Must we either be taking full advantage of our bodies to the level of immodesty or taking no pride in them at all?

The only times I ever wanted to wrap up my chest is during swimming/lifeguarding.