Backroads

I don't think one explanation can cover everyone's situation - really - when has it ever? There are always unique circumstances that go against the norm, some of which, might be so neatly dusted underneath the rug that it's not commonly considered a valid reason.
 
There's countless factors to throw into this mixing bowl. Culture is one. Even though most of us live in mainstream western society, it's interesting that there are still places around the world where sex (let alone public affection) is considered taboo, even among married couples. National Geographics does a great job of highlighting these areas (certain parts of Africa and Turkey, for example) where men and women eating together is considered rude and crude behaviour. A couple of these women were asked about intimacy with their spouse, especially, considering that they did not share beds! While they agreed that sex is a wifely duty, it was not an act of affection nor did it contain any amount of closeness with their husbands, it was just another household duty along with the cooking and cleaning. This is perhaps an extreme scenario given but it's still one to contemplate. I think a woman coming from a culture where women take "the backseat" to men, and sex is solely a duty and not an act of affection, it could be perceived differently if she were to marry outside of her culture. Makes sense why she might avoid intimacy if it's not initiated by her husband, for example, or why she might respond "un moved" during intimacy. That was the way she was programmed, after all.
 
But reeling it in where it's more applicable to us and our culture, specifically within LDS members, I think trauma plays a big part in how one gives and receives affection. I think this trumps the generation card (those from the 60's era and earlier) where sex was kept private and no one knew your marital intimacy problems because the topic was locked behind bedroom doors. It just wasn't polite conversation, so folks didn't gossip about it, or talk candidly about it. BUT  despite this, I don't believe in American culture that it was ever made out to be that sex was dirty. So, going back to trauma, I think a child that has experienced unhealthy domestic relations (sexual abuse, incest, etc.) is likely to carry that pattern over into his/her adult life - or - completely avoid it like a hermit.
 
My last thought is some kind of imbalance, possibly chemical, where someone just isn't responsive to affection or gives much of it. This isn't because they hate touch, but because they're indifferent about it, and don't feel the urge to engage in it. Depression could do this, hormones could do this. I think the public overlooks this sometimes and marriages that could be resolved are instead abandoned because of chemical imbalances that prevent someone from expressing their needs and wants well.

I also take issue with "being an advocate for change".  Speaks to me highly of a faith problem.  Stay in the Church for cultural/family reasons, but make yourself feel better by declaring your progressiveness.

I disagree that it can be categorized as a fault of the home. To be clear, that is not to say that it is never the fault of the home. I think, in general, however, that trying to blame peoples neuroses on specific thing is a mistake. Unless that blame is that people are mortal and thereby emotionally and mentally weak, fallible and generally prone to problems.

I supported Prop 8 and my son is gay as well.  Would you be laughing at me as well?

"Let's eat Gramma!"
"Let's eat, Gramma!"
Commas save lives.
Q

Is there anything you've done from childhood onward, that you still believe in, that you'd be willing to 180 on for a month... As an experiment?
Such as
- wearing underwear
- using silverware
- not picking your nose in public
- shaving your legs
- ?
I'm picking morally ambivalent habits, here.
But, even so, you will find it EXTREMELY WEIRD to go commando, eat without implements, talk to the mailman while picking your nose, or whatever action you choose. You'll also find yourself forgetting to do so. Changing something you don't even think about anymore, that's pure habit... Generally takes about 7 years.
But... Imagine if it IS a moral imperative you've practiced from childhood onward?
Somehting you associate with being a Good Man?
I'm not going to suggest you DO any of these.... But reflect on if you were asked now to
- kick puppies
- slap your wife across the face
- not allow your children to eat
- etc.
Could you do any of those things on a daily basis?
Weekly?
Monthly?
It doesn't matter hat after 20-30 years of doing X that we TELL ourselves X is no longer the right thing, Y is the right thing...
For some, X has become both habit and ingrained into their self worth.
Which generally means 7+ years to change the old way of thinking/believing ... If ever.
Q

a bishop asking for further details regarding LOC issues to a teenager is extremely inappropriate. If I found out my bishop asked my teenage daughter anything other than the standard "do you keep the LOC", there would be serious problems. if a YW does not fully understand the LOC, it should go to the parents for counsel, not under any circumstances the bishop.

It's also the scriptural approach:
 
 

I think that when most people talk about bishops having inadequate training, they're typically referring to things like the engineer bishop being completely clueless about teen psychology.  At least, that's what I think of when I talk about bishops needing more training.  Leaving the door cracked open is just plain common sense.

When we say Bishops dont receive training is not totally accurate. I cant speak for the whole Church but, it comes down to the Stake Presidents and the training they give to the Bishops. We were always encouraged to make sure door not locked and to leave it partially open and to have someone sitting outside the door. That could be a councilor or parent or even a youth leader.  As for interviewing Youth I personally always used a different set of questions depending on their age. I am not crazy about having a Parent in the room with me while interviewing their son or daughter for two reasons. The first being I would be concerned with getting the young man or woman to open up and feel comfortable and the other reason is....I dont want Mom or Dad answering the questions for their son or daughter or trying to dominate the conversation.
   I have had some very good conversations with the youth when I interviewed them. There were times they told me things and would then ask.....are you going to tell my Parents?? I would reply No i am not....but I think you should. Had a few times where the youth asked if I could get their Parents and bring them into the room.
    Bishops are human and we make mistakes....these callings are hard enough as it is. You get more crap from members sometimes than what you got going door to door as a Missionary. If you have never been a Bishop you have no idea what its like.  The first time I was called I dont think I did a great job at my calling being new and learning what I was suppose to do. I never asked to be called either time, but I am thankfull I was called a second time and I feel like I did a better job the second time around.  Total combined years of serving both times was 11 years.

My husband and I had seven kids.  We had a mini van that seated seven though there were nine of us total.  Car seats weren't the law until the younger children were born.  Finances were always tight.  I did what I could to bring in extra money like babysitting from my home, or at times I worked full time.  I would put money aside on a regular basis so we could go on vacations.  It was a priority for me.  We managed to go to Disneyland several times.  A lot of our vacations were visiting relatives out-of-state or going camping.  When our oldest daughter graduated from High School, we rented a large 15 psg. van and went to Great Basin Nat'l Park, Yellowstone, Canada, Glacier Nat'l Park, Seattle, Mt. St. Helens, Oregon, and then down the cost of California to San Francisco and Sacramento.  Then back over to Utah.  It was a wonderful vacation.  And, I knew it was going to be the last one we had as a whole family.  A few years later when I went to work for a major airlines, my older children were already out of the house.  The younger kids were able to travel internationally because of my flight benefits.  We learned to travel inexpensively.
 
As for providing for the family:  Our home is a moderate 2400 sq. ft.  But, it has six bedrooms.  The basement was unfinished when we bought it, and over time we have finished bedrooms as needed.  Now, whether if we had two children or the seven, we would be in the same house.  So, mortgage would have been the same.  We had our mini van, and usually one other vehicle.  Church was within walking distance, and except for that and vacations, or driving to visit Grandparents, we didn't need to be all in one vehicle.  Food and clothing would of course be more expensive for a larger family than a smaller family. But, you don't need designer clothes to be well dressed.  And, you don't need to eat steak for every meal.  I learned to cook casseroles, which by the way, my husband does not like, but he learned to eat them.
 
Also, on the practical side of things, I did not over schedule my life or my children's.  We couldn't afford it for one thing.  They did manage to have swim lessons, piano lessons, and some of them played sports.  When we had some really bad financial problems, all lessons were stopped because we were unable to afford them.  But, I think my children would say, thank you for giving us birth, we didn't need all the sports, music, or dance lessons.
 
Is it practical to have a large family in this day?  Practical may not be the correct word.  It's do-able.  My son and his wife are expecting their sixth.  And both of them are attending school full time right now.  My daughter-in-law will be taking a short break after the baby is born, and then she'll be back in school.  Now, their children are spaced a lot closer together than mine were.  With most of my kids, I had a three year space and one four year space.  They have about a two year space between all their kids.  So, to me their house is more hectic than mine was.  Their oldest is nine, and with the kids as young as they are, they don't go through too much food, yet.  Just wait until they are teenagers!  Diapers is one of their biggest expenses right now, but that won't be forever.  They are struggling financially, but managing.  I think even if they had one or two kids, it would still be a struggle financially.  That's why they are both in school.  They want to better their financial situation.
 
For me, a large family was what I always wanted.  I came from a large family, and so did my husband.  On my mother's side of the family I have an Uncle and Aunt who had 14 children, another Aunt and Uncle that had 12.  As a kid, my favorite place to visit was my Aunt and Uncle's house with the 14 children.  There was always something happening, and it was so fun.
 
I'm not an empty-nester yet, but almost.  My home is so quiet without all the kids and their friends coming and going.  I miss it.  This week I've been able to watch my 16-month-old grandson while his mama is in So. Korea visiting her older sister.  I love the snuggle time with the baby.  I love his little happy dance when he sees me.  I love his fresh baby smell right after a bath.  I love it when he wants me to hold him.  I love watching him play.  I love to see the progress he has made, just in the week I've had him. These are things that I miss from when I was a young mother.  And, because I was blessed with more than one or two children I had the joy of seeing the magic of childhood multiple times.  Are children a lot of work?  Yes.  But, to me, so worth it.  Children are a wonderful blessing.
 My heart is so full with the love for my own children and my grandchildren.  I can't imagine not having the children that I had.  In some ways I wish I could have had at least one more.  But, by the time I was 39 when I had the last, my body had had enough, and I almost lost the last pregnancy.  We were so blessed to have had that last baby, and he has been such a joy.  And, I was attending college full time when I had him.  I don't feel like I missed out on anything by having the family that I did.  I would do it all over again in-a-heartbeat.

I had 6 siblings - we never went on vacations. We went to my Uncles house in Snohomish, WA (we lived in Ballard, WA) three Saturdays a month. Excluding Oct, Nov, Dec, Jan & Feb. Roads were just too nasty to risk 10 lives in a car.
 
Mom's mother lived with us, and no she never helped financially. She helped some with chores, cooking and laundry.
 
We all had chores to do. Starting at age 5, you did chores. At 5 yrs old, you dry mopped the floors, folded laundry and even ironed pillow cases and handkerchiefs. We did not have fabric carpeting, so there was no vacuuming until my last two years in High School, when my oldest 3 siblings went together and bought Mom & Dad a large area rug for the living room for their anniversary. That thing needed vacuuming! Grandma and Mom's two brothers bought the vacuum cleaner. 
 
On holidays - like Memorial Day, we all got into the station wagon and we went into the woods where there was a lake. Mom and Grandma had cooked fried chicken, potato & macaroni salads, we each had a whole tomato, whole cucumber and handful of radishes. We played in the nearby woods, swam (or floated in an inner tube), ate and got sunburned. 
 
Mom, Grandma and all of us kids fell asleep on the way home. I don't know where we went- but I absolutely loved those Away (away from the house and our own backyard)  Picnics. We never locked our house either! No need to, the neighbors would never let anyone to walk into our house when we all were not there. 
 
Mom was a mother, wife and keeper of all things dealing with the house. Daddy was a father, husband, & worked one job. Grandma worked as a cook at a Nursing Home and she lived with us. 
 
Mom cooked nearly everything from scratch. The elbow macaroni was purchased, all other noodles were from scratch. It wasn't until I was a Junior in High School that she was introduced to envelope mixes and boxed meals. She abandoned her way of making spaghetti & lasagna sauces and used the envelope mixes. She also much preferred to use cake mixes, though she still made the 'From Scratch' birthday cakes (Angel Food, Chiffon and Dad's favorite Lady Baltimore cake with 7 minute frosting and date/nuts/raisin filling. 
 
If Dad hadn't of worked at Pacific Fruit and Produce, we would probably have grown our own vegetables and found more places where we could have gleaned for the fruit.
 
Mom, Grandma and us girls made our own clothes. Daddy taught us girls how to knit socks, and how to darn them. I was not skilled at that. I could do scarves, IF you really didn't care what it looked like   Mom was extremely skilled at taking clothes others gave us and remaking them into outfits for us younger, smaller kids. She accepted clothes even if they were too old for us kids, because she was going to re-make them. Grandma laid us down on the floor, on top of newpaper that was taped together. Marked our shapes from the knees up, and use that to make patterns for aprons. At home we always wore aprons over our clothes. The aprons came off at the exterior door when we went outside to play, and at the stairs as we went up to bed. I always forgot to take mine off before leaving for grade school - so I ended up wearing mine all day long. 
 
My most comfortable winter coat was cut down from a 'cape' style coat given to Mom. It was two people too big for her, She made me a sleeved, button up coat and a button up, collared. long sleeve jacket for our youngest sister, and a pair of dress up slacks for our little brother. 

Do you like to write and have looked for a way to get it published. This is your chance.  Want to share your writing with LDS.net’s worldwide audience? All submissions will be considered, but unfortunately not all submissions can be published.
 
To give your work the best chance of publication keep your article in line with the general tone of LDS.net. Our readers love lists and keeping up on the latest news.
 
Just go to the home page and click on the "Contribute" button and submit your writing.
 
We look forward to hearing from you
 
 

A few thoughts -
- One antidote is to serve him.  You can do this anonymously and as often as you decide.
- Another is to pray for him.  (Matthew 5:44)
- You may want to consider saying something to him just so he can learn from it.  Keep it simple ("I'm sure your heart was in the right place but I need you to know that what you said really hurt my feelings."), hand him a plate of cookies, wish him a nice day and leave.
 
x

If it's been 6 months ... I would have to suggest you're not going to just get over feeling badly.
Which leads me to suspect that EITHER what he said was true OR that it's something you work hard doing the opposite.
The first one is the hardest, so I'll table it for the moment.
If it isn't true:
The second one has an intermediary step... Which is to meet with him and point out exactly how untrue what he said was.
At that point he can either decide to believe you, or not... But either way the miscommunication is dealt with & the problem begun to be addressed.
Ahem. Which is another thing... He may be completely unaware that it has affected you as much as it has. Oftentimes things that bother me not at all, send others into fizzles, and vice versa. Not being mind readers, we generally don't know how much something we've said or done has affected someone... Yep. Even if they react strongly in the moment. It's not uncommon to have someone bawling in your office one minute (as a boss, or a teacher, or ANY position of authority... So I suspect it's the same for bishops), and then cracking jokes, working hard, totally fine the next. In fact, in some jobs, it's expected that a person may break down on the 1:1, and then be fine, better, best as soon as they're no longer 1:1.
So while you may be simply gutted over this statement, it may very well be possible that he's clueless it's affected you this much, for this long. He may not even remember saying XYZ to you after this long, or have even meant something totally different.
To be clear, since you were leaving the actual incident out I have no idea what it's about or how memorable it is in the scheme of things. So the above is just fairly generic what ifs and could bes. I'm not saying he did forget, or meant something different, and he may well be aware how much it's affected you. Or not. No way to tell without talking to him, or more detail.
If it IS true...
Then you've got some simpler options: sort it and move on.
Yeah. I said simpler, not easier, unfortunately. The simple things are always the most difficult.
Q

Maybe it's just me, but aren't we all adults here?  The site is open to ages 14+, but even the teenagers here know what "it" is that we're talking about.  Is there a reason we can't just say "sex?"

The interviews are prescribed to be twice-yearly.  For youth aged 12-15, one interview per year should be with the bishop, while the other may be with a counselor.  For 16-17-year-old youth, both interviews should be with the bishop.
 
They are not required.  However, not participating in these interviews can have consequences, such as not being able to obtain a limited-use recommend for the temple*.  You mentioned in your OP that you didn't force your daughter to go to the temple with the ward.  The temple should never be forced.  If she doesn't want to attend, she probably shouldn't.  If she wants to attend, she needs to meet with the bishop.  If she refuses to meet with the bishop, then she needs to accept the consequence that she will be unable to attend the temple.
 
As I think about this more, it sounds to me a little like your daughter is just rebelling for the sake of rebelling.  As the oldest child, she is likely given the most responsibility and blame, but the least amount of freedom and control.  She may be acting out simply because she feels she is under your thumb and (like a toddler during the "terrible twos") simply is trying to assert a level of control in her own life.  The sharing may just be to get your attention.
 
Or, she may not have a testimony or want one.  Despite your own efforts and the way you've raised her, she may genuinely want nothing to do with the Church.  The more you push her into it, and force her to "do what's right," the more you may be pushing her away, in reality.  I don't have any advice for you on this issue, because I've often thought to myself that as long as my children live in my home as minors, they will go to church with the family, whether they like it or not.  When they're 18, they can make their own decisions.  Thinking about your recent experience, I'm not certain that I agree with myself on that anymore, though.  But it is an angle you should consider.





*Other things might include broadcasts of local temple dedication services, ecclesiastical recommendations for college, letters of recommendation, and other local non-official things (in my stake, youth have an interview with the bishop prior to attending Trek for youth conference every four years, and they sign an honor code contract).  Additionally, she would not be able to have a calling if she refuses to meet with the bishop or a member of the bishopric.

Don't know if there's a hidden motive within the original post but here are my thoughts. First, assuming this is an accurate report, the teen has done wrong by purposefully being deceitful and manipulative. Second, I would think that many religious practices and or protocols would turn the heads of those outside of subscription. Typically, people are sceptical and perhaps even fearful of what they don't understand.
 
 
Now, addressing a possible "hidden motive", which I felt was the questioning of whether bishops should be having invasive interviews with minors without parents, here are some more thoughts... I would hope and would like to think that the majority of bishops out there are fine ones, and worthy priesthood holders, with only the best intentions. That said, there is no doubt in my mind that there are going to be a few bad apples in the mix, as with many things, it's just unavoidable. Personally, I would feel more comfortable with a second "witness" sitting in during these interviews that touch base on delicate and sensitive topics. I think if it's a female child, perhaps a YW leader ought to sit in or maybe a parent, and like wise if it's a male child, a YM leader sit in or maybe a parent. This would help protect both parties, child and bishop.

classylady, -- I also read agenda in the OP and the response and therefore have not engaged. I have also not engaged because there is not enough information. Unless we know what the bishop actually said how can we possibly assess its appropriateness? The OP stating that something bugged her does not tell us a thing. Either way, I find myself skeptical of the legitimacy of the report, and side with you on the inappropriate behavior of the teen. Ridiculous.

Shepard... I have to ask... what was your response the very first time your daughter told you that the bishop creeped her out?
 
Did you blow off her concerns? (at least in her mind).  Or did you talk to her and try to figure out what was bothering her?  (Again this was the very first time)
 
As parents we need to take signs that our kids have issues with other adults that we would consider "Trusted" very seriously.  Maybe it is just a personality clash, maybe its just a teenage rebellion thing, but in this day in age were we are very much aware of child predators and we can't expect a child to bring forth concerns and then not listen when they do.
 
To me this sound very much like a "your not listening so I will make everyone listen" kind of response.
 
I have not heard the recording but since you have and you aren't calling for the bishop's head and I going to assume that this is a parent/child issue with the bishop being caught in the middle.  And since you are the adult you need to take charge in fixing it.

If my daughter did this, even if she truly felt uncomfortable with the Bishop's interview, I would be so ashamed--ashamed that my daughter has no regard for authority or appropriate behavior.  Did I not teach her proper behavior?  How could I as a parent fall so short of my responsibility of teaching correct manners.  If this is an actual occurrence, and not some troll trying to get a rise out of us, I would be so embarrassed over my child's behavior.  And, I as a mother, look at my children's behavior as a reflection on me.  This is not a funny joke that she perpetrated.  This is just totally uncalled for and inappropriate.  I may rile a few people here, because I understand that children can go against their parent's teachings.  But, this behavior is not acceptable.  If the Bishop's questions were a little out of line, then she should have gone to her parents.  This sounds to me like she purposefully egged him on.  And recorded it!
 
I should probably just erase what I just typed and not post this.  I usually don't get upset over posts.  And, it's not the post that is upsetting me, it's the behavior of a 15 year old girl.  Not acceptable or funny!

While I agree with most here that the bishop is probably the greater victim here that the child, I would caution you against entirely dismissing your daughter's concerns.  While it is possible and likely that some level of discipline (not necessarily church discipline) will need to be levied against your daughter, it needs to be done with respect to how she went about addressing her concerns.  While doing that, you should also acknowledge her concerns and validate her feelings on the subjects. The goal needs to be teaching her how to respond to these matters appropriately. 
 
And to put a fine point on it, this should have been done two years ago.
 
I can sympathize with your daughter on her feelings about the bishop's interviews with the youth being uncomfortable and potentially inappropriate.  You need to find out what aspects of the interviews make her uncomfortable and help her define limits on what are and are not appropriate questions for her bishop to ask her.  If she feels uncomfortable answering a question, she has every right to say "I'm not comfortable with that question."  She also needs to know that if her bishop is unaccepting of that, she has the right to get up and walk out.  After doing so, she should go to you, the parent, to discuss what just happened.  
 
Then it needs to be made abundantly clear that the way in which she handled this was childish and rude.  Making the recording alone may be illegal, depending on your state.  
 
On the bishop's side of things, I see a couple of issues that he may need to address in himself.  First, he needs to spend more time with these young women.  He needs to attend classes with them, mutual activities, visit the families in their homes, if necessary.  And he needs to get to know every child in Primary that will be in the youth program within the next two years.  If he doesn't already have a relationship with these youth where they are comfortable talking to him by the time they turn 12, he's compromising his ability to serve them (that's an 'easier-said-than-done' thing).  But that fact that your daughter was able to stage a revolt with nine girls at the age of 13 tells me that the majority of them had similar feelings about the interviews.  That's a problem.
 
Second, he needs to rethink the level of detail necessary when pursuing people's transgressions.  While calling the police with respect to this interview may be overkill, the school psychologist is doing her job, which is to protect the child from potential abuse.  If a professional psychologist is concerned at the level of detail brought up in this interview, I think it warrants some review*.  Also, let's keep in perspective that the psychologist's concern is the level of detail he was asking for while alone with a young girl.  There is an age and power imbalance in this situation that is ripe for abuse and it's generally in the best interests of all parties for someone to be present in the discussion that can normalize that imbalance.
 
It's a crappy situation you're in, and I don't envy you.  But I'm hesitant to go all crazy over what your daughter did.  Her actions are a symptom of deeper issues, and it is those issues that you need to work to understand and address.
 
 
* To be fair, bishops receive almost no training about this, which is something I think really ought to change.  

From what I understand about federal law, if there is an investigation from CPS, the person/people being investigated must be made aware first, that there is an investigation, and second, what allegations exist.
 
From what I understand about the various city, county, and state CPS organizations, education and adherence to the relevant federal laws are sometimes lacking.  In some cases, the social workers are ignorant of the relevant laws.  In other cases, they are intentionally not following them, and refusing to comply.  Some are trained to bluff and lie about what they're doing, and the power they have to do it.
 
Absolutely you should tell your bishop everything you know about what is happening.  Both he, and the stake president, should be made aware of what's happening.  The church in general may wish to conduct their own investigation, because absolutely if there's a bishop doing something wrong, the bishop needs to be dealt with.

I agree with Pam.
 
I do feel for the Bishop. I don't know what the protocol is for interviews. Sounds like the beginning of some very trying learning experiences for this young lady.
 
I will say that I have heard of a Bishop taking questions too far. I know it happened with my brother when he was went to the Bishop in the MTC with some things he had not repented of. My father (also a Bishop) was furious when he was told about how the interview went down. If there is ever a problem you simply move up the chain of command and speak with the next authority, (Stake President).

None of us have heard the audio recording.  We don't know if the questions being asked were out of line.  Was the Bishop digging deeper into the details because he was a perv?  Or did he need to dig a little deeper to decide if some disciplinary action was required.
 
We've always been taught that conversations with the Bishop remain confidential.  Most Bishops respect that aspect of their calling.
 
Your daughter betrayed him with her recording and sharing of the audio.  If she really was concerned she could have taken it to you as parents.  Not share it around the school to get a few laughs.  
 
Yeh something wrong with the daughter here.
 
I actually feel for the Bishop here.