Coach Sam discusses the origins of our American cultural norms and beliefs around talking about sex. The first in this series that will discuss our beliefs about talking about sex as members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and what rules you can establish in a conversation that will help you comfortably discuss sex without feeling like you're defiling something sacred.
2 comments:
Sam, thank you for your interest and desire to get good info out to LDS. I've been quietly following your blog for a few years now. I wish more LDS would grow in this area of sexual health/education. I've also listened to each of your podcasts and curious to get a little clarification on your perspectives of sacredly discussing sex. My struggle to follow your thinking might entirely be on me, I usually do better with the written word vs spoken.
First, I'm curious about how you're determining the context or definition of "sacred". It seems what you are saying is; listen to the spirit, treat the topic of sex respectfully, and take counsel(?) from your leaders about the boundaries in discussing these sacred topics?
If I'm understanding you correctly. This framework feels a little arbitrary and ambiguous. For example, if you were to discuss these topics like you currently do, in the 50-mid '80s. You would be viewed at the very least, as irreverent and not treating sex sacredly. Some/many leadership would require you to shut down your writing and repent. It could even result in some form of disciplinary action. I have family who worked for family service at that time period and even they were cautioned/warned not to pursue these topics. Therapists who pursued sexual health often become outcasts and not referred to anymore.
It seems like this approach is a form of moral relativism, in a way, and is guided more by the opinions of leadership than the spirit. What if in 20 years the way you're suggesting to discuss this topic is viewed the same way we did in the '70s. While I deeply value and 100% agree with the need to treat the topic of sex sacredly. I'm wondering how exactly you're deciding those boundaries. When I listen to other sex educators like Brotherson and Jennifer Finlayson-Fife and others who seem to be a lot more frank and maybe less cautious. I still feel the respect and sacredness of the topic.
But the way you say things like your example of finding good books on sex and then throwing them away when done. Feels really incongruent. Many leaders would argue that, if you feel like you have to throw it out, you shouldn't read it.
Also, while I respect the fact you take certain measures to age restrict your blog and podcast. It seems to communicate a mixed message. Gosh, I'd much rather have my kids come across your information than some random porn or sex education article online. The message feels like, this is a sacred way to discuss sex and learn about your body. But it's too dangerous for singles to view. The indirect and sometimes direct message in your podcast comes across like it did in the '70s. But slightly less scary.
Forgive me if this doesn't come out the way I intend, I mean no disrespect, just eager to learn. But when you address how to talk about sex in a sacred way. It comes across as circular and defined by you.
I felt this way when you discussed the definition or rather the risk of defining porn. It seemed to boil down to what you believed was porn. Ah... just trying to make sense of it all. These are big topics. Thank you and keep pursuing the good work.
One other example, you mentioned you got your leadership okay to write about sex. But what if you were to move to a new stake and that stake president or bishop said, this is highly inappropriate and you'll need to stop writing about this topic. Would your previous perspective now have to change? I've seen those types of inconsistent leadership a lot, especially on this topic. So I think it's a valid concern, not just a hypothetical.
Post a Comment