NOM

An person I'm close with asked my thoughts on the following situation:
TBM friend confided with my friend that her husband masturbates in the shower.
She also found out her teen age son has started doing the same thing.
My friend asked about the TBMs husband if when there are libido differences why she (TBM wife) just doesn't give her husband a hand to help him out in those times when he needs a little attention. My friend says there was shock and horror to even suggest she do that to her husband.
Am I just to liberal on this topic, or are most TBMs against this in the marriage bed?

I'm not sure about everyone, but giving a hand is not how the marriages I am familiar with work...

In the TBMs mind the less sexual partner in a marriage just supposed to suffer with sexual frustration and sing hymns and their head and stuff?

After all if it's good for homosexuals to live horrific sexually frustrating lives, it should also be good for straight people to a lesser degree.

(Not saying I agree with any of that crap, but I think that's the TBM line.) Sexual frustration is like THE pathway to God. Unless you are Joseph Smith I guess. if you're Joseph Smith then God will send a sword wielding wielding Angel to get you all kinds of shag opportunities.

As Mormons, our sexual frustration or gratification are entirely determined by someone else. We really have no say in the matter, that's up to Old Russ and the Q15. Gee I wonder why there's so many sexual problems in the church?

2bizE wrote: ↑Tue Aug 28, 2018 3:37 pm TBM friend confided with my friend that her husband masturbates in the shower.
She also found out her teen age son has started doing the same thing.

I can visualize the shock and shame at finding out her husband and child engage in perfectly normal and healthy human behavior.

slavereeno wrote: ↑Tue Aug 28, 2018 4:33 pm In the TBMs mind the less sexual partner in a marriage just supposed to suffer with sexual frustration and sing hymns and their head and stuff?

Strangely enough I think if you polled active Mormondom the top response would be either the above or strangely enough the somewhat opposite idea that wives have a wifely duty to provide sexual relief to prevent husbandly indiscretions. I suspect you'd see generational and gender trends between the two responses.

2bizE wrote: ↑Tue Aug 28, 2018 3:37 pm An person I'm close with asked my thoughts on the following situation:
TBM friend confided with my friend that her husband masturbates in the shower.
She also found out her teen age son has started doing the same thing.
My friend asked about the TBMs husband if when there are libido differences why she (TBM wife) just doesn't give her husband a hand to help him out in those times when he needs a little attention. My friend says there was shock and horror to even suggest she do that to her husband.
Am I just to liberal on this topic, or are most TBMs against this in the marriage bed?

I think many women are a bit repulsed by the idea. It feels to some like “servicing” a man, as if seeing to his pleasure and not your own is somehow what prostitutes do. I had one client say that that “was not making love, but giving him sex.” She even objected to other terms for sexual intercourse other than “making love.” Ummmm, but then I was working with sexual assault victims, victims of childhood sexual abuse and domestic violence victims, so “giving sex” had abusive connotations. So, maybe again my idea of “normal women”might be skewed on this.????

On the other hand, some men do not like the idea. My husband was super Squeamish about it during the time right after I had had a baby, so sex was out by doctor’s orders.. I had to talk him into it.

It is commonly suggested by marriage counselors.

Hmmm....

I think there's a mathematical solution here. I agree it's probably over simplified and doesn't account for a true definition if sexual desire/needs but bear with me here, ok?

Couples Love + Self Love = Sexual Fulfillment

If CL < SF, SL will increase until SL = SF
If CL >= SF, SL = 0
If CL = 0, see a marriage counselor

If SL > 0 you're normal.
If SL = Shower, lock the door.
If SL = 0, your lying to your bishop.
If SL > 0, never confess to a bishop.
If SL > SF, see a therapist.
If SL = Kitchen table, see a therapist.
If SL = 3X a day, use lube.
If SL > 3X a day, see a therapist.
If SL > hours worked, see a therapist.
If SL > hours spent eating, see a therapist.
If SL = before eating, wash your hands!

Did I miss anything?

alas wrote: ↑Tue Aug 28, 2018 5:12 pm I think many women are a bit repulsed by the idea. It feels to some like “servicing” a man, as if seeing to his pleasure and not your own is somehow what prostitutes do. I had one client say that that “was not making love, but giving him sex.” She even objected to other terms for sexual intercourse other than “making love.” Ummmm, but then I was working with sexual assault victims, victims of childhood sexual abuse and domestic violence victims, so “giving sex” had abusive connotations. So, maybe again my idea of “normal women”might be skewed on this.????

Interesting, I'd have no problem offering the equivalent to my wife. Of course I'm male and not the victim of sexual abuse so removed at minimum by two giant differences from the group you are referencing. The subservience and one-sided perception of it makes sense given the abuse, and even without abuse if such acts are not part of a larger give and take of a healthy sexual relationship I can see a negative perception.

alas wrote:I think many women are a bit repulsed by the idea. It feels to some like “servicing” a man, as if seeing to his pleasure and not your own is somehow what prostitutes do.

Hmmm.....

I think there's an over simplified answer if we break this down to "intelligent design." I've heard many women suggest that the male penis is repulsive, hideous, and unattractive. Perhaps the argument could be made that the penis should have been modeled after a designer hand bag and therefore would never leave her hand! Clearly God was not thinking straight when he created man in his image!

alas wrote: ↑Tue Aug 28, 2018 5:12 pm
I think many women are a bit repulsed by the idea. It feels to some like “servicing” a man, as if seeing to his pleasure and not your own is somehow what prostitutes do. I had one client say that that “was not making love, but giving him sex.”

This just drives me crazy....if there is no coercion involved, giving sex is a pretty healthy thing.

So if a husband gives his wife a foot massage or a back rub or does the dishes or any number of other things to give service or pleasure to his wife, that's "o.k.", he's not a Gigolo. But if the wife is having her cycle or heaven forbid has a yeast infection or whatever......helping her guy out suddenly turns dirty if she has to use her hands? I just feel really sorry for young women who are raised with this kind of thinking and even more so for their husbands.

Making love is done in a myriad of ways. Remembering birthdays and anniversaries. Taking out the trash. Changing the baby's diaper. Making the kids and mom dinner or taking everybody to Burger King or for Pizza.

It probably isn't just a Mormon thing and probably all Mormons aren't this way, but the church's non-stop hammering on this issue probably contributes to mental frigidity in some poor women. And some weird behaviors in church men as well. I remember one of those little question sessions among male missionaries who were wondering if they really had to keep their garments on during sex. And they were serious folks, no kidding. Somebody's grandpa somewhere was telling his grandson about how critical it was to wear the garment at all times. Even when you're making babies....

Of course that WAS clear back in the early 70's.....

Red Ryder wrote: ↑Tue Aug 28, 2018 5:52 pm

alas wrote:I think many women are a bit repulsed by the idea. It feels to some like “servicing” a man, as if seeing to his pleasure and not your own is somehow what prostitutes do.

Hmmm.....

I think there's an over simplified answer if we break this down to "intelligent design." I've heard many women suggest that the male penis is repulsive, hideous, and unattractive. Perhaps the argument could be made that the penis should have been modeled after a designer hand bag and therefore would never leave her hand! Clearly God was not thinking straight when he created man in his image!

ROFL

1. Lights out.
2. Missionary position.
3. Procreation only.

Don't believe me? Ask the gang id's freedomforum...

Palerider wrote: ↑Tue Aug 28, 2018 6:11 pm

alas wrote: ↑Tue Aug 28, 2018 5:12 pm
I think many women are a bit repulsed by the idea. It feels to some like “servicing” a man, as if seeing to his pleasure and not your own is somehow what prostitutes do. I had one client say that that “was not making love, but giving him sex.”

This just drives me crazy....if there is no coercion involved, giving sex is a pretty healthy thing.

So if a husband gives his wife a foot massage or a back rub or does the dishes or any number of other things to give service or pleasure to his wife, that's "o.k.", he's not a Gigolo. But if the wife is having her cycle or heaven forbid has a yeast infection or whatever......helping her guy out suddenly turns dirty if she has to use her hands? I just feel really sorry for young women who are raised with this kind of thinking and even more so for their husbands.

Making love is done in a myriad of ways. Remembering birthdays and anniversaries. Taking out the trash. Changing the baby's diaper. Making the kids and mom dinner or taking everybody to Burger King or for Pizza.

It probably isn't just a Mormon thing and probably all Mormons aren't this way, but the church's non-stop hammering on this issue probably contributes to mental frigidity in some poor women. And some weird behaviors in church men as well. I remember one of those little question sessions among male missionaries who were wondering if they really had to keep their garments on during sex. And they were serious folks, no kidding. Somebody's grandpa somewhere was telling his grandson about how critical it was to wear the garment at all times. Even when you're making babies....

Of course that WAS clear back in the early 70's.....

1+ Wish I'd said this.

Seems very selfish for the partner with the lower libido to expect the partner with the higher libido not to masturbate.

And is there really a person who thinks giving their spouse a handy is wrong? That shame can only exist in mormonism or another cult.

Spicy McHaggis wrote: ↑Tue Aug 28, 2018 9:47 pm Seems very selfish for the partner with the lower libido to expect the partner with the higher libido not to masturbate.

The truly crazy thing is that within the context of Mormonism and it's anti-masturbation rhetoric it's 'righteous' to expect this. True there are some Mormons who think of the anti-masturbation rhetoric as just applying to youth and the unmarried, but there is plenty of carryover into marriages of the thinking. The porn rhetoric also rears it's ugly head without anyone even necessarily looking at porn as well, I recall one person on r/exmormon who was sharing that she felt creeped out at the idea of her husband masturbating in the shower while he visualized her, and her husband was riddled with guilt at the prospect of visualizing someone else.

Mormonism, the giver of so much sexual dysfunction.

My position is the same as that of the sage counsel from the apostle, seer, and revelator, even Boyd K Packer: “Sometimes the truth isn’t very useful.”

Too bad the church teaches that a person’s individual sexuality is the business of so many other people, and that god is keeping score of when, where, and how someone finishes the job.

Red Ryder wrote: ↑Tue Aug 28, 2018 5:37 pm Did I miss anything?

If SL = teenager involved with blessing or passing the sacrament, please, please, please wash your hands

Spicy McHaggis wrote: ↑Tue Aug 28, 2018 9:47 pm Seems very selfish for the partner with the lower libido to expect the partner with the higher libido not to masturbate.

On the surface, I agree with you but I don't know if it's selfishness, or the person completely buying in to the Kimball/Richard G Scott maxim of self-discipline in marital sexuality. That when no nooky is forthcoming, the higher libido person just does without. It's pretty harmful to a marriage.

We had an interesting conversation about this some years ago when my apostasy began to surface, and Sis M was not feeling generous towards me, so it was not the most lovin' filled period of our marriage. And I don't blame her, I blame the church. So, I took matters in hand, so to speak, just as I had during periods of pregnancy or just the low down times - at those points, with guilt, but of course that went away when I figured out what the church was. One Sunday, after we had one of many lessons in the ward on the dangers of pornography, she asked me some pointed questions on my personal sexuality. At this point, I decided to be blunt. I said, "Lookit, if you and the church insist that the only sexual outlet I can have is when you decide that we can have sex, and you've decided you're permanently not in the mood because of my apostasy, than what do you expect I've been doing?" That has initiated, over the last few years, a policy of "don't ask, don't tell" in my house. Which is perfect for both of us, and our sex life, for our age and station, is actually pretty good. I give her a lot of kudos, as Sis M is pretty liberal when it comes to sexuality, except during the initial period of my apostasy.

But when sex is used as a weapon, either from withholding it or demanding it from one or other of the partners, a marriage is pretty destructive - like everything else, communication on this and other matters is vital to keep a good relationship, and when that breaks down, therapy is a pretty good option.

Red Ryder wrote: ↑Tue Aug 28, 2018 5:37 pm Couples Love + Self Love = Sexual Fulfillment

If CL < SF, SL will increase until SL = SF
If CL >= SF, SL = 0
If CL = 0, see a marriage counselor

If SL > 0 you're normal.
If SL = Shower, lock the door.
If SL = 0, your lying to your bishop.
If SL > 0, never confess to a bishop.
If SL > SF, see a therapist.
If SL = Kitchen table, see a therapist.
If SL = 3X a day, use lube.
If SL > 3X a day, see a therapist.
If SL > hours worked, see a therapist.
If SL > hours spent eating, see a therapist.
If SL = before eating, wash your hands!

Can't argue with the math.

Corsair wrote: ↑Wed Aug 29, 2018 7:44 am

Red Ryder wrote: ↑Tue Aug 28, 2018 5:37 pm Did I miss anything?

If SL = teenager involved with blessing or passing the sacrament, please, please, please wash your hands

Mormorrisey wrote: ↑Wed Aug 29, 2018 7:52 am

Spicy McHaggis wrote: ↑Tue Aug 28, 2018 9:47 pm Seems very selfish for the partner with the lower libido to expect the partner with the higher libido not to masturbate.

But when sex is used as a weapon, either from withholding it or demanding it from one or other of the partners, a marriage is pretty destructive

That right there. Ziontology has weaponized sex. It's just one more layer of control they have given themselves when it is none of their business. I know of active couples who seem to be a good fit other than their intimacy. My wife doesn't care if take matters in to my own hands and I don't care when she does the same.

I was told by 3 counselors in the Wasatch Front that "sex is completely optional and 100% non-essential".

So, all you people who want sex....you just need more FAITH!

What a joke....what a joke this mess about "M" is...

--------------

Once had someone argue the point that prostitution should be legal across this whole world...both ways. Why?..because, as this person said: "You pay for sex wherever you are." Back in my TBM marriage days, this was certainly true. I would come home and do the dishes, do laundry, clean and vacume the floor, fix the car, put the dog out, play with the kids and do homework with them, then finish my own study, brush my wife's hair, tell her over and over how hot and sexy she was....and AFTER ALL OF THAT...if I 'earned it' I got sex.

She stayed home, went to visit her friends, watched TV, played games, spent money she didn't earn on things she didn't need...etc.

Oh yeh...I paid for it. And from what I've heard, that is not all that unusual. Goes both ways to...some women pay for it as well. AND THIS IS IN MARRIAGE!

How SAD! In the LDS church, acting "outside the marriage" (as in adultery, or porn) is a sin. But "acting in the marriage" as in withholding, or using it as a club, is not a sin. Its this one-sided view of sex that poisoned my entire notion of marriage, and began the collapse of my faith shelf.