Sex and my Sheltered Life
And now for something completely different.
Enough with the politics, lets get to a topic I really enjoy! I really really enjoy sex, so much so that I’m not always as respectful as I should be. Although I’m not exactly sure how respectful that is anyway. Opinions vary.
WARNING: This post is rambling and somewhat pointless, I should be asleep instead of blogging, but I’m not. You were warned.
I’ve lived a very sheltered life. I suppose I don’t know much about sex except that I like it a lot. I don’t have much personal knowledge of this sexual revolution that has apparently swept the country since . . . what’s it been 40 years ago. Most of my friends fall into three categories. 1. Waited until they were married. 2. Pretended they waited, because they were ashamed/embarrassed. 3. Got pregnant and got married. I’m a number one.
I’m sure many of you can hardly conceive of this, in this modern world, but that’s my sheltered life. I have in the last few years become friends with a few women who have more first-hand knowledge of the skanky world I have never seen, but I haven’t yet had “the talk” with them. But I’d like to hear the dirt, it’s just such a different world view than any I’ve ever come into contact with. I’m very curious about it. And not in the Hollywood way.
I’ve seen the Hollywood version. I watch movies, see TV (though no cable at all, I’ve never had cable. Can you believe that? Not once in my entire life have I lived in a home with cable. I’m a cave dweller.) It seems that people are having lots of happy breezy premarital sex out there. Or at least it always works that way on Friends.
I have my doubts that it really works this way. But what do I know? I know what the gospel teaches us about sex and its sacred nature. I believe it deeply. I know that most people don’t have the gospel as a guide, they have Hollywood. I don’t know how accountable people should be, or the effects this has on the emotional health, or their spiritual health.
I was reading in Newsweek about the new hooking-up thing they have going on in high schools and colleges these days and it made me really sad. I don’t consider myself a prude, despite my sheltered upbringing. I’m not into holding people accountable for moral systems they have little contact with and no belief in. But I still can’t help but think that hook-ups are an especially sad thing, specifically for girls who just aren’t built psychologically (or spiritually) to have sex with strangers. Not that boys get off easy either. It’s just that sex is much more sentimental and risky (in so many ways) for women, that’s all. Pregnancy and disease aside, the emotional risk seems huge for girls.
One of the most telling quotes in the article was from a girl who, when asked what makes a sucessful hook-up replied, “When no one finds out.”
Now that’s a rip-roaring good time! How sad.
So I asked one of my new non-mo friends about this (I have two, both relatively recent acquisitions). I’ve just started to get to know Wendy, we click. She’s not religious at all, She’s Jewish and secular, she lived a rough life, rough and sad, and pulled herself through it into happy stable picture-perfect hubby-and-two-kids suburban bliss. Hee hee. So she knows all about the skanky world, up close and personal. And doesn’t have fond memories of it.
So I asked her what she thought, was this as sad as I thought? Can girls hook-up and come out unscathed? Can boys? I totally sympathize with the reasons they want to go out and play around with sex. I love sex. But for me it’s . . . not always sacred exactly, but it’s more about trust and relationship . . . and fun too but that part would be so empty without the LoVE stuff. Recreational sex just sounds scary and sad to me.
Unfortunately, we were interrupted and the discussion didn’t get deep or insightful. So does anyone here want to enlighten me on how these things really work out in the real world? Feel free to express whatever opinion you want, both secular and religious. If I ever finish that discussion with Wendy and if it’s interesting, I’ll blog it.
(chuckles) Funny, I had a sex blog lined up too but fell asleep before I got to it.
Hmmmmmmm….
I come from a rough life, and don’t think women (girls) can have casual sex without serious psychological damage. I hazard a guess that the ones who think it doesn’t damage them just haven’t realized it yet.
My first experiance with sex was at 13, and my “boyfriend” raped me. After that all hell broke loose. I was “skanky” but there was NEVER any enjoyment; for me, I thought they would just take it if I didn’t give in, so passive submission was better than the struggle.
Sad. But that’s how it went.
I hated sex until I was pregnant with my son, and then I came to view my body as the life giving, life affirming temple it is. But that was after 10 years of traumatic sex.
And it’s uphill, this “sex is ok” business. I have always admired and (not so secretly) envied the women who wait until marriage. Not having that choice, I’ve always imagined how much better my life would have been.
Your morals (religious or not) to wait bolster me, and give me hope that women will be ok.
Personally, I salute you. Absolutely.
And if you ever wonder if you made the right choice (I don’t think you do) or wonder if maybe you missed out on something: you didn’t. Hollywood lies. From plastic surgery to casual sex, they lie like dogs.
Enjoy sex. Be happy. Have fun.
Posted by introspectre
Comment by Anonymous — November 6, 2004 @ 6:50 am
Lisa, you horn dog!!
I must confess that as a single guy the idea non-committal sex sounded just great! But since I’ve gotten married and lived a little, the context of a healthy relationship is everything.
We talked about this a little at BCC awhile back, mostly in connection with the NYTimes article. Here’s the link: click here!.
Posted by Steve Evans
Comment by Anonymous — November 6, 2004 @ 2:33 pm
Thanks Intro, That was awesome. I had some deep quesiton to ask, but I can’t remember what it was. Small brain.
Steve. Thanks for the link. I followed it to the NYT article, and I agree, scary. But there were not comments. Did haloscan erase them or something?
Posted by Lisa
Comment by Anonymous — November 6, 2004 @ 4:30 pm
Haloscan deltes comments once they are four months old.
Blogger on the other hand archives all comment.s
I have no idea why BCC is still in the prehistoric era.
Posted by Kim Siever
Comment by Anonymous — November 6, 2004 @ 4:39 pm
~giggles~
If you remember what it was, feel free. If the answer is too personal, I’ll e-mail to you, ok?
Posted by introspectre
Comment by Anonymous — November 6, 2004 @ 6:24 pm
We just sent our daughter to the midwest to start college. She has two roommates and lives in a dorm. The first night she was in her room one of her roommates had a boy they’d just met that day sleeping on the floor. A couple of weeks after that her roommate had sex with this same boy (oral sex) a few minutes after my daughter had turned out her light to go to sleep. My daughter got up and left, first driving to the ward she attends (although it was the middle of the night) because she was so upset, and then ended up spending the night in an armchair in the lobby.
Although they had come up with some roommate rules, this one wasn’t covered. When we sent her off I was thinking about possible roommate problems and thought things like borrowing clothes without permission, playing the stereo too loud — things I dealt with in college. They’ve subsequently established some rules (”no sex in the room when others are present” is one of them).
I’m sure she’ll survive college, I’m just not sure I’ll survive her experience. (sorry this was so long)
Posted by Meem
Comment by Anonymous — November 6, 2004 @ 6:54 pm
I was a number 1 too!
I bet your hubby thinks he is the luckiest guy ever!
Posted by Aimee Roo
Comment by Anonymous — November 6, 2004 @ 8:58 pm
The comments really are still there, I promise — it says there aren’t any, but if you click on the link to comment they’ll show up.
Kim, are you volunteering to pull BCC in to modernity? It’s all yours, baby.
Posted by Steve Evans
Comment by Anonymous — November 6, 2004 @ 9:01 pm
I’ve read the Newsweek and NYTimes articles, and they are not surprising at all. These kinds of things are all too common at my school, and it’s really not surprising given the complete lack of compunctions among my peers. But what can you do? At this age, everyone thinks with their hormones. If I sound prudish, it’s because I’m bitter since I’ve been freshly dumped by a girl.
Posted by Joe
Comment by Anonymous — November 6, 2004 @ 9:20 pm
Okay, so I’m almost 30 and still a virgin (cause I’m still single, sigh…) and most of the time I’m fine with that fact. But it hasn’t always been easy to remain a virgin. Over the last 15 years of dating, there have been a few times (okay, maybe more) when I was very tempted to have sex.
But, looking back on those moments, I’m nothing but relieved that I didn’t given in to my immediate desires and that I had the strength to keep my long-term goals (not to mention, covenants) in check. The guy I thought would always love me, doesn’t any more. Another guy I thought was going to pop the question, didn’t. I could go on, but you get the picture. What I had planned on being a permanent relationship, wasn’t. And the idea that I would have shared the most intimate part of myself with guys that I would eventually never talk to again (or, even worse, end up detesting) is a scary thought.
My (female)non-mo friends and I have talked about my choice to remain a virgin until I marry. A few think I’m crazy, but most wish that they had waited. The morning after can be a very crushing experience, filled with emptiness and a sense of loss.
In the end, I’m glad I’ve waited (although, the thought of living my entire life a virgin, never having that physical experience, is kind of sad to me).
Oh, well. Truth is truth.
Posted by Lizzy
Comment by Anonymous — November 6, 2004 @ 9:29 pm
>introspectre stands and applauds Lizzy<
Posted by introspectre
Comment by Anonymous — November 6, 2004 @ 10:55 pm
Sure, Steve.
Posted by Kim Siever
Comment by Anonymous — November 7, 2004 @ 8:41 am
I have to agree that casual sex differs greatly for men and women. One of my dearest friends is what I like to refer to as a “drunk man whore” - his numbers are ATONISHING! So, the fact that he’s great friends with me, little miss clinging to her technical virginity though over a decade past the point where most people loose theirs, makes for some interesting coversations. After sharing his latest extracirucular sextivaty with me, I sighed rather deeply. “What?” he asked. “Doesn’t that make you sad? I mean, you didn’t even know her. You probably can’t remember her name. That would just make me so sad.” But to him, there was nothing to be sad about. To him, it’s just the way things work. I know for me, in the experiances I have had, it can be devestating to give things away to people that you can never get back. I honestly believe there is something about being a woman, about having someone inside of you in more than just a physical way. When you offer that up before your in a solid, committed relationship the person or people you give yourself to have a way of taking root inside of you. From my own experiances, and from the experiances of close friends, I don’t think it works the same for most men. And really, I just find that absolutly facinating.
Posted by Sarah Marinara
Comment by Anonymous — November 7, 2004 @ 9:47 am
dang it, I accidently posted it before I finsied what I was saying. Now let me try to remember…
oh yes, I was saying that sex outside of marriage aside, teenagers really are NOT matrue enough to understand this. I even wonder if at the age of 24 when I was married, if I truly understood what it really was. I think it was something that has grown as our marriage has progressed (we celebrate our 10th anniversary next May).
Anyway, I don’t know how much sense this makes, but what I am trying to say is whether a person (man or woman) believes they are having casual sex and being unmarked by it, they are. Mainly because they don’t really understand it. If they did, they wouldn’t have casual or meaningless sex. Sex may SEEM to be a physical act, but it isn’t really. It is a spiritual act and the consequences can be strengthening or devastating to the spirit, whether one realises this or not.
Another part of this is the sexual relationship as it relates to birth. I have a lot of thoughts on this and I may expound on this more on Our Thoughts when I get a few moments. But the connection between these two is very palapable and powerful even though the world says they aren’t (at least not as significantly as I believe).
Posted by Mary Siever
Comment by Anonymous — November 7, 2004 @ 10:17 am
oh no! I realise it didn’t post my previous comments…argh and I now I can’t remember how I said it.
I said something to the effect that I believe that there are always consequences when sex is treated casually whether the person recongises this or not. And that discounting the spiritual part of it is damaging and I really didn’t know this before I got married and certainly not as a teenager. Now I am probably repeating myself. Sigh. They were pretty good thoughts too…..oh well, hopefully you get the point.
Posted by Mary Siever
Comment by Anonymous — November 7, 2004 @ 10:20 am
Aimee, I’m not sure how lucky the dear husband thinks he is, it depends on how mental I am that day. But I’m certain he appreciates the enthusiatic sex, men are like that.
Joe, is it a certain sub-set of students who behave this way, or is it the expected behavior? And do the kids in each group view each other?
Meem, My daughter is only four and you’re scaring me!
Sarah, I think part of the difference can be explained hormonally. Women have “bonding” hormones that we release when we’re nursing to make us feel heightened emotion and to feel bonded to our babies. We release the same hormone after sex, our body telling us to bond with the potential father of our baby. Tricky huh?
Lizzy and Sarah,
I have to say, I think you two are pretty tough. I’m almost positive that if I’d been single until I was thrity I would have had sex somewhere along the way. I don’t have much self-control in these matters. If you can believe it, before we were married it was always my husband that was having to stop things. But I got married at nineteen and therefore I don’t have to have a strong will.
Mary,
I too think that I understand sex much better as I get older . . . it’s powerful stuff. The other bonus of getting older is that practice makes perfect. (Sorry single girls)
Posted by Lisa
Comment by Anonymous — November 7, 2004 @ 4:10 pm
Okay I’ve been feeling dumb about this and must once again apoligize, when I said (sorry single girls) it should have been (sorry single women). I forget to be politically correct sometimes, but I do think it’s usually wise and otherwise important and stuff
Posted by Lisa
Comment by Anonymous — November 8, 2004 @ 8:53 am
I think serial monogamy (stupid marriages ending in too-easy divorces) are more immoral than a single person’s sleeping with someone s/he loves. There are so many serial divorces and quick marriages in the Church. It bugs me that as long as they’re married, or have ever been married, they tut-tut self-righteously about the “immorality” of others without looking inwardly at their own choices. It bugs me that “immorality” has been reduced to a code word about who’s putting which parts where before the ring is on the fourth finger.
There’s so much more to it that that. /rant.
Posted by Beth Anne
Comment by Anonymous — November 8, 2004 @ 10:15 am
Lisa, it’s very tough sometimes (remaining a virgin, I mean). Really, I think I’ve been able to do it (or, I guess, not “do it”) through sheer strength of testimony (and a lot of pre-planning and prayers).
Posted by Lizzy
Comment by Anonymous — November 8, 2004 @ 10:40 am
Lisa, all I can say is that remaining a virgin at my age takes a lot of pre-planning and praying.
(As an aside, when I was dating this one guy, it got to the point where we had to play church music whenever we were alone together–sometimes, really loudly–in order to make sure that our thoughts and feelings didn’t get away from us.;-)
Posted by Lizzy
Comment by Anonymous — November 8, 2004 @ 11:00 am
Okay, I guess I’m really passionate about this topic, hence the double post!
(actually, I don’t know why I posted twice. I thought I had deleted one. Sorry!)
Posted by Lizzy
Comment by Anonymous — November 8, 2004 @ 11:41 am
I swear to you I have no idea how I am still a virgin. I think it’s mostly lack of people willing to sleep with me. Thank God for that. I keep telling Heavenly Father that this husband he’s been telling me is “on his way” for the past 4 years had better be worth all this waiting. ;)
Posted by Sarah Marinara
Comment by Anonymous — November 8, 2004 @ 2:12 pm
I agree with Mary that sex is profoundly spiritual. And Lisa, apart from bonding hormones, I think that we also imprint, like baby birds, so that how one “does” sex, becomes the “correct” way, and by telling (warning us?) us to have sex only with the one partner to whom we are married God is giving us a sweet little gift, making sure that we can learn a “correct” way together. And though that correct way will develop and evolve, we can be always be comfortable singing from the same page. How geeky does that sound? I hope that communicates something of what I’m trying to say.
Sadly, I think there are not a few mormon women who have been so well indoctrinated against sex that they are afraid and unable to enjoy it even after marriage. Can’t get past the “sex is bad” lessons of their youth. Heartbreaking.
Posted by marta
Comment by Anonymous — November 10, 2004 @ 2:24 pm
Perhaps a thought from a non-LDS?
Two comments:
One. I posted on the issues of hooking-up and the emotional issues women deal with, mostly because I also do not think women are wired to handle casual sex. This is not a bad thing - after all, we are predetermined by nature to reproduce. And if the evolutionary chain means anything, we want to reproduce with those who are healthy and offer security. Casual and irresponsible sex does not provide for this.
Two. That being said….I was raised in the protestant church that you waited until you were married. With much curiosity and hormones, I managed….by the skin of my teeth, as they say. Unfortunately, I married someone who was not very kind, and my sexual experiences were very negative. Had I experienced things beforehand I might have known that what I was going through was not anything close to normal.
Now divorced (and yes, I was told by the protestant church that I was sinning to file for divorce despite an abusive spouse - to which I replied that I would burn in hell before I risked having children with the monster I was married to), I do not hold with waiting until you are married to have sex….at least, in my life. I find it a wonderful proposition, but my personal experience was not a good one, so I would not risk it again. I’ve since learned to enjoy sex, what I do and do not prefer, and no one controls me in the bedroom. I’m a very active lover, and am quite happy to make my partner happy so long as it is an equitable situation, if you get my drift.
Ah, my point….and yes, I know it is around here somewhere….=)
Perhaps one of the biggest problems in the church, and it sounds as though the Mormon church is no different, is that sex is not only a “bad” thing, it is a taboo topic. Couples may have a hard time finding their “groove” when they cannot ask advice for fear of feeling dirty for the discussion. Women who wait and have no experience may be abused in the bedroom, and they have no idea the pain and discomfort they are feeling are not normal nor part of a healthy sexual relationship.
I have to believe there is a middle ground between the “church’s” view of sex, and this casual sex that is predominant in our society. Certainly waiting for marriage avoids many pitfalls and devastating effects of premarital sex, but teaching sex as a negative act, or even a strictly sacred act (come on, it’s fun too!) is not effective either.
I’m not sure if I made any sense. Hopefully I did not offend. =)
Ally
Posted by Ally
Comment by Anonymous — November 10, 2004 @ 3:54 pm
Very very interesting Ally, thanks for posting. I appreciate a different view. Lots to think about.
Posted by Lisa
Comment by Anonymous — November 10, 2004 @ 4:47 pm
I love sex…but not just the act of sex…the feeling of being close to someone you love…holding him…kissing him…feeling your bodies rub together…it’s something very special! Prior to my decision to follow Christ I had sex…in fact I had it all the time…I lived with the father of my children for most of the eight years we were together. What I shared with him was not in the bonds of marriage…but it was with love, tenderness, and a strong desire to be together forever. To me every time we made love it was special. I have also had a few one night stands…yes…at the time it was fun! Sex without any commitment…you could be what you wanted to be…pretend…but in the morning when you wake up and that person is not holding you…you think to yourself…why did I do this?
I know that when the time comes and I meet the man that will take me to the temple…my honeymoon night will be just as special if not more then the first time I had sex. Not only will it be with the man I love but it will be with the man I call my bestfriend.
Posted by Sleeplessinportland
Comment by Anonymous — November 30, 2004 @ 4:01 pm
Great post. I know I’m really late with replying but I just found it.
I was a #1, too, waiting until I got married. We were married ten years and even after divorcing, we’ve “hooked up.” Sex is different when you are married versus single and I’m very glad that my first experience was with my (then) husband and was based on a deep love for each other.
I’m always up for talking about sex. hee
Posted by teresa
Comment by Anonymous — December 8, 2004 @ 5:10 pm
Another late reply,
This hooking up thing is not new, I saw these stories and wondered out loud why they are saying this is new? Its been common for at least 30 years. Maybe its just got a new name now.
As far as the potential harm of these encounters, I suggest two possibilities 1) Both genders are at equal risk psychologically and spiritually while women bear additional physical risks. 2) That these early sexual encounters are evidence that the harm has already been done. The psychological / spiritual damage is, in part, a cause for this type of sexual behavior. not that I’m talking from experience or anything.
Posted by Fluxus
Comment by Anonymous — December 10, 2004 @ 11:57 pm
I made it to 29 and married before I had sex and it was difficult at times, but the key for me was avoiding getting close to the line and really believing in the emotional and spiritual bonds.
I was in schools just as bad as anything now when I was a kid, and things really haven’t changed, as far as I can tell, other than the worst of life is more prevelant.
I think it damages anyone who isn’t continent.
Posted by Stephen M (Ethesis)
Comment by Anonymous — January 22, 2005 @ 8:34 pm
I’m a 45 year old male and LDS living in conservative Boise, Idaho. I was baptized at 19, converted at 24. Prior to my conversion to the gospel, I led a VERY active sex life, with lots of hook-ups, and many more sessions of just petting.
I do not think men get as emotionally scarred from the hook-up, but I do think it affects them later in life. I married a wonderful woman who was a virgin when we got married, and have dealt with the fact that she is not as “wild” in bed as I am accustomed to all of our marriage. At the beginning of our life together, I promised myself that I would never ask for something that she was uncomfortable with, unwilling to do, or which she found disgusting. It has made my life “difficult” when it comes to the intimate part of our relationship, but I do not regret the decision. However, I wish I did not have all the memorys of all the other women in my brain. I think in that respect, men are scarred from the hook-ups, just not as quickly as the women.
Posted by Stephen
Comment by Anonymous — February 9, 2005 @ 10:35 am
I am not religious at all. I have not been in any of the “skanky” conditions you described but I have had premarital sex with three trusted partners. I think the important component is trust and caring, not necessarily commitment (though it takes time to develop trust).
Premarital sex is okay, but “random” sex really isn’t. I find that the people I know who are having random sex are unhappy and it’s a way of acting out. I doubt they get more than momentary pleasure from it. A lot of them feel guilty about it and don’t know how to form a healthy relationship.
I think it’s overrated. But, there is no point in depriving one’s self if one is really curious and wants to experiment. So that being said, it’s not my thing and it can be unhealthy, but it’s not immoral. It’s just risky (STDs).
Comment by sarah — March 30, 2006 @ 12:04 pm
Wow. Fascinating stuff….And on my favorite subject, to boot!
I’m in the number 1 category myself (though, had I not gotten married at 19… I probably wouldn’t be able to say that).
I think there are some flaws with the way the world seems (to me) to look at sex. Non-religious and religious alike…
I wish I could consisely state my point of view (difficult for me)
Non-religious: Hollywood is just a plain joke. And sex is EVERYWHERE every minute. Huge societal impact, and totally misguided (IMO).
And the non-religous (education system, specifically) seems to care only about preventing consequenses (Pregnancy/STDs) but doesn’t like to mention or endorse the most effective method (abstinence). Also, there’s not much discussion about the emotional aspects. Which is something teenagers especially need, having to deal with relationship issues even more now that they’re beginning to branch out from parental ties…
Religious: The sin factor. If Sin=bad, dirty, devil, hell-fire, slut, skanky, whatever, then that can cause serious issues once it’s finally time to “do it”. Sex is good, and as a mormon, it’s like, a HUGE part of the plan. Sex should be talked about WAY more in LDS families. And with couples BEFORE they marry. I don’t think you have to have sex before you marry necessarily, but it should be talked about. And candidly (frequency, positions, body parts- I’m serious!) But not in a dark, candle-lit room on your bed (he, he)… It should be treated as something to be excited about just like finding an eternal mate is something to be excited about….Besides, if you make it BAD, doesn’t that make it more tempting (wink).
It’s been really great to get so many different perspectives!
So much for keeping it short (sigh)
Comment by MC — August 27, 2006 @ 12:01 am
O.K.
Here’s my situation, I became a member when I was 18 served a mission, and returned with honer. Now that it’s 12 years later I’m starting to look into this law of chastity idea. This is getting tough, it’s natural to start wanting sex but frustrating when you can’t meet someone in the church to share your life with.
So here I am asking if I can wait anylonger, and you know what I don’t know if I can. This is diffiucult, and too many people frown at me since I’m not married.
So whatever…..
Anonymous
Comment by Anonymous — August 28, 2006 @ 7:18 am
Can’t wait any longer for what?
Hitting the sack with a prostitute at a truck stop?
Little more clarity please.
Comment by Seth R. — August 28, 2006 @ 10:57 am
Interesting. Don’t think I would have seen this entry if someone hadn’t recently commented on it.
Like everything, I don’t see sex (pre-marital or marital or otherwise) as black and white. Lisa hit the important ingredients: trust, relationship, love. Those elements trump personal or institutional beliefs about morality, chastity, etc. in my opinion. If you have personal or religious beliefs relative to sexual boundaries, great. But these beliefs, imo, are not universal… they vary as much as humanity’s beliefs relative to the nature of God. I think recreational sex violates the core ingredients of trust, relationship, love, respect, etc., to say nothing of adultery or cheating. Maturity is another constraint. Oh that we could enforce a minimum age like we do with drinking or driving.
Lisa, if you are still interested in peering behind the curtains to see how sex works “out in the real world”, the following two women, both former Mormons, are excellent writers who sometimes blog about the subject:
http://www.thegirlwho.squarespace.com/
http://www.selfportraitas.com/
I wouldn’t recommend either site if someone is easily offended by sometimes “blue” language or subject matter.
Comment by Matt Thurston — August 28, 2006 @ 11:43 am
I’m new to this site, and saw this post rather late in the game, but still feel I should share this, in case there are others who are in similar circumstances. This may be TMI, but I am in a situation similar to #30, but the other side of the coin. I was raised in the gospel, and waited until I was married (at 26) to have sex. My husband, on the other hand, converted to the gospel shortly before our marriage. He had a very sexually active life before meeting me, and has an extremely high hormone level.
Before marriage, I, also, thought I had high hormone levels, but when it came down to my first time, there were problems. I wasn’t shy or afraid until I discovered that it HURT. Wanting to please my husband, and gratify his high hormone levels, I’ve done my best to be available whenever he needs me, but I find it difficult to initiate, even when I’m wanting to - partially because he is so much more experienced and eager than I am.
I wasn’t sheltered by any stretch of the imagination, but despite knowing all the sordid physical (and many of the emotional) details, I wasn’t prepared for the reality of sex. Hearing it was “fun” and “sacred” and “feels good” - things from both secular and spiritual sides - kept me from realizing that for some it isn’t any of those things. My husband is caring, and deeply concerned about giving me pleasure - he is far from abusive - but no matter the many measures we have tried to make it more enjoyable to me, nothing works. I finally learned to hide the pain and discomfort because I didn’t want to disappoint him. He’s also eager to try different things - which I was, at first, but I find that I don’t enjoy some of the more experimental things and am reluctant to tell him - and wouldn’t know how, if I wanted to. In short, despite high hormone levels, I don’t enjoy sex - and don’t think I ever will, since it hurts even more after giving birth to my daughter.
That is only a small part of the increasing frustration I feel in marriage - frustration that is not in any way my husband’s fault, but may have been avoided if more information and openness existed in the church. I wish there was an outlet - some way to discuss the details and gain understanding without being left to figure it all out on my own, but I’m finding that large portions of the realities of marriage and family life are left to the individual to either figure out, or to rely on outside, secular information.
Comment by UnicornMom — December 5, 2006 @ 2:14 pm
Nice site. Thank you.
Comment by e-books — March 1, 2007 @ 8:23 pm
Hey unicorn mom,
There is a big problem for women, inside and outside the church, about enjoying sex. it’s supposed to be something like almost 50 percent of women have problems with it at some time or another. I really don’t think it’s fair to blame the church, especially because we have the same resources as everyone else. For example, one of my sister’s loves it, and the other hates it, either way they had the same access to the same information and it has nothing to do with the fact that we were all raised in the church. But, my real point was that I read a book by an LDS lady called “And they were not ashamed…” she has some good exercises in there where you decide not to do it for 7 weeks and work your way back towards having it, instead of always having to rush. it’s supposed to work miracles, I’d suggest you try it. Also, i think if you don’t like it that much you should probably see a sex therapist, God certainly doesn’t mean for it to be a curse upon women, and you’re not doing anyone any good (you or your husband) by hiding your feelings about it. So there are outlets, you just need to be on the lookout for them. And this next sentence is for everyone else….STOP BLAMING THE CHURCH FOR ALL YOUR SEXUAL PROBLEMS! Own up and come to terms using all the resources everyone in the world has, plus the bonus ones we have as members of the church (prayer, fasting, temple attendance, priesthood blessings for help if you really hate sex). It REALLY gets exhausting hearing the church be blamed for everything! What, it’s responsible for every happiness and unhappiness in our lives? I don’t think anyone has informed president Hinckley about that. Maybe I’ll use it as a scapegoat next time one of my kids acts up.
Comment by josie — March 1, 2007 @ 9:03 pm
I didn’t see this until just now, but Unicorn Mom, have you ever told your doctor about this? It shouldn’t always hurt, and there are ways to diagnose and treat the problem (there are several possible conditions it could be). I hope you see this; there are tons of resources out there for you, and it can usually be solved.
Comment by dangermom — March 1, 2007 @ 9:19 pm
Unicorn Mom, I concur with dangermom that you should speak to a physician. May be that lube or a massager will help, depending on what sort of hurt you’re talking about.
Ally, your preacher was WRONG. Our leaders have taught us that even Charity does not require us to remain in a marriage with someone that abuses us. (1990s talk … I can picture her face but I’ve forgotten her name. Powerful talk on Charity.)
Good for you. I hope that what your preacher taught you about divorce didn’t lead you to do things you otherwise wouldn’t have. I’ve seen that happen some times when someone is misled to believe they’ve sinned beyond redemption
I don’t think so, Ally. I was lucky enough to get engaged at BYU where there was this wonderful pre-marriage seminar on sex. IIRC, one 1980 Ensign talk said that abstinence was the only form of birth control that the church categorically opposes for married couples
I was a virgin when I married (actually for three weeks into my marriage, which was a funny story), but my wife and I had discussed sex in detail prior to marriage and we had a pretty good idea that we were compatible. The church seminar recommended having such conversations. Being chaste doesn’t mean being blind or prude.
Comment by Christian — March 1, 2007 @ 10:19 pm
For women (and I expect men as well) if you dont get into the habit of mastubating yourself to orgasm frequently and with relish long before adding another person to the mix, you’re going to have sexual problems, and be made miserable by them your whole life through. You’ve got to learn what you like and then teach your partner, and take turns 50/50—later you can explore the sexual universe together. That’s the winning formula for monogamy. It’s simple, and should be doctrinal, since adultery, divorce, birth control, STDs, and abortion will all be unnecessary—and frequent orgasms elevate levels of oxytocin in the brain—strengthening pair-bonding and loyalty to the family group.
Comment by William Bingham — March 23, 2007 @ 3:59 am
My high school friends had sex for the first time arount 16-17. Without exception they all hated their first time and the guy.
I think that expecting to be treated with real love and respect in a sexual relationship with a teenage boy is expecting too much from the boy. He is pretty immature.
Comment by jks — March 23, 2007 @ 10:36 am