I think a lot about sex—-although maybe not in the way that some people do. In particular, I think a lot about why people like and don’t like to have sex, what ignites desire and what suffocates it. As a therapist, I meet with people almost daily who are trying to figure out why they don’t like to have sex, why their spouse doesn’t like to have sex, or why their spouse does like to have it. It is an elusive question sometimes as well as a painful one for many couples.
My dissertation research focused on the question of Mormon women’s sexual agency. That is, Mormon women’s capacity to be actors in the sexual realm—to act on their own behalf in a context of sexual conservatism and patriarchy. While some LDS women thrived (a subject I take up here [link to interview]), most of the women in my research were undermined in their relationship to their own sexuality as they had internalized a message that eroticism and desire are unfeminine and risky to their desirability—a trait essential to femininity. According to radical feminism (a primary framework in my research) patriarchies oppress women through gender role ideology; notions of proper female comportment undermine women’s relationship to their sexuality and to themselves. For example, in patriarchy, men are constructed as naturally dominant, assertive, strong and inherently sexual, while women are constructed as nurturing, selfless, deferential and virtuous. That is to say, women are taught that they are naturally less sexual than men—inherently lacking hedonistic desire, and even morally superior to the supposed depravity of male sexuality. While superficially approving of women’s nature, this cultural prescription leaves women little room to legitimately experience, express or integrate their own eroticism. To be feminine is to suppress or disconnect from sexual desire, or feel ashamed of its presence.
This theorized suppression of sexual desire and knowledge aligned with the experiences of most LDS women in my research. It also fits with much of my LDS clientele. In my experience, many if not most LDS women struggle pre-maritally and in marriage to integrate a sense of legitimate sexuality and desire. Many women are naïve about their own capacity for pleasure and allow themselves little room to explore and take ownership of this part of themselves, even when husbands are encouraging and openly long for more sexual connection. This sexual immaturity can, of course, cause deep frustration with a higher desire marital partner; but a bigger problem, in my mind, is that it represents a fractured relationship with oneself, an unwillingness to be in a mature relationship with one’s own body, one’s own sexuality, and an important source of strength.
While many LDS women struggle to claim and integrate their sexuality because of the cultural invalidation of female eroticism, other LDS women know their capacity for pleasure and may even know what they long for sexually, but nonetheless lack desire for their spouse. What I want to write about is the issue of women’s selfhood (also deeply affected by patriarchy) as an additional factor in sexual desire. According to author and clinician Dr. David Schnarch, selfhood is a stronger determinant in sexual desire than biological drive, for men and women. In Schnarch’s thinking, it doesn’t matter how much physical desire we feel, if we believe the act of wanting another person or having sex with them will diminish us in some way, we won’t let ourselves want. Or conversely, if we believe having sex or wanting will add to our sense of self, we will desire. For example, it is easy to desire when we are dating, because in addition to the libido-increasing factors of novelty and uncertainty inherent to an early relationship, we also perceive that merger with the other will add to our sense of self. The validation of our beloved’s reciprocated desire makes us feel more whole, more significant—so we want. In marriage, however, sexual merger with a higher desire spouse can quickly make us feel like we are losing ourselves through having sex—like one is capitulating to the desires and expectations of the other, folding into their reality and affirming them at our own expense. It isn’t exciting.
A man is no more willing to lose himself in chronic accommodation of his wife’s sexual desire than a woman is to a man. This is why some men prefer objectified forms of sex (e.g. pornography) over sexual intimacy with their spouse—there is less vulnerability, less perceived loss of self. That said, LDS women in a context of patriarchy and robust gender role ideology in my experience are more likely to feel like the partner with less power in the marriage. Many Mormon women have not only less economic and social power relative to their husbands (who function as providers and leaders), they are also more likely to feel pressured to forsake their desires to comply with what others want from them. This is part of women’s prescribed goodness in church-cultural thinking, her “inherent” feminine selflessness. As Elder Richard G. Scott said in reference to the many sacrifices that wives and mothers make for their husbands and children, “you do all of these things willingly because you are a woman.” (“The Joy of Living the Great Plan of Happiness, General Conference, October 1996). While this accommodating role may give women status for being what is expected and may offer some security through pleasing those around them, women cannot earn through systematic deference to the desires of others a robust sense of self. Deferring to others’ wishes in order to fend off criticism or scrutiny is not an act of generosity or strength. It is instead a reflection of one’s inability to validate her own legitimacy, and it breeds resentment and stabilizes immaturity in marriage, at a minimum.
Plenty of women in this position have sex with their higher desire spouse. They are dutiful and accommodate, but they are not passionate. It is very difficult to make love to, open your heart up to, or desire, someone whom you believe is above you or stronger than you, or that you perceive takes from you because you are unwilling to challenge them. Feeling like one exists for someone else’s pleasure seldom inspires women to explore or discover their own eroticism and desire. It is too costly. If I come to discover (or expose) this part of myself, will I then be more obligated to you sexually? Will I be even more possessed by you because now I no longer have the excuse of a nonexistent sex drive to fend you off? And if I reveal this part of myself, doesn’t it just validate you as the stronger, more able one—the one who always knew I was sexually immature or repressed? Many women in the face of these questions would rather hold a sense of self by stripping themselves and the relationship of their sexuality—a very costly act of defiance to the loss of self that patriarchy demands.
As much as many marriages have modernized in the church and function in more egalitarian ways relative to a generation ago, I am still struck by how much the dynamic of inequality persists in many LDS marriages. While immaturity in marriage and the challenges to selfhood that marriage evokes are not problems specific to Mormons, the institutionalized support for glorified under-functioning in women is indeed a Mormon cultural problem. We need to stop acting like real strength in women undermines marriages and mothering. We need to stop embracing impotence in women as a kind of goodness, much in the way that we regard children as good—innocent, powerless, and harmless. We strip women of their strength and autonomy in the gender narrative and then ask men to take care of them. This may create an ethic of dependency and deference in women, and therefore potentially less overt conflict in marriages. However it does not, in my experience, create strong people, strong families, or passionate, stable marriages.
Want to hear more Jennifer? Of course you do:
Mormon Stories
Dr. Fife is offering for Valentines Day a special on her Relationship and Sexuality Course Recordings for LDS Couples at a 20% discount until February 15th. See her link for details: Dr. Fife’s Blog
Dr. Jennifer Finlayson-Fife
Jennifer grew up in Burlington Vermont in a Mormon family of ten. She did her undergraduate at BYU, MA and PhD at Boston College in Counseling Psychology. She wrote her dissertation on Mormon women and sexuality. She runs a private practice in Chicago IL working with primarily with LDS couples on marital and sexual issues.
All posts by Dr. Jennifer Finlayson-Fife
I cannot express how much I love this. Bravo. I especially loved the part about how we need to stop acting like real strength in women undermines marriage and motherhood.
Thank you so much for writing this. Frequently, when I bring this up, people deny there’s a problem by saying THEY have no problem, or they’ve never heard anyone talk about this as a problem, or because the church doesn’t actually teach women they have to be this way. They ignore the problem by saying the church is perfect but the people aren’t, and therefore it’s not the church’s business to address and it is wrong to associate this problem with the church. Well, the church IS it’s people, and these things ARE taught, and it is the church’s responsibility to acknowledge the problem and help fix it; in the very least by discontinuing the constant praising of women for being supposedly selfless. When the only socially acceptable way for a woman to get validation from her peers or herself is through sacrifice, why should we be surprised when an unhealthy culture develops around that?
Great point, Heidi. Jennifer’s line ” the institutionalized support for glorified under-functioning in women is indeed a Mormon cultural problem” is so true.
I’m always reminded of Margaret D. Nadauld’s talk in which she said, “The world has enough women who are tough; we need women who are tender. There are enough women who are coarse; we need women who are kind. There are enough women who are rude; we need women who are refined. We have enough women of fame and fortune; we need more women of faith.”
Um, yeah. So that’s encouraging women to be powerless if I’ve ever heard it.
(Here’s the link: http://www.lds.org/ensign/2000/11/the-joy-of-womanhood)
Ziff, I feel Margaret’s talk is spot on and I would also substitute “men” everywhere it says “women” as well. Would you rather be a “human dissatisfied, or a pig satisfied”?
Being kind, tender, refined and a woman of faith does not encourage women to be powerless or weak. Some of us don’t feel powerless at all. Some of us could stand to be a little kinder and more tender and no, that does not diminish my strength.
Kindness, tenderness, and refinement are NOT weaknesses. They come from strength of character and take a good deal of mastery over self. They help people become like Heavenly Father. Your quote has nothing to do with women and strength.
Selflessness/sacrifice and praise/acceptance are mutually exclusive. If someone pursues this route they will at least experience cognitive dissonance and at the most be a true hypocrite.
Alma- the problem is that we don’t ever teach that to men in the church. The issue is the unbalance.
I’m confused, why do you think the church hasn’t talked about this? Ive read many talks about this. The church has even SAID women have desires just as much as men and that sexuality is healthy and good as long as both partners feel safe.
I love that last paragraph and agree. I recently read an early Young Women’s Journal where a women (probably Susa Gates) rebuffed a man’s article in the same issue. The man argued that woman’s power came from her femininity (weak and therefore rescuable, sacrificing, loving etc.) and told the young women of the church to not be “mannish”
The author’s reproof begins with this nugget: “”If we did not know, then it is time we did, that to square our lives by men’s opinions is not the way to bring in the millennium.” She concludes her rebuttal with “God is the father of both (male and female), and giveth gifts to be improved, not hidden in a napkin; it is safe to say to all; follow the bend of your individual tastes and inclinations. Be not ‘mannish’ or ‘womanish;’ be pure, be just, be saintlike; and all will be well with you in this life and in that which is to come.”
That was 1890 and it sounds like she’s responding to Elder Christofferson’s talk from last conference.
I think Dr. Finlayson-Fife’s comment that this ethic of gendered prescriptions may lead to less overt conflict but not true companionship is right on. We are seeing the same thing in the church as an institution. It’s easier to be separate, ships passing in the night that both take care of their own responsibilities , and harder but so much more rewarding and Christ-like to come together as one with our own strengths.
Dr. Finlayson-Fife hits it out of the park again. That Mormon Stories podcast was life-changing for me and this post is wonderful as well. She needs to write a book!
I loved this. I will be sharing far and wide.
This would make a beautiful section of Doctrine and Covenants. This should be required reading for men and women alike. Many thanks!
Best thing I’ve read all week!
This was amazing! I’ve never been able to put my finger on the sexual repression I feel, but you nailed it!
Wow, thanks for this. Though I’m no longer active I still feel like I have hang-ups in this area, stemming from my Mormon upbringing and young adulthood. Thank you!
I remember my mom when she was Relief Society president talking about how the women in her ward constantly complained about their husbands. Complaining about your spouse is not a uniquely Mormon trait, but I wonder if one of the reasons why the gossip train about spouses runs amuck in Relief Society is because women feel powerless otherwise. Just an idea.
This could have saved my marriage. (I divorced back in 2010)
This article is so spot on.
I always thought I wasn’t attracted to my husband and that’s why I resented the dutiful sex. But this (article) makes way more sense.
My life as a young, lds bride and then stay at home mom was exactly as you painted it. And I felt so repressed it’s ridiculous.
It was only after I divorced that I came into my “self” , found my power, and subsequently my “sex drive” shot throught the roof. That’s the simplest terms I can put it in. But you nailed the psychology of it all and I’m grateful to have some answers that help me understand my past so much better. Thank you!
Loved this essay and have experienced much of what you are describing. However, you imply that not wanting to have sex is always a sign of sexual “immaturity.” This is disempowering for women who sometimes just want to say no. Some nights I’d rather be cozied up in a blanket with a good book than have sex. That doesn’t make me immature. That makes me an agentic self — someone in tune with my own needs and desires who does not have to do “things willingly because I am a woman.” I’d love to see this essay go viral, but please clarify the power of sexual choice.
Hi Jennifer,
Yes absolutely. Saying “no” is not only an act of agency, and often an act of self-care, but sometimes an act of very good judgment given the sex that is being offered in the marriage. I would never want to imply that not desiring sex is inherently sexual immaturity. What my concern centers around is women’s fractured relationship to themselves and their own bodies. I hope for women to be in a comfortable relationship with their own sexuality. What they choose to do with their sexuality is another matter.
Jennifer, thanks for this. Any thoughts of putting it into book form?
Hi Mike, I am planning to publish my dissertation research in book form in the next year with a couple of added chapters. I’ve also started writing a book for couples with a BYU professor that should take a couple of years to complete (I imagine).
Hooray! Hooray! I can’t wait to read your dissertation-based book! And the next one1
Me too! And also to purchase copies for wide distribution as gifts to every male church leader I know. 🙂
Wonderful post, Jennifer! Like others, I particularly love your concluding paragraph. This line in particular struck me:
“We need to stop embracing impotence in women as a kind of goodness, much in the way that we regard children as good—innocent, powerless, and harmless.”
So well said!
You should call your book The Manhattan Project. Because if you can convince men that less patriarchy = more sex, then the war is won.
😀 Great title!
Such good, deep insights here. I really like the vision of empowered women, comfortable in their own skins and souls, experiencing all parts of mortality with vigor and joy. Do let us know when your book comes out.
Sexual repression in the church in marriage drives me bonkers. I remember hearing an older male member in a church class say that sex was only for procreation and that was the only time you should do it. My head nearly exploded.
Excellent post about a pervasive problem. I am a part of a message board of 75-100 Mormon women and have seen this problem. The most striking example was a thread about feeling sexy in which only 2 of us said we felt sexy during intimate moments with our husbands. While weight gain and other body changes that come with motherhood were to blame for a portion of this, it became clear that many struggled to see themselves as sexual beings, even those who said they enjoyed sex. Being sexy was somehow immodest, even in marriage.
The non-sexual, passive female trope is reinforced in the Young Women program, as many of the lessons on chastity have historically included quotes and object lessons and stories that imply that the role of teen girls is to “help” the teen boys stay chaste. Who helps the girls? There is so often nothing even mentioned about the hormones, desires, or temptations girls have during their teen years. They are the “Guardians of Virtue” and their sexual capacity is only talked about in relation to how their bodies or clothing or actions might arouse the boys.
My husband and I attended a fireside in our ward a few years ago in which an LDS therapist (male) came and gave a talk full of gender stereotypes, misquoted or misunderstood research, and general support for the status quo of men as doers and women as passive nurturers. I left wondering if he’d ever actually met a woman, and how he thought a woman was supposed to thrive in a marriage following his advice. Much of what he said was mirrored in the blog post above. When I see the marriages he described, I see happy, coddled, “nurtured” men and confused women who think there’s something wrong with them because…isn’t denying my needs and having a happy, coddled, nurtured husband supposed to make me happy?
How many LDS women are interviewed and asked if they masterbate? Most of the young men are asked this question.
I know more than on LDS Bishop who does not believe women can masterbate – that it is a male activity and is evil – the reason so many young men fall short of Celestial goals.
In too many LDS families women are property, not partners.
Ziff,
Let’s be clear…being tough and coarse and rude w fame doesn’t make a woman strong. (Not loving your condescending of the talk.) Yes, this is a problem for LDS women, but it’s not the only problem. Losing our values to succomb to the worlds ideas of a woman is another one. I do agree w the article…at the same time I am a stay at home LDS mother of 5 with a more than great sex life (often driven by me) and spouse relationship. I hope we can help LDS women understand this article while staying strong to the values that make Mormons a peculiar and blessed people.
I have this exact problem. My husband & I had pre-marital sex with each other before we were married. By the time we did, my libido had gone down because I felt somewhat powerless (felt like “used goods”; I had wanted to stop long before we got married, but he gave me and still gives me guilt trips if I don’t feel like performing; he had put his priesthood/mission experience over my head to show he understood the gospel better than me). I have basically known why my libido has gone down, but he just expects me to stop feeling guilt for what happened before, but the damage is done. I still feel powerless in many ways. Do you have any follow-up suggestions on how to help this?
I think what so many LDS women fail to realize is that, once they do get married, it is perfectly fine to have sex! And to enjoy it! And to have fun with it! I think that, growing up, so much emphasis is placed on chastity, that women become almost embarrassed about their sexuality. I feel lucky that I somehow escaped that feeling, but I know a lot of my friends are going through it. I have been married for 10 years, we have 5 (adopted) kids, and our sex is great. I used to be part of a blog that no longer exists, but on that blog, most of the LDS women had said they had never even experienced an orgasm. How sad.
Max Powers,
My parents married in 1980 and their bishop told them he had NEVER seen his wife naked. He offered that to my parents as some sort of advice. My dad lol’s every time he tells us about it and assures us he did not heed.
I’m really frustrated after reading your article. Lack of education shouldn’t be an excuse for lack of empowerment. Luckily I married a man that’s been willing to learn with me. Someone early in our marriage recommended the books “Between Husband and Wife” and “The Act of Marriage”. If you’ve got a problem, don’t just whine about it… fix it. Am I naive? I’m trying to teach my boys that sex is good… once you’re married. Do other parents not teach their kids that?
Since when is impotence in women equal to goodness? I thought it was really strange when women got upset about Julie B. Beck saying we should be the best homemakers in the world. We should be. It takes a strong women to be a successful homemaker. I had a successful 7 year career as an Air Force officer before deciding to stay home with our baby 7 years ago. I have not regretted that decision at all. Is every day heaven on earth? Do I still have days upon end where I haven’t bathed? Do I yell at my kids? Yeah, but it’s still an amazing job and when it’s not, I suck it up. I do what you need to do. I disagree with the comment that said women are not empowered by quotes like this: ““The world has enough women who are tough; we need women who are tender. There are enough women who are coarse; we need women who are kind. There are enough women who are rude; we need women who are refined. We have enough women of fame and fortune; we need more women of faith.” I saw plenty of tough, coarse women in the Air Force and it didn’t make them powerful or empowered.
I really did not like Between Husband and wife. I think part of the issue is that most couples do not even know they have an issue. It is not that they are sitting around and whining about it.
Jessica, It’s been a long time since I’ve read it. What didn’t you like about it?
HI Eliza,
I am not arguing that “lack of education is an excuse for lack of empowerment”–that has nothing to do with my position. I am also not suggesting that being a full time mother is an indication of weakness in women. (I chose to be home full time for years). Further, I agree with you that toughness, coarseness, and rudeness have nothing to do with strength.
I guess my other big problem is that this is an issue dealing with parenting and not the church. Girls are in Young Women’s one hour a week. Their mothers should be the ones teaching appropriate sexuality. I suppose that goes back to the idea that if the mothers are repressed then they will teach their daughters to be?!
Are women lying to their husbands about their sexual fulfillment in their marriages? Surely they know there’s a problem. I know my husband worked really hard to figure out how to make sex fulfilling for me.
I truly wish it were only about parents not doing their job. Parents can be a great antidote to messed up messages in the church (or in popular culture), but I don’t think that’s the same thing as saying the church holds no responsibility for the challenges that many women / couples face. We have made the gospel about selling gender role ideology. This conflation is at the very least unhelpful, if not destructive. Gender ideology, when taken seriously, is what interferes with intimacy in marriages in my experience (sexual and otherwise), not sexual conservatism. At the core of the gospel we believe in individual divinity and strength, and the pursuit of wisdom–earned through engagement in the world. This is far more important than focus on “women’s nature” or gender ideology. If we are “naturally” one way or another, then let us just be it and celebrate our differences. Let’s not pressure women (or men) into half people.
Wow, what a great comment! Thank you for engaging with the comments and continuing the dialogue. Also, I just finished listening to your podcast on mormondiscussion and recommend everyone listen to it as it is filled with more helpful insights. http://mormondiscussion.podbean.com/2014/02/13/jennifer-finlayson-fife-lds-sexuality/
Thank you for this article. I may be a man, but I could actually relate to a lot of this and it honestly helped me while I am going through an intense period of self discovery and understanding.
As anecdotal as it is, and while my perspective is obviously a male one, I idolized that idea of female purity. I wrongly put it on such a high pedestal, and to be honest I wanted to achieve that kind of purity for myself. Part of it an act of rebellion being told that women were just inherently more pure, and better than men. Part of it a really strong desire to relate to that. I always related to the female side of traditional gender roles much more than male ones within the church. I am a very nurturing, sensitive type that wished nothing more than to be able to stay home with the kids and raise them (which I found out in practice to be very frowned upon by my church leaders, as I was always encouraged to switch roles once I was in this position and go out and be the bread winner.)
I noticed through my own sexual repression that the very act of desiring sex, even though it was with my wife made me feel extreme guilt. It was as if wanting it made me dirtier, or made it so I was disrespecting that ultimate purity that was just innately hers. It got to a point where I didn’t allow myself to want it for two major reasons. It felt like I was not attaining that purity I falsely associated as a trait to women, and the desire to not stain that purity of the woman I loved. I was also far too ashamed to even bring it up and talk about it, which obviously lead to even more problems with intimacy. Seeing how much emotional harm this has caused me, even as a male (and I fault nobody but myself, ultimately, and can only imagine the differing pressures put on women to live up to that purity standard) I do sincerely hope to see a change in perspective about sex and gender roles within the church, and society at large really. A more healthy ownership, and allowance of ones personal sexual growth that doesn’t try to pin genders down into neatly organized categories, especially for women (though not to disparage those that do happen to healthily fit into those categories by their own choices.)
Thanks for your thoughts, Dusty. I think invoking the idea of purity around sexuality can be very problematic and potentially creates the kind of dissonance that you are speaking of (for men and women). I think a much better paradigm for us to teach is the ideal of wisdom in the sexual realm, using our God-given sexuality for good. We should caution against indulgence in pleasure at another’s expense (even when married), but to not fear pleasure in and of itself. In my opinion, we are still as a church ambivalent about whether sexuality and sexual pleasure is okay—we only accept it in sterile, cleaned up (and unarticulated) terms which doesn’t help people navigate this terrain with prudence and clarity.
I am not sure how I clicked into this website and article…but this was very informative. Thank you!! It made me think of a talk on TED about love. I heard a talk by a researcher, she said she found after researching love from many cultures and histories that she said love is defined in three ways: Attachment, Romance, and Lust. She said, although rare, a relationship can contain all three. But in most cases, it is one or two of these. My wife and I started out as Lust, then it moved to attachment. There was and is no romance. Our sex life now is usually discussing our fantasies with other people, our lust is now turned outwards because we have lost the initial lust for each other we had when dating. We love each other to pieces because we are each other’s best friend, I guess we are in attachment love. We both miss what romance feels like. We both like to whisper swapping fantasies about our couple friends for play…but we try to keep our covenants, so it is just a fantasy nothing more. I don’t know if these fantasies for stop-gap purposes is unique to us, or if this is common to LDS couples…thoughts???
This could be titled “How Mormon Women are Oppressed by Patriarchy” and be more accurate. But, why are we afraid to name this blog post properly?
When reading this, I did my best to focus on your arguments and points made, but all I kept seeing was “patriarchy” this and “patriarchies” that and “women are made to think so meek and feebly so the men in this church can dominate them.” To be honest, it’s such an extreme feminist agenda, at least in my personal view.
Yes, I’ve known women who were made to be less-than-equal to their spouses, and it’s grotesquely wrong, but there HAVE been movements towards getting people to think differently that are being ignored! Every time I’ve come to read one of your posts or articles thus far, it’s so charged with negativity and anti-male. The goal is for an equal relationship between a man and woman where both can speak freely and both are HEARD, UNDERSTOOD and LOVED. To me, this has always been the doctrine of the gospel, and anything outside of that have been the skewed views of not-so-perfect people. If you want to know the truth, the true damage that I experienced growing up came from my mother, not my father when it came to what a woman was. She overly dominates and I hated seeing that.
Say what you will, that I’m just in the “same camp as those others hiding behind the imperfect people crap,” but know that is a weak statement. Your arguments are frustratingly extreme feminist when it comes to the gospel and doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and make it difficult to agree with what valid points you do make. To me, you seem to preach that the extreme power men hold over women needs to be reversed, and women need to hold the extreme power over men, when it needs to be of an equal yoke and collaboration between man and woman.
Pardon the pun, but:
It’s about f***ing time!
I think it might be useful to point out a possible reason for the delusion that people can expect that a righteous and chaste life will naturally lead to a tidy and unproblematic sex life in marriage: the Church culture and popular doctrinal understanding is still terribly simplistic and ignorant of the complexities of the human psyche. As Jung wrote: “every person is blindly convinced that he is nothing but his modest and unimportant consciousness” (_Psychology and Religion_, an essential read). This popular understanding that our selves are merely our conscious wills is part of the general willful blindness to the enriching understanding of human sexuality and psychology that science has helped make available.
What’s spirit? Inside am I really a ghostly image of my body with a core of awareness and will, with just my memories of life before birth blocked off? And all through life I’m consciously making blunders, working at cross-purposes with my stated intentions, and the only solutions I see are to try harder to govern my behavior through obedience to commandments . . . no wonder I see typical Mormons as neurotic. I see again and again people holding out the “faith” that if they just pray and read the scriptures more, somehow they’ll just magically be ok. I see too much lip service given to the idea that science doesn’t clash with religion: science does smash a literal factuality of many Genesis stories all to smithereens and I see otherwise rational Mormons completely refuse to face up to that.
The overly-literal understanding of the creation story — God fashioning Adam and Eve out of clay, magically animating them and plunking them down all tabula rasa like — blinds us and keeps us from understanding ourselves as complex beings with bodies and minds linked to the rest of life on Earth, and with very real and dangerous unconscious motives that can steer the best intentions into the most absurd and even destructive courses.
I don’t mean to thread-jack, but I think that psychology with its inconvenient findings and debt to the theory of evolution is essential to navigating the problem of sexuality. Thanks again for sharing this with us, keep it coming!
I am 100% serious when I say this: maybe Mormon women would feel like more sexual beings if we didn’t have to wear the ugliest underwear on the planet.
Melinha,
That seem to cause skin irritation and vaginal infections… The right stuff for good (or any) sex
Equal compatibility is tough – people are people and there will always be differences in sexual desire. As usual communication is key and every women needs to be honest in opening up while at the same time men need to be willing to listen!
Melinha,
Thank you!
Melinha,
Thank you for being the first to mention it!!
Where was this sensible talk in 1982?? I did everything the way you are supposed to from Ricks to the mission to BYU to the temple and when I met my first wife, she seemed just as interested in intimacy as I was. I always wondered if she just left that at the temple door? 18 years later when I finally convinced her to discuss it, she informed me that after all those years of being taught it was wrong and dirty, she could not relax and let go. It was a chore to her. An obligation to be dealt with once a week. She refused counseling because “there was nothing wrong with her” and informed me that I had probably just married the wrong person! Can you imagine going 18 years and 4 kids and never having a “moment of truth” in the bedroom, so to speak?
We got a divorce and I found the right person. A girl raised outside the LDS religion that had a more enthusiastic approach to the whole situation and was also willing to look into the LDS church. 15 years later, she is baptized and we are sealed AND we have a shared enthusiasm for our relationship. Am I wrong to believe that it is easier to teach an open-minded girl about the church than it is to reprogram a closed minded LDS girl when it comes to sex?
This will be required reading for my children when they get married. This is horrible to say but my husband and I have a very healthy sexual relationship because and part of it may be due to the fact that we weren’t married in the temple until 15 years into our marriage. Although we’ve been active for years. Now as I’m married in the temple I try to play the role for my daughter. Being pure. A great cook, laughing and playing with your partner. Which are all good things. But I think I’ve left out that other part…. the part that I live but keep to myself. Sex, and good sex is just as important for yourself and your husband as a homemade five course meal. In marriage feel sexy, be sexy, explore yourself and eachother. Desire and attraction are great. Do not feel guilty about awesome sex!!! I can’t believe I would work so hard to uncover these truths for myself and not even give it a thought to pass on to my LDS daughter! Thank you! I love your work it is life changing for LDS women!!
Thank you for your article. A lot of this rang true to me. I do think the teaching of gender roles in our church can be very difficult for our members. I have always wanted a career but, when my husband said he wasn’t willing to send our children to daycare my gender role training kicked in and I said, “If any one is staying home with our baby it’s me!” My husband has struggled with employment and life has been very challenging for us. I just think if gender roles were not so pushed I could have had a successful career and he could have been very happy at home.
I recently divorced my wife after 2 decades because of her inability to desire me sexually. We both grew up Mormon. I regret not exploring sexuality with her before we got married.