Single Mormon Chick

guest Mormon 43 Comments

britannica_prison

Intro:
Everybody blogs, right?  Why not me?  Looking for my niche, my angle, and the one thing that seemed to make me stand out in my corner of the world. I found it: Being single. And 40. And Mormon. In a family ward. In a town where EVERYONE is under 30, sealed in the temple and constantly reproducing. The best humor is found in our painful life experiences. Read about mine and laugh with me. Or at me. Whichever.

I went through the Sonic drive thru today to get my first root beer float of the season which made me think of a date I went on with a guy I met on lds dating site . I had been on an lds dating site a few months and was getting a little worn out from all the b.s(does that count as profanity? I am saying “no” and leaving it!)and thinking of just bailing on the whole thing when an im popped up saying saying “hi”. We had a nice chat. He was a gentleman without being a dork, funny, and smart. He asked for my email,I gave it to him(shocking, isn’t it?)and I got an email from him the next day. He sent it from his own email account, so it showed his name and it seemed familiar to me. Strangely familiar. We emailed back and forth a few times before it hit me that I had gone to school with this guy!

He was a year behind me in a big high school. I knew who he was, but never socialized with him. When I emailed him back, I asked if he was the same Joe Schmoe that went to Anytown High School. It was him! He was as shocked as I was. I never thought he would remember who I was, but he did. It was a fun start. We emailed for a bit and he started asking me out. I wasnt hesitant, but we had a hard time coordinating schedules.

He had two daughters that he has full custody of that he had to wrangle around. We finally set it up to go get ice cream(I think it was November, but who cares?). We met in a bank parking lot(he thought it would be safer to leave my car there)and I hopped into his car. The conversation came easy. He was really funny without trying too hard and we had a lot of parallel experiences from our youth to refer to.

We had not decided where to go for ice cream and the choices were slim in my neck of the woods. We ended up driving to a town about 30 miles away to get root beer floats at Sonic. The town is small and Sonic is considered fine dining. The only other thing this town can claim is the fact it hosts probably 4 or 5 different prisons. We hit the drive through and just drove around from prison to prison talking. Joking about the fact we were cruising prison parking lots drinking root beer floats.

It was a nice date. Some might consider it boring, but we talked a lot and I think we hit it off. I worried about the fact that he told me that he thought the church needed to relax the law of chastity for divorced members. We had a pretty intellectual conversation about it, but it nagged at me. I am glad he was up front about it, but where do you go from there? He is pretty much telling me that he expects sex before marriage on the first date! He has a right to get what he wants, but I just wasn’t going to be the girl to give it to him.

It’s difficult to describe the feeling that situation creates in me. Here is a nice guy. I know he likes me. It’s obvious that we are hitting it off, but right out of the gate, we arent compatible because I will always be defending my choice of abstinence and he will alway be promoting his agenda of a healthy sexual relationship between two consenting adults. Then me thinking he is thinking I dont like sex, dont want sex, and religious inspired abstinence is my get out of sex free card.Telling a guy on the first date that you can’t wait to get married and get your freak on doesnt seem all that prudent. I hate trying to defend my desire for a righteous and healthy sexual relationship with the man I marry. Convincing someone that they won’t be left wanting doesn’t seem very lady like. Sigh.

Comments

comments

Comments 43

  1. I know he likes me. It’s obvious that we are hitting it off, but right out of the gate, we aren’t compatible because I will always be defending my choice of abstinence and he will always be promoting his agenda of a healthy sexual relationship between two consenting adults.

    I love that phrase, “healthy sexual relationship”, because when it’s used by a single guy insisting on sex before and outside of marriage, it almost always means, “sex without any real commitment.” Simply put, he wants the benefits of sleeping with you without any of the responsibilities. It gives him the freedom to drop you and move on (or at least threaten to) when real problems and issues crop up, or when you decide that you actually need some commitment from him, or when he’s simply bored and/or finds someone more interesting.

    I hate trying to defend my desire for a righteous and healthy sexual relationship with the man I marry.

    Then don’t. Drop him and find someone who understands. Speaking as sthe father of nine adult children (birth- and step-) who have taken various paths, I can tell you that the kids who worked to hew to gospel standards are the ones with the solid happy marriages. And speaking as someone who found himself unexpectedly single and divorced at age 32, I can tell you that there are single LDS men out there who understand and are willing to keep their temple covenants; they just don’t tend to stay on the market long (I was remarried within a year and have been joyously married for over 23 years now). Hang in there. ..bruce..

  2. I’d give the guy another shot. Look–if the guy’s name would have been Joseph, you’d have apologists coming to his defense with comments like, “there are easier ways to get sex than going on boring dates to sonic and a few prisons.”

    He says that the church should relax a little on the law of chastity. Maybe he thinks that the church should be a bit more like Jesus. Jesus’ response to an adulterer was “go thy way and sin no more”. The offender didn’t show any remorse or confess voluntarily–she was caught in the act. Would the church today respond in like manner? Maybe the church should relax a little on the law of chastity.

    Successful dating leads to sex. Marriage should come before sex, but some people are a little more forward about where this could be leading.

    Maybe the guy was more clear about his intentions than I understand, but I don’t think you’ve shared enough to justify giving up on the guy when you say that “we hit it off”.

  3. I think the problem is one of incompatible moral standards, as you’ve framed it. I agree with your standard, and I agree that this guy has signaled his intentions in a way that lets you make a choice. And I agree with that choice. As someone who’s going to be entering the SA market in the near future, I accept your standard as the one I want to follow in the dating world. From the stories I’ve heard, it’s a bit of a minefield, and I’m not looking forward to that aspect.

  4. I’m sorry that you have to deal with LDS men who just don’t get it. What he said was nagging at you for a good reason and you are right to expect something more from a priesthood holder….A LOT MORE. It is obvious that his concern is for himself and not for you. It is important to find a man who cares more about your well-being than his sexual urges. That is all it really amounts to because sex is not a need, it is as want. We don’t need sex to survive like we need food and water although some people will tell you different. Really this boils down to a man putting God first or himself. If a man truly puts God first in his life, he will strive to obey him and he will respect and cherish women. On the other hand, if he puts himself first, he will feel God should bend the rules to meet his needs and wants. Marriage is hard enough when a couple is working together to put God first, you don’t need to yoke yourself with a man who thinks more of himself than anything else from the very beginning. You can do much better!! Believe that and stay away from men who just don’t get it.

  5. Um….

    I think one of the things about dating is you find out more about people. I think you found out something important about his guy. What else do you need to know?

    He’s got issues to work out. He should be working them out with is bishop. Not creating issues for someone else.

  6. I would say spiritual incompatability is very obvious here. I would also say that if you feel strongly (and it sounds like you do) about your position, then it would be foolish to bend your policy to try and keep a hold of someone you are attracted to, but incompatable with. It also sounds like you have a good head about this. That being said, I don’t buy into the whole “he must be selfish” concept here. I have good friends who lived together for a long time before they were married, and so far so good. While clearly someone who refuses or delay’s to get married is clearly unwilling to fully commit, that is not necessarily because they want to be totally carefree, sometimes they just take a while to make big decisions. But it does not necessarily follow that “he want’s to be sexually active with a woman before he marries her, therefore his intention is to lure her into sexual activity and immediately leave her or cheat on her”.

  7. Cowboy-

    I don’t think the man she is referring to here wants to live with her. I think he just feels that sex should be an option before marriage for divorced members of the church. I don’t have a problem with people who want to live with one another before they get married if that is their value system. But to be a member of the LDS church, the standards are clear. If he made it clear up front that he was not interested in the church and didn’t believe in its teachings then she should not expect him to agree with her standards. I think it is the fact that he is LDS and from what is written it seems that he is active in the church and just wants the standards to be more lax for him because he is divorced. He is not thinking of her because he should assume that she doesn’t believe in pre-marital sex and not try to persuade her otherwise. If that is what he wants, he can find that by looking for women who have the same value system as he does. It is selfish to try to bring someone down to where you want to be when you know that they want to be some place else. If I continually try to get someone to do drugs that I know doesn’t want to be involved in drugs, I am being selfish and not thinking of the other person at all. Would you agree with that?

  8. Bill: “He says that the church should relax a little on the law of chastity. Maybe he thinks that the church should be a bit more like Jesus. Jesus’ response to an adulterer was “go thy way and sin no more”. The offender didn’t show any remorse or confess voluntarily–she was caught in the act. Would the church today respond in like manner? Maybe the church should relax a little on the law of chastity.” Right, EXCEPT that 1) Jesus didn’t say “go and get your freak on,” he said “go and sin no more,” and 2) this story is a late addition to the Bible, meaning it probably is not based on anything that actually happened in Christ’s life. Good story, though.

    I think SMC (single mormon chick) is torn because there aren’t that many awesome guys out there, and as a divorcee, she is empathetic about the desire for a sex life. By the same token, I think there’s an incompatibility issue if they view this issue differently. Does he also view it as meaning that he can date and have sex with multiple girls concurrently, that a healthy sex life is HIS right as a divorced man, not just an eventual byproduct of a healthy relationship? This was a first date. It seems pretty important to him to let her know that he’s expecting her to put out before marriage despite their both being Mormons. That’s a bit awkward at minimum. If he had even a half-hearted commitment, he would at least let things develop in this relationship before he starts firing warning shots across her bow.

  9. Jen:

    I think is another case where you and I basically agree, with just slight variances. If the LDS Church is important to both or either of them, then yes it’s standards are clear. Furthermore, if their worldview is rooted in accepting Mormonism as “true”, then they would be foolish to jeopardize their (her) peace of mind in order to pursue an acceptable relationship, as such a decision would be accompanied by religious regret. So I agree with you, that no one should alter their value system for the sole purpose of appeasing a potential partner in a relationship.

    As I am sure you have seen her Jen, Members of the Church do not come in one size or flavor. So, I would argue that he is not under obligation to assume anything about her character until becoming acquainted with her, and hence the purpose dating, ie, to get to know one another. I do agree that the proper course for him/her to follow is to respect the given and stated values/positions of one another. In other words, it would be disrespectful for him to try and get her to loosen her stance on her stated values, particularly if his approach were to be overbearing. I don’t necessarily think however that he is required to consider LDS women off limits, strictly based on that information only. After all, I consider myself LDS, but not for the reasons you mention. I was raised Mormon, I live in a Mormon community, I have been an active member my entire life, yet I don’t believe that the Church is “true”, nor do I feel compelled to follow all of it’s guidelines based upon the qualification of Church policy. In other words, I take license to make decisions myself. If I were the man in this story, I would not have any consternation over Church policy, rather I would consider the possible benefits vs. negative consequences to decide whether I was willing to be sexually active prior to marriage, to what level and under what circumstances. Therein lies the problem I think, this man wants to serve two masters, and Jesus put it best.

    Should she date him? I don’t think that question can be appropriately answered based on the information given. Is he just experiencing and expressing personal weakness/frustration, or is he trying to find out how far she is willing to go? I am sure most people would like to think they know, but based on the description of the authors experience, this is the only real wrench in the spokes. What are his religios feelings and intentions, including his position on marriage? As I have stated, if he is truly not compatable then they should part amicably.

  10. yeah, this guy has (thankfully for smc) shown his true spiritual colors right up front. It saves smc from getting more emotionally attached before learning of his feelings/beliefs/attitudes. Although a bit insensitive and morally questionable, his actions are merciful toward potential mates so they can cut him off before getting too invested.

    Still, it sucks to be LDS, older (than 25), single, and committed to chastity outside of marriage: the options are so limited.

    SMC “Convincing someone that they won’t be left wanting doesn’t seem very lady like.” Isn’t that what dating is all about, though? You need to determine mutual attraction and compatibility on a host of different levels, sure, but you also need to “sell your wares” if you will. From an evolutionary standpoint, the female gets the male to commit to a stable relationship wherein offspring can be nurtured and protected by both parents in part by enticing him with the promise of sex with someone. I don’t wish that statement to communicate sexist attitudes towards either males or females–I’m simply stating what I understand about the ways sociologists and evolutionary biologists have explained the importance of sexual dynamics in creating important interpersonal bonds that protect the vitality of the community and ensure the continuation of the species. I’m also not advocating a “if you got it, girl, flaunt it!” attitude. However, letting a potential spouse know that you are definitely attracted to him/her, and that you anticipate the sexual aspect of your relationship to be particualry exciting and gratifying for both is certainly part of the courtship ritual.

  11. I’m not laughing at you or your story, I think its great you shared that. Its interesting to read. I think it is more and more common for people in the church to be in that situation, so we should talk about it and know what its like for others in our church who are just as important as the rest of us married people.

    While I’m not in that situation to know what its like, it seems to me that the same principles that applied when younger and dating would still apply. Same standards. Not sure why that would change with age. Certainly the situation gets more complex (kids involved, more complicated schedules and work commitments, fewer people in the immediate area in that same situation and available and normal, etc etc etc) – but the same principles apply about sex and about getting to know someone and having fun.

    I would hope it is something that is fun to do for you…and not something you feel you need to compromise your standards or become desperate to not keep your options open for something better. But until you find something better, enjoy it.

  12. #8: “this story is a late addition to the Bible, meaning it probably is not based on anything that actually happened in Christ’s life. Good story, though.”

    I understand that most things in the Bible probably didn’t actually happen.

  13. People get all worried about kissing on the first date, and here this guy’s saying that he expects some serious action well before (if) they get married . . . And if it goes so far as to devalue a serious tenet of her religious beliefs, it seems that his priorities are not a healthy relationship. (Relationships can be perfectly healthy without sex; neither requires the other.) If he’s around 40, he’s had plenty of time to learn to make easy and enjoyable conversation. He sounds like he’s first looking to get some, but he thinks that it might be perceived better if he’s up front about it than if he just tries to get his hands all over her. Either way, he’s clearly setting a prerequisite that is in conflict with something she strongly believes in. Never a good starting point for a long term relationship. Especially one that involves children who have already gone through a divorce. But that’s a different issue entirely.

  14. Dump him. Nicely. He was up front about what he expected. It’s not what you want. From the point of someone who has no emotional investment at all, it’s simple. For you, I’m sure the choice is much more muddled. But he was honest with you; you should return the favor.

  15. One question I would have was whether he has expectations or was exploring a false hope he has had … he is a guy after all.

    BTW, as to “this story is a late addition to the Bible, meaning it probably is not based on anything that actually happened in Christ’s life. Good story, though.” the current thoughts (as of the last time I looked, which was a while ago) was that the story was grafted in from an archaic tradition, just not the Gospel of John, which doesn’t make it probably not based on something that happened in Christ’s life, but rather a story based on a record other than John’s.

    That does make it different. Kind of like what might have happened if someone had grafted parts of the Gospel of Thomas into the Gospel of Luke. They would not belong in Luke’s gospel, but would not necessarily be not authentic or part of a tradition as old as Luke’s thereby.

    Back to the guy, you can pretty much tell him that if he is looking for someone to provide him an outlet for his thoughts on premarital sex, or who would be accepting of his having it with others while he dated you, he is wasting his time dating you. Heck, what he really needs is a link to this post, if he hasn’t found it already. Though he might not connect James with you … ( 😉 )

  16. re:#11
    women fake men out all the time when it comes to sex. those who choose sex as a means to catch a man are sometimes pulling a classic bait and switch. they put out and do all sorts of swinging from the chandelier type activities only to shut down sexually after rings have been exchanged. a common story i have heard many times while on the lds dating site circuit. i talk about it a little more in depth on my blog:
    http://singlemormonchick.blogspot.com/
    i didnt judge this man. although i was a little disappointed, i appreciated that he was honest and forthright. i dont agree with him and just like jen said, we are lds, the standards are the same for everyone. we have free agency and we get to choose. my bottom line is respect me for my choices as i respect you and dont judge me as frigid or immature because i choose abstinence. sexual compatibility can be gauged quite accurately without having to “go all the way” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1DtQldf66E 😉 I know from experience.

  17. If your relationship with this man ever progressed to the point where physical intimacy was a possibility, then it would be as much your decision as his. You already know your position on this. So I don’t really see what the problem is. (Men don’t always get what they want.)

    The fact that he was willing to discuss controversial issues with you openly speaks well of his character. For Pete’s sake, give the guy a chance.

  18. I find the jumps to the conclusion that this guy is simply a perv trying to get some easy action both unwarranted and distasteful. It is very possible that that is the case, but it is by no means a given. Everyone here is giving her similar advice; to whit – tell him upfront what your position is on this issue. I agree. At the same time, that is exactly what he did, and he is being excoriated for it by many of the commenters on this blog. For all any of us knows, he just wanted to get that out on the table out of respect for her, and in case it was going to be a deal breaker. The ironic thing to me is that there are so many men in the church (this has been discussed on this blog) who put on such a righteous face, and when it comes down to it they try to get the woman to do something she doesn’t want to do. This guy has divergent views on morality, but he was at least honest from the get-go. I suspect that the real problem many people have with him is that they they think he’s a perv simply because of his stance on the issue. Either way, I think it’s unfair to criticize him for bringing it up at the outset of the relationship.

  19. brjones: It could be that this guy doesn’t have any plans to request sex outside of marriage. SMC said “he told me that he thought the church needed to relax the law of chastity for divorced members” and she interpreted his opinion as “he is pretty much telling me that he expects sex before marriage”. Of course, SMC had the conversation with the guy, and is therefore most qualified to report on the intentions behind his words, but we also don’t know how accurately SMC is reporting the actual event, either. Her version of the story undoubtedly differs from what the guy would tell.

    So either this guy really does “expect” sex before marriage, or maybe he likes to talk about perceived policy problems promoted by the LDS church without ever truly contemplating challenging them through action. How many of us believe that the WoW was best served as general health guidelines and not TR benchmark commandment, and yet would never think of pouring ourselves a glass of wine or ordering up a mocha latte at Starbucks? But even if the guy isn’t a pervert and would never actually follow through with sex outside of marriage, his attitudes about the issue can tell SMC something about his take on spiritual issues. SMC might agree but never wish to break LoC regulations, or she could see the guy’s attitude as one incompatible with her own spiritual worldview vis-a-vis Church authority.

  20. SteveS, I totally agree with you. And I’m not even suggesting that SMC should continue seeing him. He put his opinion out there, and she would be completely justified in deciding not to see him again, based on that alone. All I’m saying is that as outsiders, it’s inappropriate to be so quick to condemn this guy as a lecherous pervert who is letting her know up front that he’s going to be expecting sex soon. That’s not justified, even if he was saying that he personally intends to have sex before marriage.

  21. i have attempted to post a comment to participate in this debate, but it is still hanging out there waiting to be approved by the moderator. maybe too many f-bombs or something. 😉
    i have a whole other post that explains more of this on my blog, but in a nutshell, he is not a perv. he is a nice man who explained quite eloquently his position on the law of chastity. i did give him “another chance”, but the same issue came up-like he didnt believe what i said the first time. this wasnt a love match gone wrong. it was two,possibly compatible people who never made it past the first date and some negotiations for future dates. i just hate, in general, the attitude(especially with members of the church)that if you arent having sex that there is something wrong with you. its too prevalent.

  22. #21 – SMC, I’m sorry you’ve had frustration in your dating experiences. Personally I think there is a reasonable argument to be made that there is something wrong with a SYSTEM that encourages mature human beings to repress expression of their natural sexual desires. That is very different from treating someone as if there is something wrong with them personally for not having sex. As many others have said, there are good men out there who truly respect and share your values, and I’m sure you’ll find one.

  23. thanks hawkgrrrl!
    brjones- the “system” doesnt ask you to repress, simply to manage. i have been told this is easier for women. maybe its true, but i am not willing to completely buy into that right now. the man i am referring to in my post used what you are saying as part of his platform and certainly there is an intellectual argument that can be made. then there is the simple act of obedience. abstaining because you believe that is what the Lord has asked us to do.

  24. #25 – I don’t mean to be argumentative but this is simply untrue. For many people in the church who, for one reason or another, will be unable to marry in this life, they are commanded to be celibate in thought, word and deed. If you don’t see that as repression of sexual desires I’d be interested in your definition of the word. And I’m not sure exactly what “manage” means in this context – any alternate means of sexual expression such as more minor sexual activity, masturbation or even thinking about sex are expressly forbidden. In my mind those methods would be “managing” one’s sexual desires. But when everything of a sexual nature is forbidden, you are dealing with repression. I don’t even think it’s a matter of opinion. Now, whether that repression is good or bad is another question entirely. And I would readily agree with you that within an LDS context there really is no place for the argument that repression of sexual appetites is unhealthy. You either accept that it is god’s law or not. The fact that someone claming to be a believng member is questioning that principle is a huge red flag.

  25. you are right. no sex, no masturbation. that is the law of chastity, but “managing”, in my opinion means healthy affection between two people. hugging and kissing. it(hugging and kissing) doesnt have to be a means to an end(sex). it can be very satisfying, but that might bring us back to the differences between men and women. many women find the make out to be the greatest thing ever and it doesnt necessarily have to lead to sex. men on the other hand seem to only want the make out to get the sex. a tale as old as time.

    ps- there are others who choose celibacy for a number of reasons. it only seems to be those of us who hold out for religious reasons who get the bad rap.

  26. #27 – SMC, I didn’t mean to imply that there were no circumstances in which sexual desires could be managed, as opposed to repressed (although either way I think it’s repression, but I don’t think we disagree on the important issue). Rather, there is a whole host of people within the church (gays, women who are never asked, handicapped, etc.)who will not have opportunities to manage, even in the modest ways you have suggested. They may never have the opportunity to have a meaningful affectionate relatioship with anyone. There is no outlet for them, and no help offered except that god will somehow help them live their entire lives denying the most basic primal human desire. I personally think this is very unhealthy.

    As to why those who are celibate for religious reasons get a bum rap, there is a reason for that. What’s the possible harm in an individual choosing to be celibate because he or she doesn’t have a desire to be sexually involved or to avoid disease or any other reason? The reason religious celibacy is so derided is that it is being undertaken at the behest of someone else. The vast majority of the people engaging in this kind of celibacy actually desperately want to be sexually involved. They are repressing a strong, natural desire because someone else told them to. I think there is a strong argument that this is not only unhealthy on an ethical level, but that it has the potential to produce harmful results in many different ways. In any event, I think, again, there is justification for viewing religiously-induced celibacy as of a different, and more harmful, kind than that based on personal desire.

  27. I don’t think bringing up the question of Church policy regarding sexual behavior on a date is a neutral setting for a purely academic discussion of the issue. By itself, this is an indication that the person is interested in premarital sex, and is testing the waters to see if the date is open to the idea. I don’t think being interested in sex makes you a pervert, and I don’t think that choosing celibacy makes you frigid or asexual. I am interested in finding an identifiable group who can deal with the idea that disagreement doesn’t mean that the other person is an extreme-whatever and suitable for demonization. Haven’t seen it yet, and I’m finding that annoying.

    But this is a kick-out question for not a few people. The Church standard is quite clear, and quite clearly at odds with the norm outside groups that have accepted that standard. There are myriad arguments and rationalizations that can be made about how that standard is unreasonable, unhealthy, oppressive, repressive, whatever, but the standard remains, and variance from that standard is at odds with the worthiness standard of the Church. This is one of the central behavioral standards of the Church, so rejecting it isn’t dissimilar to rejecting principles like restoration of priesthood authority IMO — I don’t understand staying around if you don’t accept what the Church claims to be of God.

    And it’s a quite significant cultural divide in the Church between SAs and Church leadership. I think it needs to be addressed with some frank language and more useful counsel than “Sing a hymn” or “Put a rubber band on your wrist.”

  28. I agree with Blaine. The church doesn’t sway on it’s rulings based on society or science or anything other than the word of God (At least it isn’t supposed to). If you really believe that the church is wrong in saying that no one should have sex outside of marriage, you are in defiance with the word of God. Even if they change the policy tomorrow, you are still wrong today, in the church’s eyes.

  29. i thought i needed some sound research to reference, but went into google and typed “is celibacy unhealthy?” i got page after page of hotly adamant people talking about the evils of abstinence. when i typed in “is celibacy healthy?” i got the same enormous wave of information explaining how abstinence is wonderful. i didnt read a lot of it. some of it was down right weird. an intellectual argument can be made for either side. i dont think that being sexually active outside of marriage damns you or makes you instantly contract a std. i also know that sexually active people are not necessarily these emotionally healthy people who are so centered because they have regular orgasms.on the flip side all those that abstain are not uber- righteous people happily embrace their sexless lives. nor are they privately crippled inside because no one has touched them in who knows how long. the church will never change its stance on this. i personally have a testimony of this doctrine,but i am certainly looking forward to the day i get married and revisit that important part of a healthy relationship.

  30. One of the reasons I left the church was that I realized if I didn’t believe all its claims, it was pointless, cruel, and unnecessary for a system to deprive me of the right to a sexual relationships. I was one of those 40-year-old Mormon virgins (I’m a woman) who worked in the temple, had other callings, did my visiting teaching, etc. But I was terribly unhappy and lonely and didn’t want to admit it. I also bought into the teachings/suggestions to marry another member at all costs. I grew up under the Kimball presidency, and choosing to marry outside the church demonstrated a lack of faith.

    I am glad I woke up to the possibilities once I discovered I truly did not believe: it wasn’t worth wasting my emotional and sexual life. I am happily married to another ex-Mormon who was also a virgin when we met… and when we married.

  31. blain-i love what you said!you really put a finer point of what i was saying. i agree with you so much, but i had to laugh-singing a hymn is my weapon of choice! 🙂

    stephen m- thanks 🙂

    i have really enjoyed reading everyone’s take on this particular subject and how i spun it in my post. thanks so much for letting me hear your point of view.

  32. I know I’m young, too young to really participate in an intellectual waxing of ideas on this topic with those of a different experience level. I don’t care though. It’s easy for me to say, “sex is a sin.” It’s also easy for me to put a period on the end of that sentence. Choosing to sin is bad. However I do not have the point of reference that mingleman has. I’ve never had sex, I’ve never been married, and I’m not divorced and trying to start over. I love making out, and do not use it only as a means to end. If any of the aforementioned were true, then maybe I would, I don’t know.

    However, I do know a thing or two about testing the waters with members of the opposite sex. I think this is textbook guy to girl manipulation. If you had agreed with his opinions on relaxing then you guys would probably have had sex… whether the church “relaxed” things or not. Which we all know the Lord wouldn’t have that. The dude is probably having premarital sex right now… and good luck to him making it to the Celestial Kingdom. I hope he does, and if I get there we can high-five in the CK and I can joke about how I was the goose who thought the commandments were literal…

    By the way, Single Mormon Chick, how come I can’t make comments on your regular blog?

  33. Mormon-thanks for your input-you may have read that i comment on the youngsters in my blog. its nice to know there are some who follow this commandment.
    i fixed the comment issue. look forward to what you have to say. thanks.

  34. I am on the side of those who think he just meant to be honest, specially since he seems to like you.
    I also think it is funny how tensed the discussion on the matter can be.
    What if he had said that he believes the church is true but that Js had lost his way at one point and in the end was not a prophet of God anymore.
    You’d probably be schocked but then just consider it is his point of view and leave it there.
    To me it is the same thing.
    He does not believe in the law of chastity for divorce? Ok. This is his point of view. And just as you would with a non member you stated your opinion and he either go along with it or go away.
    Kind of easy for me to say. I also don’t believe in the law of chastity but I have commited to follow it because I want to enjoy the rest of what the gospel has to bring. So I guess it is easier for me in a way.
    Unlike you I don’t have to ponder about what he says and feel disturbed by the situation where I like him and he has good points and yet….
    What I know is that I agree that the law of chastity is both hard and not the one I believe the most in.
    I have been living a life free of any law and the conclusion of it is that I have not become a perv and sex is great!
    But nothing close to feeling closer to God and understanding and improving my relationship with Him. I disagree with Him on this subject but I have been proved before that it is not because I have good points that I am right on the whole. Things cannot be changed just for me.
    And if this poor guy has not figured it out by now the problem is not so much the law of chastity but “what else has he not understood?”. I am sure he can be a great friend and someone who brings you new lights and uplift you at times. Yet I would wonder about his path and what he has gathered from it so far and therefore his ability to learn.
    I am not saying he is not a wonderful person.
    I am just saying that you may want more than a wonderful person.

  35. SMC-
    Keep your chin up, and your standards. Your story sounds like the beginning of an absolutely horrid (but thankfully brief) marriage I just got out of. Our bishop actually encouraged us to get a divorce (after he saw that our marriage was not going to work, ever) because my ex was out having a great old time and divorced he would ¨just¨be breaking the law of chastity. A friend said it was better for me, too, for the same reason. I´m fairly new at all of this (I was baptized last year, I´m 42 with 2 kids) but the emphasis on sex-are you? will you? won´t you? why? is just…I don´t know, very high school or something. (And the fact that people just assume that you are lying, ack! (I live in a country where people are not known for their chastity) I detest the way our very being in this world seems to be boiled down to how we use (or not) our reproductive organs. I have several friends who are single, chaste AND HAPPY (not all lds) and we all agree that it´s not easy, but we have an eternal companion, and the sad and lonely moments we go through are comparable to the sad and lonely moments one goes through while in a relationship. Be constant to the Lord, lose yourself to the degree that you can in service to others, and you will be rewarded. Best of luck SMC.

  36. elizabeth: thanks so much for your input-it reminded me of a quote; A woman’s heart should be so lost in God that a man needs to seek Him in order to find her.” i dont remember who said it, but they werent lds.its not trendy or sexy, but i think it makes quite a statement. i totally agree that the whole “drama” about “will you or wont you” is SO high school. it smacks of a certain immaturity that there is such a focus on sex from the beginning when as members, we should know the answer. no.
    i want to reiterate that we all make our own choices and i am not judging and i am asking not to be judged. the man from my post is a good guy. devoted father and committed to his work. he wasnt trying to pressure me in any way. the only thing i fault him with is telling me that i was crazy to believe that a solid, healthy relationship can be built without having sex before marriage.

  37. My parents got divorced when my mom was 35, and she tried a few SA activities. She was shocked at how many men openly asked for sex (two at her very first dance). She was appalled. Now, my mom likes sex (it’s a little uncomfortable to be her daughter and have ber tell me how much she loves and misses sex), but it’s been 18 years since she got divorced, and she still hasn’t gone back to the activities.

  38. My brother in law who got divorced and then remarried later, to a woman with children, had no problem with her beliefs in chastity before marriage. Anything else would have been a deal breaker for him, I think. There are men who follow God.

  39. re: #40 stephanie
    i always feel a tinge of guilt criticizing the single adult program. its part of our church, sanctioned by Heavenly Father. right? i just think there are so many flaws. maybe not in the actual organization, but in its execution. i have been to sa activities and i have been to secular clubs and the atmosphere is THE SAME. ok, so the sa activities arent serving fuzzy navels or playing inappropriate music, but the vibe and how men and women interact is almost identical. that vibe at a sa activity is creepier to me. at a club you pretty much know everyone is there to get drunk and find someone for a one night stand, but at church, you figure there is a higher purpose. or you would hope.

    i know stephen m # 41 is right. there are men who follow God. could they all gather in one place and identify themselves please? and could the ones who like really tall girls who still love heavy metal from the 80’s wear t-shirts to indicate as much? 🙂

  40. He can not force you to have sex, or can he?. It is very simple live it or take it. The next guy you meet tell him rigth away “I want to wait”, so both of you avoid weating each other’s time. I am pretty sure you will find the rigth one who will respect your personal decisions and your standar moral.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *