Imagine if there was some way for the Catholic church to demand to see how you spend your money, and seeing that you spent $100 a month on sex toys, said that they'd start paying you $100 less.

It's no one's business how you spend the money that you work for. Health insurance is a benefit in lieu of money.

I still feel guilty about this and that. I'm just better at reminding myself that I don't have to feel the guilt on top of whatever I'm already feeling, like if I'm already frustrated that my kids are misbehaving on the way to church. Why also tell myself, "What a terrible mother I am. I can't even keep my kids kind on the way to church!," when that's not even my ability to do so. Sure, I can teach them, and reinforce boundaries and follow through on catching them being good as well as consequating them when they misbehave, but how they choose to act isn't a pure reflection of my mothering abilities.

And here's the kicker--I'll bet you, that when I walk into church, and I've chewed my kids out and feared them into behaving during sacrament (not that they will be feeling the spirit, mind you), there are 10 other families out there who all had the same thing happen in their cars, and we all look at each other during church and think, "Now why can't we be like family A? Or B?" even though all our families are just as "real."

Ok, licked cupcake, I got it now. I've heard the poop-in-brownies analogy about watching movies with inappropriate content of any sort, how, if I knew there was poop in a brownie, I wouldn't say, "But it's just a liiiiittle bit of poop. Otherwise it's a FANTASTIC brownie."

Or the cake analogy where a speaker had someone come up from that audience and have a piece of "cake," which was actually a cake made of stiff frosting. At first the girl loved it, and then, as he spoke to us about chastity, she started to get sick. I always like the point of that one, too, because I felt that it was referring to the icing as being sexual relations, and that if a relationship is based solely on that, it can be too much of a good thing. My take was that it's part of a whole. A great, tasty, wonderful whole, but it's not the whole picture.

But I agree with you that a licked cupcake analogy is shaming, because it is implies that a girl (or boy) who has been sexually active, whether by choice or rape, is now damaged goods, and less desirable.

The same applies to abortions.

If any religious organisation has no business getting into the nitty gritty with individuals, asking them why they used birth control or got an abortion and asking them to prove that their action was a legitimate health decision (and they don't), then they have no business making sweeping judgements for all. These are legitimate health care procedures. How an individual chooses to use them is private.

There's also a real problem with a religious organisation stating that in order to work with them, you have to practise their religion. What if they feel like it's immoral to pray to Muhammad five times a day? Are they allowed to refuse you a place and time in order to pray? What if they feel like it's immoral for you to marry your gay partner but the state you're in allows for that? Are they allowed to refuse you time off work? What if my religion believes that people should have only two babies each because it's ethically the right thing to do? (Just go with it.) Does an employer have the religious right to usurp MY religious rights? And what if my "religion" is atheism and that guides my decisions and ethics? Does an employer have the religious right to trump how I practise my beliefs?

Yeah, the licked cupcake is an object lesson for when a girl loses her virginity. People are still using these type object lessons in YW classes. There are several different iterations of them (maybe the crumpled dollar bill is the same).

I am so sorry to hear that any type of boundaries were crossed where they should not have been. I wish you/your family didn't have to go through such an experience. Sigh. I know bad experiences happen, even within the church. I'm glad that not all imperfect church leaders give in to saying or doing inappropriate things that cross any boundaries.

>But, problems with men, pornography and masturbation are extremely prevalent in the church and more of the same general approach is not working to curb the problem.
That I do agree with. But I am also seeing the general approach changing, as well. We'll see if it makes a difference. Meaning, rather than just saying, avoid, avoid, avoid, which often backfires, I've specifically seen porn addiction counselors using tools that more say, “Ok, I know you're there. I recognize the enticement. I acknowledge that this a big temptation for me."

>You mentioned GC conference talks that speak to you. Does that mean that you ignore others with different type messages?
No. What I'm trying to say is that maybe things fit in my ear differently, but I don't notice talks with “different type” messages, at least that I've noticed. Though I'll be listening with a third ear this April, just to try and see your perspective as well. : )

Even growing up with very imperfect church leaders, I never noticed local lessons/talks/discussions geared toward shame for sins. Just sorrow & a desire to change. However, feeling shame seems to be extremely prevalent, because I've noticed a huge focus in talks & Ensign articles about how grace really works; I even posted a link here recently of a talk by Brad Wilcox called "His Grace is Sufficent." http://byutv.org/watch/49475abb-10d4-4f45-a757-7000b9945468

I think the church is trying to stamp out the misunderstanding that the person who commits a sin is damaged goods. In fact, I've heard more talks along the lines of the object lesson with the crumpled up dollar bill, that even if it's gotten scuffed up and stained and beat up, it's still worth its original value, the value of a daughter or son of God. I don't think Satan is to blame for all our sins or weaknesses, but I do really think this is one area where he thrives. If he can convince people that they're too far gone, or not good enough for the atonement, he keeps them from the utilizing the very atonement that is intended for them—the “sick” who need the physician, not the “whole.” (Meaning, those with flaws, not the illusion of someone who's already perfect)

>Even if you don't, what if someone else grew up in a shaming environment and is more likely to hear the parts that are more shame inducing?
Yeah, I do agree with people hearing a talk and placing guilt/shame on themselves, though I feel like they are misunderstanding doctrine; I have done it myself. See my above paragraph.

>For instance, the talk "Mothers Who Know." ...I heard the part about perfectly brushed hair and always ironed clothes and rolled my eyes at it
See, I saw this a completely different way. An example, not a doctrine of what a “good” mormon mom should do.

In the above post, someone saw the picture of one man among the majority, NOT heiling to a Hitler leader, and jumped to the conclusion that Natasha was comparing mormons with nazis.

The very part of Beck's talk where she mentioned ironed clothing and perfectly brushed hair, she was talking about “mothers who know” honoring covenants and pointing their children toward the temple. Mentioning third-world type women who take such hygenic pains with their children to symbolize how important church attendance is, to me was an example, not a condemnation or a command about how I should mother, except encouraging me to value church attendance and temple worship.

At the time I had 3 little boys, and I'm lucky if they have clean clothes on Sunday. I don't guilt myself because my relationship that counts is with my Heavenly Father, not people in the ward who might judge me for boys who, yet another week, came to sacrament meeting in uncombed hair and jam already on their white shirts. I know that the shirts were clean before breakfast/lunch, right as we were walking out the door to church with toast-and-jam. I missed the hair, but WE MADE IT to church. Yes, I'm still embarrassed about it, but to the other moms, not to God. He knows I'm doing the best with who I am.

I think we as women, especially, are so quick to guilt ourselves as we compare our worst to other people's perceived bests. I still believe Satan tries to make us dog ourselves so we can't see the good we are doing in raising our kids to be decent people. I've succumbed to it many times, and still sometimes have to remind myself, “Well, if they judge, they'll just have to judge. I know my heart, I know my weaknesses, and I know my strengths.”

Thanks for your thoughts. I appreciate seeing your perspective, like that of considering having your boys attend church and doing "damage control" the way I feel I do when my kids come home from school sex ed, not that I do damage control per se, but that I feel like my role as a parent is to further expand on the basics, and give my child a bigger foundation in what I think is true about sexuality.

I agree that parents can do a lot and that if they do their job well (some people have amazing parental intuition, were modeled good parenting, or go to wonderful outside sources), some of the bad messages at church can be counteracted. And, of course, I'm not saying that all of the messages from church are bad ones. Morals and ethics are also taught and when done well are parallel to some of the very good secular sources. For a little while, my husband and I thought we might continue to keep our kids at church, though we no longer agreed with many of the doctrinal points. We had heard of people who do damage control with their kids after meetings and feel it's worth it because of the community they feel at church and because it is their heritage. I'm happy for people who find a good community at church, but due to a couple of pretty severe boundary violations by leadership and also a member, we realized that church wasn't providing us with a safe community. That was when we decided to break away.

There is no doubt in my mind that there are people that are happy and fulfilled at church. And if you are happy and fulfilled, there is no reason to change anything.

P.S. I also agree with you about pornography from a Feminist standpoint. I don't like it. But, I'm also no longer terribly scared of it or its prevalence in society.

P.P.S. You mentioned GC conference talks that speak to you. Does that mean that you ignore others with different type messages? Even if you don't, what if someone else grew up in a shaming environment and is more likely to hear the parts that are more shame inducing? For instance, the talk "Mothers Who Know." By the time I heard this talk I was feeling pretty confident in my role and how I was doing my job as a mom. I heard the part about perfectly brushed hair and always ironed clothes and rolled my eyes at it (I was still a True Blue Mormon at the time). But, what about the mom with three to four really young kids who can't keep up with her own hair let alone all the kids? And what about the fact that she's probably attending church with some moms who DO regularly have their daughter's hair brushed perfectly and all the clothes ironed. Maybe she's able to let it roll off her back, maybe not. This might not even be classed as shame, but even if she feels *guilt*over this, why? Is it because she's not a good mom? Not necessarily. However, too bad, this is the message from the RS leadership to the women of the church.

'Cuz that's what I woulda done. And I'm certifiably ADD. The internets and fb and email only help fuel it for me.