Excommunication Regarding Outspoken Sexual Matters

The big P can end up becoming a major addiction for some people. A friend of mine who was in the book trade once went to buy the library of someone who had died – thousands of volumes of such material, so for some people it is a problem.

Its widespread presence online is changing our societal dynamic. It definitely promotes promiscuity over steady relationships and long term marriage – which we can see around us. My former therapist has told me it affects adolescents heavily now – she has teenage girls who are clients, and they complain they are being pushed into more and more experimentation and extreme behaviors which are depicted in these films, which they try out, regret and don’t enjoy. Their boyfriends even complain they don’t look like the stars of these films and their bodies are different (I’m not going into detail, but let’s just say we are all different shapes and sizes, and appearances, and have irregularities… Which are not reflected in the industry). This leads to a lot of confusion, body dysmorphia, self-hatred, STIs etc.

The industry also doesn’t reflect the social aspects of courting, affection and long term commitment.

My understanding of this is that she was not ex’ed due to her beliefs and therapeutic practice, rather it was because of public opposition to leaders. I think in recent years the church has made it fairly clear that we can’t go around saying the leaders are wrong – even if they are. I agree with her, I also don’t believe masturbation is a sin (although there is a point where it can supplant other normal expression of sexuality; I don’t believe pornography is an addiction in the same way alcohol, drugs, and tobacco are (my licensed psychologist member daughter explains it as a compulsion as opposed to an addiction and the treatment for compulsions is entirely different) but I do believe that one can spend so much time viewing porn that it affects their life functions; and I agree gay marriage should be legal although I don’t believe churches should be forced to perform or recognize them. The difference in Ms. Helfer and me is that I don’t go around publicly teaching what I believe from the pulpit or otherwise. I think I am free to express my ideas in private conversations, perhaps even with church leaders as long as I am not saying they are wrong about their beliefs (and I have spoken privately with my SP on gay marriage and on pornography).

We’re mostly only hearing Helfer’s side of the story here, as usual. I’d like to know what she was saying that drew the ire of the leadership.

As side notes, I do think withdrawal of membership was probably too “harsh” and I wonder why her former stake, where she hasn’t lived in 18 months, carried this out. I know you can’t just keep moving around to run away from church issues, but it’s been a while since she was there and it doesn’t take that long to put these things together and her offense would seem know to be against a whole other set of leaders (unless it’s the top leadership she’s spouting off about – but even then, why not her current stake?).

It has been a millenium since I have posted. Anyway, I believe the Big P (as it has been designated) is available for addiction. I work in the public sector and more than one person in our area has been either severely reprimanded or terminated due to Big P use at work. Not during work hours, but individuals coming in in the very early AM to involve themselves in pornographic movies. they did not want to be discovered by their spouses. (Obviously that did not actually workout.) A friend let me know that his son in law was fired from a job because he spent all night watching Big P (at home in this case) and did not have the umpff to get to work.

I am not an expert on addiction, but I believe if a behavior is disrupting your family life, marriage, or career, etc. Then regardless of the behavior (drug use, booze, Big P) you are probably looking at an addiction? Maybe someone with more knowledge on the subject will helpout with that. However, I have heard people around church meetings, on BYU-I campus, yada, yada, describe Big P as a bad habit. The mental health rpofessionals I work with, in fact, chuckle at the “New Drug” take on the porn problem. They suddenly are not chuckling when one of their kids gets caught surfing X sights.

Now, the psychologist (I am sure with good intentions) began publicizing ideas that juuuuuust do not mesh with church ideas. Had she kept her thoughts and ideas within the bounds of her practise then this would not have become such an issue, if at all. I do not think she was wrong, but she appears to not wanted to have backed down. As we have seen in recent years the Big Ex is right around the corner. I really believe that this is unfortunate.

So, after a millenium that is my take.

P.S. Thanks for giving me a phrase I can use in mixed company!

Psychologists will tell you that pornography is not an addiction but can be a compulsory behavior. There is a huge difference. There are no competent psychologists who will tell you differently (and most of them are competent), hence the support Sr. Helfer had from her colleagues, church members and not. This is also what worries psychologists and other therapists in Utah – they know this to be proven fact as well, but how much can they talk about it publicly now that one of their own has been ex’ed for publicly saying so even though psychologists regularly publicly acknowledge it. There is still an element in the church that eschews science in favor of puritanism or pope-like infallibility of religious leaders. Also, the whole idea of porn being an addiction is almost purely a Mormon idea – it’s not a “thing” in the mainstream or even other mainstream religions or churches.

That said, that does not mean that porn can’t be harmful to some, just like gambling or other compulsions may be harmful to some. Viewing porn occasionally does not an addiction (or compulsion) make and the church has tended to blow it way out of proportion (a form of Jedi mind trick).

Psychologists will tell you that pornography is not an addiction but can be a compulsory behavior.

Psychologists go with prevailing trends, in this case sexual license. As I always remind people, they used to class being gay as a mental illness, now they class homophobia as one. All to do wth societal fashions. Promiscuity used to be classed as satyromania and nymphomania, now you’re classed as abnormal if you don’t lean in that direction, and marriage is almost seen as aberrant. Soap operas and music push that message too. So I don’t even see their claims as very scientifically based.

That’s because like all science we learn new things all the time. That’s what science is. You clearly don’t buy that psychologists are scientists and maybe not even professionals and I wholeheartedly disagree (although Sheldon Cooper may agree – but he thinks MIT is a tech school and not an actual university). They spend years studying and practicing like other professionals. Where’s your doctorate? What proof do you have other than your own anecdotal evidence? (And no, homophobia is not in the DSM and homosexuality has not been in there since 1973 – decades before the church gave up on “conversion therapy” and 5 years before the church ended the priesthood ban.)

I’ve seen and heard evidence that the Big P is indeed an addiction for some people. Even if we see it as a “compulsive behavior”, that sounds like a bit of a euphemism for borderline addictive behavior in this case. The problem is that the LDS use the addiction label too widely.

Always a good defense when you can’t argue with the truth, although I do agree the church (more specifically some church leaders and members) does apply the label too widely.

The wide free availability of the Big P online ensures that certain aspects are well hidden. Twenty years ago, some people spent serious money on it – that’s a sign of addiction, as is the amount of time some people spend with it. (You’re talking hours and hours here in some cases.) So there’s a difference between someone who occasionally sneaks a peak at it, and someone who is spending thousands of dollars or hours on it. Lockdown isn’t helping.

It’s OK to say the word here and anywhere else – they say pornography in General Conference. The amount of time one spends might be a sign of compulsion/compulsory behavior, but not necessarily an addiction. It doesn’t take very long to shoot up with heroin which is an addiction and has little to do with time spent.Tobacco addicts do spend a fair amount of time smoking or chewing but often while doing other things and they can usually manage going several hours without a “fix.” Again time has little to do with it. Alcohol is pretty similar to tobacco. In all of those cases, and others, there is a physical need for the substance – that’s an addiction. Yes, there is a difference between someone who sometimes takes a peek at porn and someone who spends hours – but if you asked most active church members (especially women) in Utah if there was a difference you’d get a pretty resounding no and both would be addicts. The truth is, some people have the time and money to spend on it and it does no harm, much the same as gambling. I live close to a casino – close enough to walk if I wanted. There are people who can afford to go there and blow money and still pay all their bills and do other leisurely activities, and there are those who can’t do that. It’s only harmful to those who can’t afford to do it (and either way it benefits me because my taxes have significantly decreased and services increased since the casino opened). If gambling or porn are not affecting one’s means of living and general well being it makes little difference how much money or time they spend on it as indiviudals. We all waste time doing things like watching TV and posting on web forums but it doesn’t matter as long as someone’s not going to lose my job/livelihood or family because of it. In other words, if it affects your quality of life and health anything could be harmful (too much TV, too much sports, too much whatever) but otherwise it’s likely not harmful.

If you want to know why the church is struggling with keeping Millennials and Gen. Z, you don’t have to look much farther than these issues. They’re not interested in Kimball’s Miracle of Forgiveness or Oaks’ BYU shock therapy. It’s not 1973, it’s not 1983 (thank goodness in both cases), it’s a whole new world. The church will catch up in 20-30 years.

I also think it’s interesting that while the rhetoric often compares pornography to drug addiction, the way the two are treated is often different. I have seen people bring up that they are a recovering cocaine addict, and people react with support and view it as an unfortunate and difficult circumstance for them to be in. But then pornography use in my experience is more often viewed as a moral failing. Which to me suggests that people do at some level understand the issues to be fundamentally different and attribute more control to a porn “addict” than to a drug addict.

Admin Note:

Let’s be VERY careful about disparaging an entire profession and rejecting what their work has taught them. It is easy to forget that we don’t know each other in real life, so we don’t know who we are rejecting and belittling when we make sweeping statements.

Finally, there is a critical difference between addictions and compulsions, to professionals in the field, but the nuance is lost easily on those outside the field. This isn’t the place to argue about the distinction. We focus on faith and religion here, so let’s avoid continued technical analysis and fine-detail, scientific discussions or arguments. What we have at this point is enough.