- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Anyone care to share some thoughts on Rob4Hope’s recent postings? I’m not sure what the motivations were behind bumping the ‘A Terrific Article about Pornography’ thread but my immediate reaction was that he was tossing another log on what was a dying fire. It was the same argument from previous pages but this time in caps and with a little more bitterness.
Quote:THOU SHALT HAVE NO SEXUAL RELATIONS!!!!!!except with your spouse to whom you are legally and lawfully married (if they don’t refuse you and are of the opposite sex)I tried to validate him but it doesn’t seem to help. I’m not sure what kind of dialog he’s looking for.
He also posted some things in the ‘Single LDS members — where do they fit’ thread where he put a lot of words into SWK’s mouth.
Quote:According to SWK,
HOW DARE YOU THINKYOU PAY THE SAME PRICECHEAPENSI’m tired of being compared to others. I’m glad those pious people were so faithful and clean,…heck man, they walked on water even, or so it seems. Me?…I’m just a lowly messed up “single” man now who is trying to repent and come back. But, my chance is blown. I didn’t make the sacrifice, and sure as H3LL am NOT going to wait for the perfect utterly right
spiritualcompanion to come along to marry. I’ve come real close to saying something but I wanted to touch base to make sure it wasn’t just me. He may just be blowing off a lot of steam or having a bad day.
Outside of the posts from today… I don’t know how to put it so I’ll fumble through this. He says that his journey is independent of church leadership but his comments reflect placing an awful lot of stock in what leaders have to say.
I’d like to help him, I’m just not sure what that looks like. Outside my wheelhouse I suppose.
I would suggest and appreciate an attempt to reach out via PM and explain that the ALL CAPS approach might not be the best way to get good dialogue here. I’m willing to pm, but I don’t want to bombard him if someone else is doing it. I would suggest simple bold or bold italic is generally enough emphasis. He strikes me as lonely, and we all know this board can be a bit slow and dull at times. My take is that some of his comments are simply to illicit responses to alleviate his own boredom.
Just FYI, I sent him a PM telling him I would be willing to pass along the interview question over-reach to Church HQ if he isn’t comfortable doing so. I told him all I need is the names of the stakes or even the general area where they are. I am not convinced he is telling the truth, although I can believe some leaders are going there, so we will see how he responds to my message.
I think he has stated that he lives in the Salt Lake area. I have PMed him a couple times in the past and he has been quick to respond. I’m curious of what he will have to say. Many years ago while serving in the bishopric we used to get these “priesthood bulletins” regularly. Often they would contain clarifications to the general handbook, which was looseleaf at the time. I recall the bishop saying almost every one of those clarifications (or sometimes new policies) were the result of something happening in Utah.
For what it’s worth severalyears ago my local SP announced that the TR interview would include a question about porn use in addition to the LoC question. This was back when TRs lasted for one year and I remember having one renewal interview under that policy. The policy didn’t last long, likely because the leaders were asked to stop. It does happen. DarkJedi wrote:I recall the bishop saying almost every one of those clarifications (or sometimes new policies) were the result of something happening in Utah.
And all the leaders in Utah said the clarifications were the result of something happening in the “mission field.”
bump Just a question for you all… any time a thread borders on the topic of sex it seems like we run the risk of going off subject and revisiting the exact same talking points. Once one of the talking points gets brought up we go down a well worn path for several pages. Specifically I’m referring to the topic of sexless marriages… and apparently to a certain extent who to blame?
That the thread almost insta-balloons by a few pages indicates that it’s a subject that people really want to talk about. Rob4Hope may toss another log on a dead fire from time to time but the conversation did eventually lead people like Holy Cow, FaithfulSkeptic, and LookingHard to come out of the woodwork and I think they get a lot out of the discussion.
What’s the best way to moderate here? Just accept this is a subject that will come up every 6 months or so? I’m fine with that. I’m also tempted to create a thread called “How Spencer W. Kimball ruined my orgasm” and direct all talk on that subject to that thread.
:angel: Rob does tend to throw logs on a dead fire, use lots of “what ifs” and beat dead horses. I think he likes to argue for the sake of argument (as I alluded to in my public post). I’m actually fine with that as long as it’s not every thread all the time, although I really don’t like beating dead horses. And I don’t know what the issue that got Rob ex’ed was, but I would surmise by his posts that it had something to do with sex and he’s still bitter about it (and perhaps not repentant). That said, I have wondered the same thing. How far do we let things go, how many lashings on the dead horse and logs on the dead fire do we tolerate? On the other hand, I recognize that forum members come and go and that there are at least as many lurkers as people who actually post (that particular thread has had over 10 times more views than posts, but many of those views are mine). There is clearly interest.
I’m fine with letting it come up and be hashed out again every few months, but perhaps jumping in at some point with a “if there’s nothing new let’s move on” thing (said more politely than I probably would, however). That is, after all, one reason cwald was eventually banned – he kept harping on the same thing almost regardless of the topic.
I am reading a book called Intimacy and Desire. It is written by a psychologist and is mind blowing in the area of you got it – Sex (and interpersonal relationships). I am only part way through the book, but I read his previous book on the same subject (it was bold lot’s of f-wording in a clinical way). Any way what do you think if I started a thread on the books and my findings. We can lock it if it gets dead horsing etc, but maybe drawing out a conversation where we pass along mind set ideas may help people who are hurting. As I watch relationships and faith crisis – intimacy takes a hit. Not just sex but conversation, connection, closeness, trust. I know Rational Faiths has a running podcast with Jennifer Finlayson Fife on this subject. Julie DeAzevedo talks about it a lot, too. Most of us on the board are mid-life and there is a natural sexual change that happens, but adding faith transition and you have a tough road for some people.
Think about it, I will keep reading. For my own interest. If it everyone here – Mods and Admins would be willing help watch the thread and take active guidance with it I will start it. Let me know.
Oh the author of the book is David Schnarch if you are interested.
There’s nothing wrong with rehashing topics – as long as it isn’t constant without any movement toward understanding and growth. There was one participant a while ago (featherina, maybe?) who couldn’t let go of Old Teatament tithing and how we still should be doing it that way. It came up for a while in every. single. thread. We finally had to tell her to knock it off. Bridget Night was the same way about homosexuality and her happiness in the Church of the Nazarene, and we finally had to tell her the same thing.
It goes back to our mission: Venting is fine, as a starting point, but we aren’t here as a support group for endless venting with no movement. It’s a fine line, and Rob still struggles to understand it (with reason, given his experiences), but I think we are good for him and that he gets something important here. We just need to call him on it, as gently as possible, when he crosses the line.
I was probably too forward with Rob today, but frankly I’m tiring of his being stuck on old teachings and constantly bringing it up. I try to understand him, and I do feel the pain and loneliness in his posts. But he really does need to just let go and put it behind him. It’s exhausting. I wonder if it is worth it to keep explaining it. But…I decided I would again. There is nothing wrong with how he feels he is treated. He just gets so stuck and can’t move on or frame things from the church correctly. Probably why he gets stuck…he is approaching the source of the problem wrong…and so never can get past it. So looks like Rob may have taken offense (or maybe he’s just lazy, he’s most certainly sinful 
On the other hand, maybe he’s just taking a break and there has been almost no sex talk or old “doctrine” discussions since he hasn’t been posting so in some ways our job has been easier. Maybe a break will help him recognize there are other things to talk about.
I’m ok with him taking a break. We all need that at times. I would rather not reach out to him. Funny, I was just thinking earlier today how we hadn’t heard from him in a while. He’s never responded to any of my PMs in the past, I doubt he’d start now.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.