This is the fifth post in a series regarding sexuality, religion, and teenagers. You can see the other posts by clicking here. The first one was January 26, 2011.
;
Guilt. Apparently religious kids-especially Mormons and especially girls-have got it in spades. If/when they have sex, they feel terribly about it-or they guess they would feel terribly if they did have sex. Mormon teenagers ranked the highest on the guilt scale of all religious groups. Here is a summary of the salient data re: Mormon teens in the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health:
- 77.1% of Mormon teens said they would feel guilty if they had sex. The next highest one was Evangelical Protestants (65.8%). The lowest was the “no religion” teens (32.8%).
- 96.4% of Mormon teens said their mother would be upset if they had sex. The next highest on this one was Evangelical Protestants (88.8%). The “no religion” kids were the lowest again (67.9%).
- 42.8% of Mormon teens said that sex would “give them much pleasure,” compared to 56.4% of Jewish teens and only 33.1% of Evangelical Protestant teens.
- Adolescent girls’ odds of feeling sex-related guilt are 92% higher than boys. Gulp. Why are girls so much more likely to feel guilty about sex than boys?
The gap between anticipated guilt between the highest and lowest levels of religiosity is a full 30 percentage points. So the take-away message is: the more religious you are, the more likely you are to feel guilty if you have sex. This seems like an unfortunate message, doesn’t it? Why should highly religious people have so much guilt regarding sex? Is it because religious kids are more motivated by fear? Are they more afraid of their parents’ disappointment, condemnation, or disapproval? Or their church leaders’? Or God’s?
What do you think of guilt as a deterrent? Is it effective? What about guilt as a motivator? How much do we do (or not do) because we are motivated by guilt? The problem with guilt, as I see it, is that it’s entirely negative; it doesn’t build positive feelings towards the object or cause of the guilt-whether it be another person, an organization, God, or sex. It doesn’t seem like coupling sex with guilt will necessarily lead to a healthy sense of sexuality later on in life. Same goes with fear as a motivator.
Tyler Blanski, author of Mud & Poetry: Love, Sex, and the Sacred, says that as soon as we leave behind what he calls the cult of chastity, the “sooner we will discover the kind of sex life God intends for us. It’s earthy. It’s erotic and playful. It’s deeply intimate. It’s 100% orthodox.” I haven’t read his book, but its message piques my curiosity because it’s so distinct from what I’ve grown up hearing in Mormon sermons, church-sponsored magazines, and curriculum.
Jeffrey R. Holland (a Mormon church leader) delivered an address in 1989 called Of Souls, Symbols, and Sacraments. The basic message was that sexual intimacy is about this trinity: the doctrine of the soul (and how we shouldn’t defile the soul by having sex outside of marriage), the symbol of total union (between a man and a woman), and a holy sacrament (a union of the man, the woman, and god).
I remember picking up a reprinted pamphlet of this talk on the BYU campus and tucking it away to read later. For years I liked the “sacrament” metaphor-it’s much better than a rose on a hillside, a rare steak, or a mangled Snickers bar, after all-but I’m no longer a fan. The talk contains a lot of very negative imagery and language. It reiterates the heinous idea (in my mind) that sexual transgression is second only to murder. [I wish I’d never heard that little tidbit of fanaticism.] It suggests that if you have sex outside of marriage, “You may come to that moment of real love, of total union, only to discover to your horror that what you should have saved has been spent, and–mark my words–only God’s grace can recover that piecemeal dissipation of your virtue.” Talk about bringing in the big dog-God-to really lay it on thick. I also dislike the idea of God playing a part in the play that is my sex life. I don’t remember casting him/her in a role . . . Last I checked, it was just Brent and me.
So, religious folk, do you think the messages we’re sending to teens via our religious organizations are worrisome or effective? What kinds of messages about sex did you get at church as a teenager? What alternative messages could we communicate to teens regarding sexuality rather than that it’s taboo and that they should never do it? Ever. And that if they do, their moms will be really upset?
Where else do we find references to breaking the law of chastity being second only to murder? What a damaging piece of rhetoric. How many orthodox believers actually believe that idea? I’m curious … is it just a menacing cloud that hangs over teenagers or do Mormons take it literally? Despite all my guilt, I never thought it was second to murder. I mean, surely there have to be a few other sins in there, correct? Torture? Embezzling funds? Abuse? Deceit?
I also don’t like the idea that “only God” will be able to help you retrieve your virtue once it has evaporated, because the thought implies to me that mostly we can *fix* stuff by ourselves, but for THIS one, we’ll need God’s help. To me, the message of the gospel should be that we need God’s help to fix LOTS of things – our attitudes, our unkindnesses, our weaknesses of every stripe. I agree that it is a weird comment & kind of doctrinally contradictory. It makes it sound, too, like teenagers who fool around are going to be bothering God with all these requests for forgiveness later.
I don’t think it’s super productive to *blame* the church culture for my personal unhappinesses, but I’ve gotta say, reading these columns (and being reminded of attitudes toward sex I was first exposed to as a teenager) has been an eye-opener for me and helped me see that it’s no surprise my head is so screwed up NOW when it comes to sex. I was fed a steady diet of this stuff for decades. It isn’t difficult to trace a line between the lessons about sex I received from a) my family, b) my ward YW program, and c) the official Church materials and the deep sadness, confusion and guilt I’ve experienced as an adult.
I tell you what, the thing I’m going to need God’s grace to fix is the “piecemeal dissipation” of a healthy sexuality. :)
I agree that the message should be that we need God’s help to fix a LOT of things. That’s one thing I like about some evangelical preachers. I heard Joel Osteen preach on the radio a few Sundays ago and he explicitly said that there is no hierarchy of sins–just that we’re all sinners before God.
Unfortunately, the ‘second only to murder’ bit isn’t just rhetoric: it’s doctrine. See Alma 39:5.
Also check out this thread on Yahoo answers, with loads of GA quotes on the subject.
This poses a really significant problem for sexual attitudes in the LDS Church. This isn’t just quotations from an old prophet that can be de-emphasised. This is going to come around every time a member reads this passage in the Book of Mormon. The whole section, where Alma speaks to his son Corianton, would be worth studying from a progressive perspective, to see what potential there is for re-interpretation.
“I also dislike the idea of God playing a part in the play that is my sex life.”
Agreed. I don’t want to pray for God’s help just before making love… The guilt component of sex as infused into my psyche through the church is already enough to cause serious havoc in my marriage. See http://notveryusefultruths.blogspot.com/2011/01/poisoning-sexuality.html
Guilt is an awful component that we, (Mormons), weave into the idea of sex without any equal treatment to assign fun and pleasure and good to the idea of sex. We ruin it to the point that it is sometimes impossible to reclaim as healthy and needful.
Yeah. I’ve heard of people who have a picture of Christ in their bedroom. Ew. So weird on so many levels.
On my mission I heard of missionaries who put a laminated picture of Christ in the shower.
NO.FREAKING.WAY.
I like the Buddhist rule about sex: “Abstain from sexual misconduct”–usually interpreted as using sex to harm or exploit another person.
Lists of regulations over when and how to have sex are conducive to guilt and to rationalization.
I feel like religious teachings on sexuality are akin to Gandalf’s telling Frodo of the One Ring, “Keep it secret. Keep it safe.” Good for hiding things away, but not so good for understanding anything about the object being protected or for actually protecting the object at all.
Heather, is the picture of a confession booth?
@Claire–yeah. It’s a confession booth. Can you not tell? Photo fail on my part.
I’m just not very familiar with the imagery, but apparently I was familiar enough to figure it out… just wanted to confirm.
The message I took away from the YW’s lessons as a youth were ‘stay modest so you can stay a virgin and get married in the temple to an RM and you’ll get a happily ever after’. Throw in lessons with chewed gum/a licked cupcake/a twinkie after someone’s dirty finger was stuck down the middle…. and the message was, ‘if you have sex/kiss too many boys/anything close to the sort you will be USED and no one wants someone who is USED. No message of forgiveness or repentance, just doom. Guilt? Hell yeah. I didn’t even kiss a boy until I was engaged to my husband (and it was him ;) ) because I was so afraid I’d ‘go to far’ and not have any self control. We’re taught as girls not to dress immodestly because of how it affects those around us. We’re told it’s up to us to make sure the boys go on missions. There are layers and layers of guilt heaped on good little mormon girls.
“a twinkie after someone’s dirty finger was stuck down the middle”
Ok, please tell me you made that one up! (Cue images of trains going into tunnels, rockets lifting off….)
Heather, I think the guilt messages are really damaging. It’s so confusing to a teenager to hear that premarital sex is next to murder, but then feel like they want to have it. That makes them feel like a BAD PERSON… what sort of person WANTS to sin that bad? Murdering people is super duper bad, right? So the sexual feelings are submlimated or or painted with the very broad negative brush. Then they get married…. or not…. and then what? Not conducive to a healthy sex life.
Not making it up. She was using the example of why you shouldn’t french kiss. She stuck her finger in a flower pot with mud in it and then stuck it in a twinkie.
I also had an Institute teacher tell a class that french kissing simulated ‘other things’ and that anyone who french kissed and was unmarried needed to repent and talk to the bishop.
That is wrong on soooo many levels. Ugh.
I remember believing so solidly that sex would be a spiritual act. That it would be this intense expression of love for your spouse and that God, in some non-awkward way, would be a part of it. My testimony was shaken (within the box) after marriage when I realized that wasn’t it at all…sex was very carnal. I never really experienced the guilt part (but I always followed the rules??) but I can see how others would. I do remember feeling like “the line” was fuzzy. So I made up my own rules. I was very comfortable kissing boys within certain limits as well as with moving right into intimacy after marriage. I was just shaken up a bit (spiritually) by the reality of what sex really was…and the definition my religion had given me. I wish someone had told me the real story, i.e, “it feels great, totally carnal, feel free to totally enjoy yourself and the great, bonding part comes afterward when you talk to each other and bare your souls.”
I would love to sit down and have a discussion with you guys on how you think it would be best to encourage smart sexual conduct without their being guilt though. I mean, if you tell your kids some choices are better than others, they’re going to feel guilty if they choose what you’ve defined as the lesser choice. They’re, of course going to think that you’re going to be disappointed with them. I think if believing parents could have a more open dialogue with their children and normalize sex to some degree (and of course combat the crazy object lessons) they can have these strict sexual codes and their kids can still have successful sexual relationships within the bonds of marriage. You’re so right that more than half the time, the context in which sex is discussed at church has the potential to be damaging….sigh….it makes a parents job that much tougher.
I am trying very, very hard to instill a healthy view of sexuality in my kids. I have tried to teach them that it is great, but that it should be saved for marriage. We talk about sex quite frankly, and I have tried to help them understand that they WILL want it before they are married (in all likelihood), and that this is normal (and not “bad”)- but that Heavenly Father has asked us to save it for marriage. So….would my kids feel guilty if they had sex before marriage? Probably. Is it because my teachings have been faulty, or designed to create guilt? I don’t think so. I think it is very important to differentiate between guilt and shame, here. Most of us, when we have done something that goes against our own moral code, will feel some guilt at not being true to what we believe. Call it cognitive dissonance if you will- whatever. When we behave in a manner that is not true to our core beliefs, it tends to cause some discomfort. I think this is a good thing. This is what leads to repentance, to trying to be our best selves. What I think is unhealthy is when we feel discomfort about what we have done because it does not align with what someone else would have us believe is important- in other words, when someone else causes us to feel shame.
If we have helped our children to gain an understanding of the sanctity of intimate relationships, then they may feel some guilt when these relationships are entered into at the wrong time, as a result of their own understanding. If we have merely provided our children with a list of (incredibly high) expectations, and shown disapproval each time one of these expectations is not met, we are just shaming them. Subtle difference, maybe, but I think a very important one.
Meggie, I really like your sex-positive approach and focus on how natural sex is. And, I agree with your thoughts about the damaging nature of shame. My parents had a similar approach and, although I still had guilt and anxiety about sex, both before and after marriage, I think my overall feelings have been positive. As Geoff mentioned, having parents model appropriate sexual behaviour is very powerful.
However, I think, in reality, it is very difficult to separate guilt and shame. I was raised in a sex-positive home, but I think it is impossible to escape the bizarre dislocation of going to the temple in the morning with sex next to murder and having the full-steam ahead 30 minutes later (not to mention endless modesty lessons and licked cupcakes). Feeling badly when you’ve done something that goes against your own moral code can be a great teacher and facilitate repentance or change, but I don’t think that is the same as guilt.
I think children (and especially young women) need to feel empowered about their sexuality. I think they need to realize that it is natural, healthy and has moral implications, but is not beyond their control.
For our 40th wedding anniversary we had our 4 daughters together at home and discussing their childhood. They all remembered with glee that their parents had quiet time on Sunday afternoons. They all realised this was code for sex. They appearently took turns listening at the door and reporting. They claim this along with open discussion of the subject as required, contributed to a healthy attitude to sex on their part.
The most important message is that sex is good, their parents enjoy it, but it’s preferable to enjoy it within marriage for Mormons, but the limes of communication will always be open and love continue.
@Geoff, this is a great story. Thanks for sharing. Our kids similarly laugh and roll their eyes when they come to the door and find the door locked.