Polygamy and later sexual repression

Discussions toward a better understanding of LDS doctrine, history, and culture. Discussion of Christianity, religion, and faith in general is welcome.
User avatar
Palerider
Posts: 1164
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 8:44 am

Re: Polygamy and later sexual repression

Post by Palerider » Thu Jan 10, 2019 5:51 pm

2bizE wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:24 pm
alas wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 3:43 pm
2bizE wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 5:00 pm
With as many wives as Brigham Young had I have some questions.
1) Did he or his wives ever get sexually transmitted diseases?
2) If you had sex every night with a different woman would your penis get raw or painful?
I really don’t want to contemplate either of your questions.
I can understand that. My question is serious though, not the normal wiseass cracks I make.
I would guess there's no way to know on question number one unless you had access to some old family secrets. SOMEONE probably knew way back when but would that type of info survive??? Kind of doubt it.

Regarding question number two, I would assume that Brigham learned early on that there should be "moderation in all things".... ;)
"There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily."

"Truth will ultimately prevail where there is pains to bring it to light."

George Washington

User avatar
alas
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 2:10 pm

Re: Polygamy and later sexual repression

Post by alas » Fri Jan 11, 2019 1:46 pm

Palerider wrote:
Thu Jan 10, 2019 5:51 pm
2bizE wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:24 pm
alas wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 3:43 pm


I really don’t want to contemplate either of your questions.
I can understand that. My question is serious though, not the normal wiseass cracks I make.
I would guess there's no way to know on question number one unless you had access to some old family secrets. SOMEONE probably knew way back when but would that type of info survive??? Kind of doubt it.

Regarding question number two, I would assume that Brigham learned early on that there should be "moderation in all things".... ;)

OK, taking the questions seriously, because, hey who doesn’t wonder about things like this?

What we know is limited, so some of this is just guess work.

But their knowledge of sexually treated disease was really limited. They did not know germ theory, so had no idea how certain diseases spread. But we have to assume that Mormons were people too and just as vulnerable as the rest of the population to getting such diseases. But would they have known it if they did have it.

I think one reason virgins were preferred over the millennia was that men who only had sex with women who were virgin at the first time didn’t give the men disease and over time things that keep us healthy become inborn preferences, sort of like instinct. We know them without knowing them. It is like without knowing about bubonic plague, humans do not like to live in places infested with rats and mice. There is an instinctive aversion to rats. In the same way, men who preferred young virgins would have healthier lives, wives, and children, so would more likely pass on their genes into the next generation. I don’t think it was just about the women being young and fertile, but also being pure and disease free.

So, even though some wives got passed from man to man to man, polygamy was really closer to monogamy because the men were supposed to marry virgins, and as long as none of the husbands also went to the brothels, and only had sex with women with limited sexual experience, the STDs would be avoided.

Now the single men who frequented the brothels, I am sure many of them had and passed along STDs, but since disease was still very mysterious, we really don’t know what the men had.

Consider, we really don’t know what BY died of. And we have written history of him being sick, but was it appendicitis or arsenic poisoning? There are theories. We look back at people like this and sometimes we can figure out symptoms and match it up with a disease. Other times, there is no record of their symptoms. Another famous man, Edgar Allen Poe, he died of something unknown at the time. But enough was recorded about his illness that many feel he died of rabies, but there is no record of an animal bite, and at the time, they didn’t know enough to ask.

About question #2, I don’t think there was any pressure on him to have sex any more than he wanted. We know he didn’t bother visiting any of his wives he didn’t want to. So, I think the idea that a man married polygamously would have lots and lots of sex is just bunk. Why would he have any more than he wanted. He had no obligation to keep his wives happy. So, I am pretty sure the men never suffered any discomfort from too much or forced sex.

It was not like the scene in Little Big Man where his wife brought her “sisters” and said how their husbands had been killed and they had no man to hunt meet for them and since he was such a good husband and provider, could he please take these women to provide food in the cold winter months. He says yes, but then his wife and all the new wives expect him to service them sexually, so he drags himself from one bed to the next trying to make them all happy.

The men were under no obligation to even visit the wives, let alone satisfy them sexually.

User avatar
slavereeno
Posts: 959
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:30 am
Location: QC, AZ

Re: Polygamy and later sexual repression

Post by slavereeno » Fri Jan 11, 2019 2:18 pm

Rob4Hope wrote:
Tue Jan 01, 2019 9:00 am
One of the sad parts of what you have mentioned is the negating of women as sexual people.
I will second Rob here, I never got the impression that women in the church were anything but asexual. Most of them performed their "wifely duties" as a burden to bear. In the cultural environment I was raised in, the sexual component of divorce was some combination of hubby to horny and wife not being willing enough to perform those "duties." I still have a perception that men are more sexually driven, as a generality. If the sexuality bell curves of men and women as populations were compared the male mean would be higher than the female. This is something stemming from way back in my upbringing and seems to be supported by all the anecdotal evidence to which I have been exposed in TBM-land. I have no idea how this perception maps to reality.

User avatar
Rob4Hope
Posts: 1143
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 1:43 pm
Location: Salt Lake City -- the Motherland!!

Re: Polygamy and later sexual repression

Post by Rob4Hope » Fri Jan 11, 2019 4:05 pm

slavereeno wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 2:18 pm
Rob4Hope wrote:
Tue Jan 01, 2019 9:00 am
One of the sad parts of what you have mentioned is the negating of women as sexual people.
I will second Rob here, I never got the impression that women in the church were anything but asexual. Most of them performed their "wifely duties" as a burden to bear. In the cultural environment I was raised in, the sexual component of divorce was some combination of hubby to horny and wife not being willing enough to perform those "duties." I still have a perception that men are more sexually driven, as a generality. If the sexuality bell curves of men and women as populations were compared the male mean would be higher than the female. This is something stemming from way back in my upbringing and seems to be supported by all the anecdotal evidence to which I have been exposed in TBM-land. I have no idea how this perception maps to reality.
I think that somehow the church has caused some of this problem. Hence, this thread. Just trying to see if I can find some of the root.

Alas mentioned the old Victorian ideal where women were either considered spiritual or whore, but not much in between. I know that the current culture tends to support this in the church. Girls are considered the 'gate keepers' of male sexuality, and even down at the good old BYU, if a girl reports a rape, they open a file ON HER!.......

User avatar
alas
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 2:10 pm

Re: Polygamy and later sexual repression

Post by alas » Sat Jan 12, 2019 9:27 am

slavereeno wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 2:18 pm
Rob4Hope wrote:
Tue Jan 01, 2019 9:00 am
One of the sad parts of what you have mentioned is the negating of women as sexual people.
I will second Rob here, I never got the impression that women in the church were anything but asexual. Most of them performed their "wifely duties" as a burden to bear. In the cultural environment I was raised in, the sexual component of divorce was some combination of hubby to horny and wife not being willing enough to perform those "duties." I still have a perception that men are more sexually driven, as a generality. If the sexuality bell curves of men and women as populations were compared the male mean would be higher than the female. This is something stemming from way back in my upbringing and seems to be supported by all the anecdotal evidence to which I have been exposed in TBM-land. I have no idea how this perception maps to reality.
When they study sexual desire, that picture of the women as disinterested in sex is untrue. But then most stereotypes contain major distortions. Women are trained to hide interest in sex, because they don’t want a reputation as a slut, so women are socially forced to hide interest. And even in courting situations, women are the ones most hurt by the consequences such as pregnancy, so women have to constantly put on the brakes. It isn’t that women are not interested, it is that the consequences are too high. Women are trained to put on the brakes, while men are not. If a woman acts interested, most men will judge her as a slut and avoid her. It goes back to virgin/whore. Men are partially taught, partially instinctive avoid “loose” women. So, this puts pressure on women to act virginal and asexual.

Men have a curve that actually peaks at about 19, then tapers off for the rest of their life. Women have a slower rising curve, and slower tapering off curves, so by age thirty when women peak, men are actually just slightly lower than women at that point, and by 40, most men are lower than most women by noticeable amounts, and by 50, well, that is a stereotype that has some truth of the cougar, older woman looking for younger man just for sex, because by 50, most men are has beens while women get a menopausal boost.

So, all these men getting divorced at 35-45, claiming the wife isn’t interested in sex, well instead of divorce, they need (a) to learn how to be a better lover, because their technique stinks and they have been too selfish and in too much of a hurry. (b) stop looking at the women who haven’t had three kids already (c) get their wife into therapy for sexual repression, but this one is least likely. There was a famous sexual therapist who said there is no such thing as a fridgid woman, only clumsy men. What he meant is that men’s sexuality is easy and obvious, so when their partner doesn’t climax as easy as he does, he is too selfish to wait, so she is never satisfied and learns not to want sex because it is frustrating and all for him. Women have to learn how. And their partner has to learn what works and to satisfy her before he finishes up.

Putting most of the premarital sex avoidance on the female is really unfair because while 19 year old men can’t think of anything but sex, the women are not really that far behind.

User avatar
Rob4Hope
Posts: 1143
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 1:43 pm
Location: Salt Lake City -- the Motherland!!

Re: Polygamy and later sexual repression

Post by Rob4Hope » Sat Jan 12, 2019 9:36 am

Alas....what do you think this training is in the LDS church that reinforces this asexual thing? I can only speak from my limited experience (though limited, it is a LOT more than most I know!). What I've noticed is the asexual trend for women is generational--the new kids don't seem to have as much of this going on: girls are sexual and its not held against them--but those who are older tend to have this trend more. However, one of the stronger things is it seems more pronounced in the traditional patriarchal type religions, LDS being one of the primary examples.

It seems the more patriarchial the religion, the more suppression happens. That is my speculation, but I'm curious as to your thoughts? And in your mind, any ideas on where to trace the roots of this?

User avatar
alas
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 2:10 pm

Re: Polygamy and later sexual repression

Post by alas » Sat Jan 12, 2019 10:28 am

Yes, there s more sexual repression of women in patriarchal religions. I think in patriarchy there s a deep distrust of women and it is manifest in control of women and women as property. Rather than a willingness to EARN the woman’s love and loyalty, they take these as their due. Because having a penis makes them SOOOO much better than lowly women that the women should fall all over themselves in their magestic presence and they are terribly insulted when the women do not agree with their high opinion of themselves. It is easier to demand respect than to earn it, even if you have to beat your wife into submission.

Women are often forced into marriage, married as children, and otherwise given little choice in who they marry, often forced into marrying an older man, because men are not ready to support a wife till about thirty, but a woman can be married off at 15.

In this type of environment to keep a woman under your control and sexually faithful, you have to deprive them of all kinds of things, so we have women in Saudi Arabia forbidden to drive a car or go out in public without a male relative. The old joke about keeping her barefoot and pregnant.

In more egalitarian societies, where the women have the freedom to go have an affair, the women don’t actually HAVE more affairs, but they have much happier relationships. So, the men give up the control of women, but they gain more respect and loyalty. Thus cutting down on affairs because the women are more free to find a man they love and actually respect in the first place.

As to how women are taught to be asexual, or at least to act that way, it is how chastity is taught. Women are taught that boys are horney lust machines, while NOTHINGis said about the girls own sexual desire or response. Sexual desire is portrayed as horrifying sin and only hookers feel sexual desire. Even in the minimal sex Ed in school, everyone pretends that girls don’t have sexual feelings. With the boys, they warn against it as dangerous and sin, but with the girls, not only is it dangerous and sinful, nobody but nobody has those feelings. So, when a girl responds to her first kiss, she is sure that something is wrong with her, because she is not supposed to feel that. It isnt normal. So, rather than just feeling sinful, she feels like a sinful freak. So, she tries to squash such feelings down, and 15 years later, when she finally marries, she is so in the habit of pushing the feelings down and doesn’t know how to switch gears and allow the feelings.

User avatar
alas
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 2:10 pm

Re: Polygamy and later sexual repression

Post by alas » Sat Jan 12, 2019 11:07 am

Oh, and with the generarational difference, young people today are growing up with a lot more media and the media is a lot more sexually open. So, whatever religion teaches is completely overwhelmed by what is available on TV and movies, and I don’t even know what internet and social media provide because I am not into that. So, a kids whole “sex education” in my generation was nothing but DON’T. And on TV, Lucy and Ricky (of the old I Love Lucy show) have twin bed in their bedroom, and it was confusing because we all knew our parents shared a bed, so why on TV are married people sleeping in separate beds. All media pretended that sex didn’t exist. Schools cut the reproductive system out of text books. And unless parents had the birds and the bees talk, all a child ever got was “Don’t even think about it.”

Now, G rated movies might show the couple in bed kissing, and R rated show the whole thing. Sex is all over the place, even in advertisements. Schools have sex Ed that cover just about everything, maybe depending on your state they fail to mention homosexuals. But transgender and transvestite, queer, bi, everything is in the news and kids quickly figure it all out

And I understand it was worse in my mother’s generation. She had a next door neighbor friend once who told her that she and her husband got married with ZERO knowledge about sexual things and had to figure it all out on their own on their wedding night. Good Catholic girl and good Mormon boy both totally naive at 22.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests