Ok, can someone give me a working definition to start from. On the living together thread, mph speculated on not following a course of action in order to avoid the appearance of evil. I thought that I understood, but with AJ's post, the reply I was going to make didn't make any sense.
Before I stick my foot in my mouth, what does the phrase actually mean? (besides not looking at pictures of celia)
Better to start a new thread for my own insanity than continue on that one.
Posted by UofUlawguy (Member # 5492) on :
1 Thessalonians 5:22 reads: "Abstain from all appearance of evil."
Most people use this phrase, or a slight variation thereof, to mean that you should avoid situations that look evil, even if they technically aren't. There are a few reasons, and they are legitimate, but they have practically nothing to do with the Bible verse. For example, you can damage your reputation or cause someone else to think that doing evil isn't so bad, if even you are doing it. Or, you can become complacent so that, when a situation comes up where you really are faced with evil, you have lost the impulse to avoid it. There are others as well.
However, the Bible verse simply means either "avoid evil whenever it appears" or "avoid every kind of evil." (the footnote in my Bible says that the Greek word translated as "appearance" actually means "kind.")
Posted by eslaine (Member # 5433) on :
*runs away*
Posted by Alexa (Member # 6285) on :
Isn't avoiding the appearance of evil deceptive? Isn't Satan the father of lies? It seems like a very superficial statement to me.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Well, I don't have any scriptural nor doctrinal quotes to back up my feelings. But here's how I feel:
I feel that I have a certain responsibility as a member of my Church and bearer of the Priesthood. In a very real, but very limited sense, I have been called to be a representitive of Christ. Part of that responsibility is to not sully His name, nor the name of His church. So I will try to avoid doing things that will do that.
You asked. Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Alexa -- avoiding the appearance of evil is only deceptive if you aren't also avoiding the actual evil. As I see it, if I had to choose between *doing* evil and *appearing* to do evil, I'd choose to not do evil. At least, I hope I would.
Posted by UofUlawguy (Member # 5492) on :
Like I said, the principle people are referring to when they use the phrase is a good one, but the use of that particular scripture to support it is misplaced.
Posted by dangermom (Member # 1676) on :
Well, I was afraid of that. Lots of posts while I was typing, and now I won't make a lot of sense. Oh well.
I'm going to pull an example out of the Bible to illustrate what I think of that phrase. Paul, IIRC, says that there really isn't anything actually outright sinful about sitting down to eat meat that has been sacrificed to idols when you know quite well that the idol-god does not exist. BUT Christians should avoid it anyway, for the benefit of the weakest of their community who might be led astray by seeing that particular activity and making wrong conclusions from it.
I don't know if that's a very good example. But I think of it as avoiding doing something innocent which might look bad to people who could draw wrong conclusions and so be weakened. For a Mormon, that might be spending a heck of a lot of time in a bar. (Or, as one buddy of ours thinks, buying caffeine-free Dr. Pepper. I think he's a little over-zealous, myself--but then I have a DP weakness. )
AJ's comment about close opposite-sex friendships is actually a pretty good one (though she doesn't like it); while I have no objection to friendliness in a general, casual, group-friendship way, I do think it's a bad idea for two married people (man and woman married to other people) to be spending time alone together, confiding in each other things which should probably be better said to their spouses. Even if it's completely Platonic, not only does it look bad to other people and give rise to unhappy thoughts and suspicions, it really is a great formula for the beginnings of infidelity. Couples friendship = good idea, friendship of people who ought to be putting that energy into their marraiges = bad idea.
It's not always easy to define, and different people have different thoughts on it.
[ April 09, 2004, 12:56 PM: Message edited by: dangermom ]
Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
UofU, thanks.
Erik, you are too funny for your own good.
mr_porteiro_head, Can you elaborate on that with application to living with someone you aren't married to but also aren't having sex with?
Posted by UofUlawguy (Member # 5492) on :
Dangermom, you're right. See, Paul did actually teach this principle, and in some depth. One of the best examples is, as you point out, when he wrote about the meat offered to idols.
Maybe this is why people get confused, and assume that the verse from Thessalonians is talking about the same thing.
Posted by Kama (Member # 3022) on :
quote:friendship of people who ought to be putting that energy into their marraiges = bad idea
But that's exactly the thing. It's not the energy you can put into your marriage. If your spouse isn't interested in discussing books, are you supposed to give it up because the person you like to discuss them with is of opposite sex?
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
UofULawGuy -- I never used that scripture to support what I was saying. Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
I have two female friends that were friends before I got married. Even from before I met my wife. I still have lunch with both of them every couple of weeks. I was even an usher in one of their weddings just a few weeks ago not because I was friends with the groom, but because I was friends with the bride.
My wife has become friends with both of them. She has no problem with my having lunch with either of them. Both of them work close to my office, but my home isn't. It would make no sense for my wife to drive all the way down here to "chaperone" us.
My marriage is fine and is not threatened in the least by my having female friends. If anything, sometimes it helps to let me know when I'm doing, or about to do, something stupid.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
*looks at Google ad at the bottom of page -- for smilies -- and s*
As far as the actual topic goes, I think that perhaps there are really two issues here. First, the whole "appearance of evil" thing. While I don't make all my choices with the concern that others may learn the wrong lessons from my actions paramount, it is a concern. And I know that some people think that they need not worry about whether their example will affect others -- but I disagree. I was aware of this concern before I had kids; but with kids, it has become something I think about a lot.
You can't tell kids, "Do as I say and not as I do" and expect it to work real well. (I know -- I keep trying! ) So I try to be very careful that my kids don't get the wrong impression about things that I do that are not wrong because of circumstances (like AJ's lying to hide Jews example in the other thread).
But that's not why I think that living together without being intimate is problematic. That has more to do with a line I've heard: Living together and sleeping together aren't the same thing, but either one tends to lead to the other. Before someone flames me, of COURSE it's a gross overgeneralization. There are couples who live together and are not sleeping together -- of this I have no doubt.
Actually, I wonder how healthy that is, anyway. If one has chosen to wait for marriage, for example, wouldn't it make more sense to avoid temptation? Not to make it a many-times-a-day thing, especially since resistance would tend to erode? Seems like that would put an awful lot of strain on the relationship. Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Celia -- Hmm, where to begin. As I think more about it, there are two reasons why I wouldn't do it -- avoiding evil and avoiding the appearance of evil.
First of all, the avoidance of evil. I am rememinded of the spoof quotes "Familiarity breeds attempt" and "Familiarity breeds". Let's go from the start that I believe that sexual relationships belong only within the confines of marriage. Let me cast my mind back to my bachelor days. As a normal guy with normal hormones, avoiding sex also meant avoiding getting close to sex. My body wanted sex too much to trust myself getting too close to the line. For me, living with any member of the opposite sex seems like asking for trouble in that regard. That goes quintuple if that woman were my girlfriend. We are already close to each other, emotionally and physically -- we like to kiss -- we are alone in private almost all the time -- Because of reasons like this, I don't think that it is appropriate for members of the opposite sex to live together.
But let's suppose that I had complete confidence in my will-power so that I *knew* that I didn't have to worry about that. (btw, I don't trust my will-power that much) Even if I wouldn't have those problems, by living that way myself I am encouraging others to do so, and therefore encouraging other people to risk those problems.
And yet again, you asked. I'm willing to share my thoughts/feelings, but it often has be be drawn out of me. I'm always afraid that when I state my opinion, others will feel like I am trying to force my beliefs on them.
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
I put this in the other thread, but it belongs here.
quote: Porter and I both believe in avoiding situations that lead to trouble where the dangers outweigh the benefits. We both interact with men and women, but I don't think either of us would seek to become "close buddies" with someone of the opposite sex. We might both be friends with them, though.
Here is just an example: We have a couple of friends who married each other. Porter has known both of them for a long time. He and she were talking on the phone once, talking about the summer jobs they had gotten. The places of work were close enough to each other that she suggested they might carpool together. Porter thought about it, and declined saying that he didn't think it would be wise. Both of them knew what he was talking about, too much time alone together. She agreed that it probably wasn't a good idea despite the convenience. I felt very proud to have such a wise, trustworthy husband.
Basically, we try to avoid situations that (we think) make it easier develop feelings for someone else. Is this what you mean about "avoiding the appearance of evil"? I don't think either of us has missed out on anything significant living this way. And since we both feel the same way, it hasn't come up much as an issue between us.
Posted by Annie (Member # 295) on :
I'm actually having an issue with something similar right now. One of my roommates is engaged. Although her fiancé and she have pretty high standards, he likes to "put her to bed" every night, which involves him falling asleep next to her and leaving after midnight. I maintain that this is inappropriate, whether or not they're doing anything "evil." This is a house full of girls and she shares a bedroom. There is no reason he should be here in her bedroom at all, much less asleep with her every night. My super-passive roommate who shares a room with the couple ends up sleeping on the couch more nights than not because she's uncomfortable being in her room when he's there. I argue that no matter how innocent your intentions and how far along your relationship, you should not be in your girlfriend's bedroom. Especially in a house full of LDS girls who have agreed to live high standards. They, on the other hand, see absolutely nothing wrong with it and are puzzled that I would deem something so "innocent" inappropriate. Hate to say it, but propriety never had anything to do with what was actually going on.
[ April 09, 2004, 01:21 PM: Message edited by: Annie ]
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
A story I put in the other thread.
My wife worked at Lenscrafters, making those glasses you can't afford.
A coworker, a muslim, is injured.
My wife is able to drive him to the nearby emergency room where his thumb can be sown up and the bleeding stopped.
He refused. He considered it wrong to get into a car with my wife, as they would be alone together.
While no one here is suggesting this extreme of a "Avoidance of the appearance of evil", there are others who turn this avoidance into dogma.
Its why they created Burkahs.
Its why the Taliban don't let women outside unless covered in mounds of hot clothing.
Avoiding the appearance of evil is fine. It is just the extremes of this avoidance that some fear.
Posted by UofUlawguy (Member # 5492) on :
mph:"I never used that scripture to support what I was saying."
If you have ever referred to "avoiding the appearance of evil," then you in fact did use that scripture, even if you didn't realize it. That's where the phrase comes from.
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
Extremes=bad. Unless you are talking about extremely tasty.
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
quote: If you have ever referred to "avoiding the appearance of evil," then you in fact did use that scripture, even if you didn't realize it. That's where the phrase comes from.
Just because a scripture in the Bible happens to use that phrase it cannot be used without referring to it? The phrase as it is commonly used is still a useful phrase.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
hey celia thanks for starting this thread.
Another extreme application (which I have actually had used against me) is that women should never be engineers, because they have to associate with MEN all day and thus even if they aren't it will give the appearance of being a slut.
Not too much different from Dan's Taliban example IMO.
Personally, I have gazillions of guy friends, the result of being a field that is probably 80% male. Fortunately the man I have isn't threatened by that.
To me this "avoiding appearance of evil" thing taken to the extreme also stunts the healthy development of self-control and personal responsibility for actions. My mother unfortunately is a tragic example of this. If you aren't trustworthy enough that you can't be trusted by your partner in a situation where members of the opposite sex are genuine friends, then I think the issues run much deeper and that this is only a symptom.
AJ
Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
beverly and mr_porteiro_head, I think we're coming from completely different cultures. I would be considerably more troubled if Bill decided not to carpool with a woman because of where it might lead than I would be if he were actaully carpooling with her.
You seem to see it as reasonably avoiding temptation, but I see it as, well, nothing. There is no temptation for me to be avoiding unless I feel tempted.
If I got that bit right, then I think I understand and thank you for taking the time to explain it.
Annie, you have no idea what an amazing act of willpower is required on my part to not respond to your post.
Edit: beverly, I think that when he used it by putting it in quotes, the assumption that he was quoting it isn't unreasonable.
[ April 09, 2004, 01:34 PM: Message edited by: celia60 ]
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I've been thinking about this lately, because I quit having lunch with my Lunch Buddy.
Lunch Buddy is a guy who works at the same building I do, and we used to have lunch once a week. It was great - I tell him the guy dramas, we'd talk about movies, I make fun of him and spin some BS story that he really should know better than to believe by now, and he'd talk about the house they were building. We eat in the cafeteria, and it was only once a week.
What started making me uncomfortable, though, was when he wanted to eat together more than once a week, and the time he suggested going out for lunch. It just bothered me. It also bothered me to hear much at all about his home life, because I didn't consider it any of my business. When I stopped suggesting and started getting e-mails about how much he missed lunch, that was it. It's hard to describe, but it felt like it went from "Fun to have lunch with you." to "I need to have lunch with you or my week is off." The second just wasn't okay.
I never said anything - just was busy several weeks in a row and avoided him after that - but I think that's okay. Since it was nothing overt that made me uncomfortable, I didn't to say anything overt back. For the level of friends we should have been (casual, convenience lunch buddies), what I did was fine. For close friends, it wasn't, but then, I never signed up for close friends anyway.
[ April 09, 2004, 01:36 PM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
here's something I posted to beverly on the other thread:
beverly part of the reason (on the other thread) why I have such a major problem with this, is because I don't think automatically limiting your friendships to 50% of the population is healthy. Plus I am a female (as is celia) in a "man's profession" if we didn't make friendships with men at both a professional and personal level we would be completely worthless at the jobs we do.
To tell me that I can't make friends with the guys in my calculus class, when I'm the only female in said class, seems rediculous and excessively prohibitive.
AJ
Posted by UofUlawguy (Member # 5492) on :
People too often talk about "avoiding the appearance of evil" (e.g. Paul's example of the meat offered to idols, which teaches that you should be aware of the effect your technically harmless but sinful-appearing actions have on those who are watching you), but forget that Jesus himself hung out with sinners all the time. When the pharisees, or even his own disciples, objected to how it looked for him to speak with, touch or even sit and share a meal with such people, what was his response?
There are important principles that trump "avoiding the appearance of evil." That's part of the reason why we are given reason/judgment; it takes some consideration to figure out when it would be best to avoid a situation, and when it is better to go ahead no matter how it looks to other people.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Celia -- for me, avoiding temptation doesn't mean avoiding succumbing to temptation -- it means avoiding being tempted.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
I have to admit.
If I could afford Brioni suits, I'd have a very difficult time avoiding the appearance of evil.
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
Celia, I guess there is a culture difference. But also keep in mind that if your husband carpooling with a woman led to him developing feelings for her, the worst thing that could happen is that your relationship is troubled by it or ends.
We have a family structure with kids at stake. It think with so much sobering responsibility, it is easier to feel tempted by something that seems less "weighed down". I think that is often the appeal in cases of adultery. Sometimes family life gets to be a heavy weight to bear. Other pastures can look greener under these circumstances. Hopefully such feelings are temporary, but they happen.
I think the quote marks were quoting the others on the board who have used it more than a Bible scripture, but I can see how that might be confusing.
[ April 09, 2004, 01:43 PM: Message edited by: beverly ]
Posted by Kama (Member # 3022) on :
mph - for me, the idea that being alone with a person of opposite sex would automatically be a temptation, would mean that there is something to be worried about in my relationship. But that's just me.
Posted by Kamisaki (Member # 6309) on :
Annie, out of curiosity, are you at BYU?
And ditto what UofU said. We have brains, we can use them.
Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
quote:Another extreme application (which I have actually had used against me) is that women should never be engineers, because they have to associate with MEN all day and thus even if they aren't it will give the appearance of being a slut.
Nah, you shouldn't be engineers because women suck at math and stuff. Everybody knows that.
mph and beverly, did you have any close friends of the opposite sex before marriage? In cases like that, do you think the friendship should be ended or at least, placed on a lower level?
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Kama -- you are putting words in my mouth. I never said that it would be an automatic temptation. But it *would* be a possibility.
[ April 09, 2004, 01:49 PM: Message edited by: mr_porteiro_head ]
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
The problem in Annie's post isn't one of appearance of evil - it's one of common courtesy. A woman is so uncomfortable with a man in her room that she sleeps on the couch, and her roommate doesn't see anything wrong with her actions?
A bedroom is a personal place. It is perfectly reasonable to expect when rooming with someone that the occupant of the room most nights will be the roommates.
Dagonee
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Well since celia won't respond to Annie's post I guess I will. (I'm not speaking on behalf of celia)
I think your roommate is being rude, but probably for completely different reasons than you do. I don't think she is morally in the wrong.
First of all if there was a contract even if only verbal when you all moved in together, that no guys would be in a girls room overnight (I actually agreed to a similar contract with some of my roomates) then she is actually sticking to the letter of the contract.
However the issue is really one of a shared room. In my dorm room we basically agreed that the ground rules were she could do whatever she wanted on her side of the room and I could do whatever I wanted on my side of the room. This included men. Three boys slept in our dorm room at various times. They weren't on my bed though. It was still my room, and I didn't care whether a guy was there or not, if I wanted to take a shower and walk out of the bathroom naked and embarrased my roommates boyfriend that was the guy's problem not mine. It was my room.
I think the roommate who is sharing the room with your friend should have the cajones to stand up to the friend and say this is my room too. If the behavior is unacceptable to her, then she has a right to address it. But it has to be within the pre-defined territorial rules. I drew the line at a different place than other people draw the line, but it was understood from the beginning. If the guy is not actually violating those territorial rules than she needs to deal with it. It isn't like they are making out from the sounds of it so really no offensive behavior is taking place. I was known to walk in on my roommate while they were making out. I simply walked over to my half of the room and began commencing with whatever I needed to do. She had the right to do the same with me and those were the rules we lived by. Most of the time she was very discreet. Our suitemate had a problem with her roommate. It wasn't the making out. It was the lack of courtesy in letting her know what to expect, who and when. However my suitemate stood her ground, and things got better.
But that is exactly the issue. The roomate is allowing the girl with the bf to walk all over and dictate the rules. It has to be a mutual agreement. If she can't treat her roomate with respect courtesy and get along I would suggest that most of her relationships with either sex will be unhealthy in the long term.
The give and take in a serious long term live-in relationship whether married or not is far more difficult than that of getting along with a roommate.
AJ
[ April 09, 2004, 02:02 PM: Message edited by: BannaOj ]
Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
beverly, mr_porteiro_head, I can only echo Kama's comment. I think I understand the point of view, I just don't happen to agree.
I don't think that spending time with a woman would lead to him having feelings for that woman. Something lacking between he and I might lead to him searching for another woman who might be conviently available from his carpool, sure.
Can you see from my point of view? For me, I'd have believe that our relationship was failing in order to think there was anything wrong with him having female friends.
Edit: For Kama's comment, it's not words in your mouth, but what they'd mean comming out of our mouths. As far as what you and I mean by avoiding temptation, aren't we just drawing lines in different parts of the sand?
[ April 09, 2004, 01:55 PM: Message edited by: celia60 ]
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
Banna, notice I didn't talk about "no frienships at all" with people of the opposite sex, I was referring to close friendships where the people involved spend a lot of time alone together.
Being friends with co-workers is fine, but if your work has you traveling together on business with a guy, it is more likely to lead to trouble.
Also, see my comments that someone married with kids is more likely to be attracted to the "unburdened" allure of an affair than a couple living together without children. For you, it is more true that you are together because you choose to be. If either of you stops choosing to be, your relationship ends.
But when you are married with kids, it is more complicated than that. I think there is more motivation to make things work when the people involved have fallen out of love with each other. I don't think that is a bad thing either. I think that is often (certainly not always) what is required for people to stay together for life.
Seriously now, those of you who are living together with no plans for marriage, do you really expect to still be together when you are old? Or do you have a more open mindset of "whatever happens happens"?
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:if I wanted to take a shower and walk out of the bathroom naked and embarrased my roommates boyfriend that was the guy's problem not mine. It was my room.
I'm pretty sure the guy had no problem with it, either. Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
So, Banna, Celia, Kama, my point is that these rules are more necessary for married couples with kids than those not.
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
My opinion on avoiding the appearance of evil: This may be a bit too general but it's the best I can do.
If you are doing something that is completely innocent and even looks completely innocent, you shouldn't avoid it just because SOMEONE out there thinks you might be doing something evil.
Example: A plumber comes in to fix the drain when hubby isn't home. There's nothing evil about a plumber entering your house and doing his job, even though someone out there might think that more is going on. I consider that to be their problem.
However doing something that looks evil or like it may lead to something evil should be avoided.
Example: Meeting the plumber at the door in a silk robe.
You may have NO intention of seducing or having sex with the plumber, but it certainly LOOKS like you might.
Other examples:
Okay: Opening a drink at the store before paying for it. (You HAVE to pay for it, though, even if it's disgusting.)
Not okay: Opening the drink, taking a sip, and then slipping it into your purse, even if you intend to pay for it at the counter. It doesn't LOOK like you're planning on paying for it.
(On second thought, opening the drink might be wrong, but for an entirely different reason.)
Okay: Letting someone of the opposite sex drive you to the hospital. (Assume you are married.)
Not okay: Letting that person bring you home at midnight, even if the circumstance was pure.
The point is that there will always be people out there that assume you are doing evil. You can't make them all happy. Just avoid what is obviously iffy, and don't worry about the rest.
-----
quote: mph - for me, the idea that being alone with a person of opposite sex would automatically be a temptation, would mean that there is something to be worried about in my relationship. But that's just me.
Then you underestimate the power of sex.
[ April 09, 2004, 01:57 PM: Message edited by: PSI Teleport ]
Posted by T_Smith (Member # 3734) on :
I do it as a favor to all girls out there that I avoid them. I'm just too much of a temptation for them to handle.
::rim shot::
Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
beverly, I would say that if a person thought that an affair was a way out of the burden of responsibilities of a family, they hadn't given it sufficient thought. That's just making it more complicated. The kind of person who reasoned it out to actually being less complicated would have to accept that only by starting a life without the wife and kids in it would do that. That kind of person could do that just as easily with or without the "other woman".
AJ, that's not what I meant.
[ April 09, 2004, 02:02 PM: Message edited by: celia60 ]
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
quote:quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- mph - for me, the idea that being alone with a person of opposite sex would automatically be a temptation, would mean that there is something to be worried about in my relationship. But that's just me. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then you underestimate the power of sex.
To turn this around PSI, I find in general that people from conservative religious backgrounds OVERESTIMATE the power of sex, and thus actually give it more power "artificially" then it actually has in nature.
AJ
Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
I totally agree.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
celia I know it wasn't what you wanted to say, and I think I know what you did want to say as well.
I clarified above that I wasn't speaking for you.
AJ
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
I think a lot of the affairs that married people get into are "escapes" from their normal, stressful, family life. I think they usually happen because the affair appears "rosier" than what they face every day. They count on not getting caught, and they probably are not thinking to clearly in the first place.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Celia -- I'm not trying to get you to agree with me. Yes, I can see where you are coming from.
I was specifically asked my opinion, and I shared it. Then you shared your feelings, and did it by saying why you think that my actions are too extreme. I got defesive. That was not good. I'm sorry. I'm still new at sharing things that matter over a forum.
BTW, that was a very good explination about Kama's comment. I'll have to remember that.
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
quote: To turn this around PSI, I find in general that people from conservative religious backgrounds OVERESTIMATE the power of sex, and thus actually give it more power "artificially" then it actually has in nature.
I only said that because it happens that sometimes people have affairs that they never expected to have. They might have a pretty good relationship with their spouse, but then they get emotionally involved with someone they know, and it's difficult to get out.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:if a person thought that an affair was a way out of the burden of responsibilities of a family, they hadn't given it sufficient thought. That's just making it more complicated.
I don't think that most affairs happen because a person reasons it out and decides that it would be a good idea.
Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
One more time.
If you had close friends of the opposite sex before you got married, would you end the friendship? I can understand not actively seeking new friendships like this, but I'm curious how you feel about pre-existing friendships.
Posted by jeniwren (Member # 2002) on :
I like what Beverly had to say about this. That's about where my line is too...you can be friends with the opposite sex (not your spouse), but not *close* friends. Aside from what it looks like on the outside, the potential temptations it might eventually cause are not worth flirting with.
I think it really is a balance. I made myself nuts over this issue at one point, to the point I needed a counsellor to get myself untwisted. I was so full of the "avoiding the appearance of evil" idea that I started obsessing about Halloween. Should we get dressed up, carve a pumpkin, get candy, etc. or would it make us look too worldly? I hated to deprive myself or my kids of the fun of Halloween. Living in a brand new neighborhood where most of our neighbors are not Christians, this started to take on epic proportions. I found myself examining *everything*. It got just a bit neurotic. The counselor helped me see that I needed to chill out. He helped me see that one of the things I *love* about Christ is his sense of freedom and choice. He didn't *force* anyone to follow him. The counselor then wryly told me that he had never, in all his years, heard of anyone being put off Christianity because some Christians went trick or treating. It only took a couple of good talks before I got unwound.
So yeah, this is one that is so bad if you take it to extremes.... but is equally bad if you don't do it at all.
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
Oh, as a side note, perhaps developing feeling for the girl you carpool with does mean something is wrong with your marriage. We have had things wrong with our marriage before, all the better reason not to endanger it by encouraging temptation. Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
quote: The counselor helped me see that I needed to chill out. He helped me see that one of the things I *love* about Christ is his sense of freedom and choice. He didn't *force* anyone to follow him.
Of course, the ones who didn't burned in hell, but...
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
zgator -- I'll tell you what happened to me. I had a female friend before I ever started dating my wife. We were pretty close. After I got married, I hoped that the two of them would become friends. It didn't happen. As a result, I let my friendship with that girl fade. We still keep in touch, but we have never been close since.
It saddens me that I lost that friendship. But my marriage is much more important than any other friendship.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
I'm also the sort of person though (and I demand in a relationship that someone loves me for the person that I am without major changes of personality) that will make comments about cute guys that are walking by. Steve will do the same about cute girls. We both know when it comes down to it that the other person is coming home to us at the end of the day, not running off and having a torrid affair. I think the openness is actually what strengthens our relationship, and why it has lasted for nearly five years.
To use an actual hatrack example, I came down with a crush on Happy Camper, while going to an OSC signing without Steve. I told Steve about it and he was vastly amused. Especially when you start comparing vocations and personality traits between Happy Camper and Steve, and realize how dang similar they are. In fact I think Steve, would be amused to meet HC because they have so much in common IRL that they would probably get along quite well.
Did Steve get mad at me for said crush, or consider me unfaitful? No. Because I wasn't. It didn't even cross his mind that I would have been unfaithful, regardless of temptation. He wouldn't mind if I even saw Happy Camper again in a Hatrack context. Why? Because he trusts me.
I suspect some people would consider me unfaithful for coming down with the crush in the first place though. I guess that is where the line is in different places.
AJ
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
I don't think a crush is unfaithful, only allowing it to take root in your mind to the point you have fantasies about it.
Posted by dangermom (Member # 1676) on :
Well, zgator, I did. I was still very close with my ex-boyfriend when I got married; we hung out a lot and were good friends. Once I was married, he kept calling and wanting to hang out alone with me. Which I found irritating for several reasons; I was a newlywed, I wanted to spend a lot of time alone with DangerDad doing things we hadn't done before and generally get used to married life, and he was not acknowledging that my life had changed at all. I thought it was kind of rude of him to so explicitly not want DDad around. And, to be honest, he was kind of an obnoxious guy and I was getting tired of being so close with him. And also, I was sensitive to DDad's belief that married people should not spend lots of time alone with opposite-sex people (something he was extremely sensitive to after his mission). He wasn't hanging out alone with his girl physics buddy, but making sure to hang out with her in groups. I could do the same.
Over time, ex-boyfriend and I spent less time together, though we occasionally met for lunch, etc. Now we live far apart and sporadically email each other about our kids.
Posted by Kama (Member # 3022) on :
quote:Kama -- you are putting words in my mouth. I never said that it would be an automatic temptation. But it *would* be a possibility.
Okay, slight misunderstanding. Sorry.
Nonetheless, for me, even the possibility would be a signal that there is something to take care of in my relationship.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Kama -- there is *always* something to work on in a marriage.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
zgator, emphatically no. I have close friendships with several guys now, that I have known for over a decade. I have no intention of ending them Steve or no Steve.
I actually need to get AJ's hall of guy friends, posted on our internet site sometime. I was laughing to myself as I looked through some photo albums the other day. Almost every attractive guy in those photos is still my friend and also happily married, and I was invited to the wedding.
The hard part is finding a guy who trusts you enough that he isn't threatened by your relationships with other guys. But it is a neccesity for any relationship which I would ever be in. I guess in a very real way it is an "Are You Strong Enough to be My Man" litmus test for me. If a guy can't handle my relationships with other guys without getting jealous than he isn't strong enough to be my man.
Of course fair is fair, and therefore you would never hear a peep from me about any female friends he might have either.
AJ
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
Kama, I don't think any relationship is so perfect that there aren't things that need to be taken care of or improved upon. I think the people who avoid situations with people of the opposite sex are making sure those "things that need to be taken care of" don't get exploited.
added: Sorry, Porteiro, I'll let you defend yourself now.
I really almost typed out Pot-Head. Glad I didn't.
[ April 09, 2004, 02:22 PM: Message edited by: PSI Teleport ]
Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
mph, I'm happy that my wife likes both my friends.
My wife still has lunch with an ex-boyfriend occasionally. She broke up with him because she didn't have romantic feelings for him, more like brother/sister feelings. We are both good friends with he and his wife. I go to Islands of Adventure with his wife once in a while because neither of our spouses can stand to ride roller coasters.
AJ, you know you have a crush on HC because he's a geotechnical engineer. Women can't help but feel that way about us.
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
Zgator, I am trying to think of close friendships we had with the opposite sex before we got married so I can answer your question. Someday I will tell the tale of our courtship, for it is an interesting tale. I'm not sure either of us were bosom buddies with a member of the opposite sex when we started dating.
But I think that if we had been, the nature of those friendships probably would have changed while we were dating. We probably would be spending most of our spare time with each other and one on one time with a friend of the opposite sex would be cut down on. Why do friends spend one on one time with each other? Emotional intimacy. Our desire for emotional intimacy was being filled already. Most (not all) of our time with friends would be in social groups or one on one with friends of our own sex (because that need is not met in our relationship alone).
Both of us feel that our marriage relationship is our deepest friendship, and we both are somewhat introverted. Our need for other intimate frienships with the opposite sex are satisfied in each other. Porter doesn't feel much need for outside social interaction, but I know that when he gets it he is much happier. He has guy friends. I am also often go for long periods of time unaware of my social needs, but am happier having those needs fulfilled in girlfriends. We both have couple friends. We have no problem being friends and friendly with people in general no matter what sex they are. But because of our feelings on the issue, we don't develop close friendships with the opposite sex and don't feel the lack.
Edit: Oops, Porter, I forgot about her. Long story.
[ April 09, 2004, 02:33 PM: Message edited by: beverly ]
Posted by Theca (Member # 1629) on :
Funny, I just saw a new patient today. Her husband will only allow her to see female doctors. Furthermore, she is not allowed to take birth control to help with some female problems she is having because he thinks that taking birth control would mean she would feel free to engage in extramarital affairs. He has had a vasectomy.
It sounds like he thinks he is removing temptation with these rules...But what happens to trust?
Posted by Da_Goat (Member # 5529) on :
quote:Avoiding the Appearance of Evil
Good idea. I recommend cosmetic surgery.
*ducks*
Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
quote: I'm still new at sharing things that matter over a forum.
Pay no attention to the join date. I'm new at this as well. I'm starting from your viewpoint to illustrate the differences between them. Not to try to convert your way of thinking, but to give you a reference to see mine from.
beverly, we're just going to keep saying the same things at each other, aren't we?
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
PSI I think there is a difference between fantasy and action.
Jesus said that anyone who lusts in his heart has commited adultery. Clearly this is an impossible standard. There are shades of grey as far as obbessive fantasies go if they hinder your real life, but actions are where the judgment calls in the human realm are made.
AJ
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
I had about a dozen very close male friends before I met my husband. Every one of those relationships dissolved when I got serious with Jes. I'm not sure if it's because they couldn't compare to him, or if it's because I wasn't interesting anymore since I was taken. I don't think they were after me, but I could be wrong.
Posted by dangermom (Member # 1676) on :
Theca: It sounds like he wants to control her life. That's not "avoiding the appearance of evil," that's irrational control issues.
[ April 09, 2004, 02:25 PM: Message edited by: dangermom ]
Posted by Rappin' Ronnie Reagan (Member # 5626) on :
I was talking with two friends of mine recently about having guy friends. They both said that they wouldn't be close friends with someone of the opposite sex because they have boyfriends. But that doesn't make sense to me, and I told them that. And then they just say that because I don't have a boyfriend, I don't understand.
I'm glad there are people here who agree with me. I was beginning to think I was crazy.
Posted by Kama (Member # 3022) on :
Of course. But some things are more serious than other.
Not wanting to get in a car with a person of opposite sex would constitute a very serious problem to me, because it would be a sign that something is wrong.
(I posted the reply before I read the remaining part of the thread, so I'm repeating things celia already said).
It's just different points of view on the matter.
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
quote: PSI I think there is a difference between fantasy and action.
But what if you're fantasizing about sex with that person while having sex with your husband (SO)? Do you think he'd be happy to hear that your fantasy of this other guy is more interesting to you than HE is? Would you be willing to TELL him about the fantasies you're having? (Not that you are.)
I DON'T think there's much of a difference.
Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
dangermom, I can see where your case would have been a problem. Being friends with someone who is married or involved includes being aware of that relationship and realizing that it will come first. It sounds like your ex didn't feel that way.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
zgator You know my bf IS a geotech right? It was eerily scary in a way. I suspect it is deeply freudian on my part, since my father was a Civil/environmental...
Though while his screen name escapes me there was a regular that is an EE that was posting last night in some thread that I would have married at the drop of a hat.
AJ
Posted by T_Smith (Member # 3734) on :
I just want to say that flirting with me, kissing me, and even professing your undying love for me is not evil, regardless of your relationship status. Please, continue to indulge.
Edited to add: Celia, remember that letter I sent to you and Bill?
[ April 09, 2004, 02:30 PM: Message edited by: T_Smith ]
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
quote: Would you be willing to TELL him about the fantasies you're having?
Yes.
(He is normally very amused by them.)
AJ
[ April 09, 2004, 02:32 PM: Message edited by: BannaOj ]
Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
what a relief.
edit: yes, and i'm still not making him a ritual sacrifice so that i can be your 30th wife. i already have 1st wife status here!
[ April 09, 2004, 02:33 PM: Message edited by: celia60 ]
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
quote: I just want to say that flirting with me, kissing me, and even professing your undying love for me is not evil, regardless of your relationship status.
That's not what you told ME! Posted by T_Smith (Member # 3734) on :
Yeah, and you took it seriously.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote: Jesus said that anyone who lusts in his heart has commited adultery. Clearly this is an impossible standard.
Just because it is impossible to be perfect in this regard, that's no reason to accept defeat, or to justify acceptable levels of lust.
edit: I realize that this sounds offensive. Sorry. Let me say that what I think Jesus was saying was that it *does* matter what we think, and should stop just trying to stop our evil actions, but our evil thoughts too.
[ April 09, 2004, 02:38 PM: Message edited by: mr_porteiro_head ]
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
Wow! Fast moving thread. Sorry, Celia, I didn't realize we were getting into that pattern. I am not trying to convert either. I am happy to agree to disagree.
Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
quote: Why do friends spend one on one time with each other? Emotional intimacy.
Or because it's convenient to carpool? Or because nobody else they know was interested in seeing that movie? Or lunch was easier to coordinate with 2 people than 6...it just isn't that cut and dry.
[ April 09, 2004, 02:38 PM: Message edited by: celia60 ]
Posted by Theca (Member # 1629) on :
Dangermom: Yes, I totally agree, I'm just frustrated.
Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
AJ, I had no idea Steve was a geotech. You're a lucky girl to have snagged one.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
You are assuming that I interpret the Bible the same way you do m_p_h.
(I was telling you the way I interpret it, I realize it isn't an LDS interpretation, but I think it would possibly fit in well at the Church of Bob)
AJ
[ April 09, 2004, 02:43 PM: Message edited by: BannaOj ]
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
Nathan, you can't just kiss your way outta....
...heh...
...oh well, maybe you can.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Celia -- I think beverly was talking about why friends choose to do so when they are just enjoying theirselves.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
And the vasectomy lets him do what, exactly? Anytime you use the word "allowed" with respect to a spouse, there's something seriously wrong.
Dagonee
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
AJ -- I edited my previous post. Please go back and read it. Then, feel free to disagree. Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
Point taken.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Dagonee -- the law of gravity does not allow my wife to jump to the moon. Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
grin... I edited too m_p_h
AJ
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
Oh, another thought on this "married people having close friends of the opposite sex". Maybe Porter and I are in the minority, but we both have noticed in our lives before we got married that when we got close to someone of the opposite sex, we usually developed feeling for them. Extrapolate that to our lives now, and that is not something we want to encourage. That might effect why we feel as we do.
I understand that many people are OK with being in a relationship and having crushes on someone else. While we understand that this happens, we don't think it should be encouraged. I don't think either of us believes it is good to fantasize about being with someone else either. We haven't talked about it much, but I think we both believe in fidelity of thought as well as action. Certainly infidelity of thought is a much more minor offense, but still not good. Are we unusual this way?
Posted by jeniwren (Member # 2002) on :
quote:If you had close friends of the opposite sex before you got married, would you end the friendship? I can understand not actively seeking new friendships like this, but I'm curious how you feel about pre-existing friendships.
From the perspective of an existing female friend to a man who got married: If it's a VERY close friendship and it can't be chilled, then yeah, it may make more sense to end that friendship.
I had a really close male friend for years. We met when I was married to my first husband, and there were sparks. Our friendship became deep, but we never acted on the sparks. A year or so before my divorce, he married. We kept the friendship going; it had not been a factor in my divorce. His wife and I got along fine, though in retrospect, I think she made the effort to like me more because she knew I wasn't going away than because she actually did like me. His marriage started having problems, and he would call me two and three times a week about it.
It became very clear to me that being any part of their relationship was a huge mistake. I ended the friendship with great difficulty, and have not spoken with him since. I still miss him sometimes, but am grateful for the way things turned out. I think maybe the friendship was too deep to share with a marriage. I don't know if they reconciled. I hope so.
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
Bev- No.
added: It seems to me that most impure actions begin as impure thoughts.
[ April 09, 2004, 02:47 PM: Message edited by: PSI Teleport ]
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
Um, before this carpool thing gets out of hand, the problem is not being in a car alone on occasion with someone, the problem is with arranging to be in the car with them 5 days a week, twice a day. Just wanted to specify. Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
most? most? aside from reflexes, do any actions not start with thoughts? Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
No, celia. And that's why you need to keep your thoughts clean.
Posted by T_Smith (Member # 3734) on :
Well, when food is placed in front of me, I tend not to think before gobbling it up.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Also to clarify that specific carpool situation, that woman and I would have been spending 10 hours a week together alone.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
quote:Good idea. I recommend cosmetic surgery.
File down the horns on a belt sander.
AJ, I too find that sharing fantasies removes the obsessive power of them. Plus, I like knowing exactly what kicks his hindbrain into action -- then I know what buttons to push at just the right time to turn his attention to me. And he can do the same.
Pretty girl walks past? I know just what to say about it to keep his attention zeroed in on me for the next few hours. Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
Nathan: Weren't you fantasizing about how good it was going to taste before it came?
Gah, No OOC!
[ April 09, 2004, 02:54 PM: Message edited by: PSI Teleport ]
Posted by Annie (Member # 295) on :
I'm still interested in the fact that the notion of propriety has all but disappeared from our society. I still belong to a culture where you avoid things on principle whether or not anything is or could be "going on." I think this is what makes my roommate situation hard for some of you to understand. The inconsiderate nature of their behavior is one thing, but the fact that they are flaunting unwritten rules (these rules actually become written at church schools) of propriety in regards to conduct with the opposite sex is an issue in itself.
I had friends in high school who couldn't stay out after 11:00 because the family rules stated that the influence of the Spirit was gone late at night and it was best to come home on principle, no matter how innocent the activity. This wasn't because the parents thought their children would be tempted beyond their ability to resist after the magical clock struck or that there was anything sinisterthat threatened their fragile souls late at night. In fact, these children turned out to be some of the most integritous and solid adults I know. Following rules of conduct for them was a matter of respect and propriety.
Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Annie -- I have been wondering about the same thing. It seems that any mention of propriety gets labeled as Puritan or Victorian, and then dismissed. It makes me want to learn more about those cultures. I wounder if some things might be better if they were more like those cultures...
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
quote: Jesus said that anyone who lusts in his heart has commited adultery. Clearly this is an impossible standard.
My husband doesn't think so, but he's been forced to overcome this because he is a massage therapist. And it's not that he has just repressed all sexual impulses He's thinking of writing a book about it. Though it was funny, the other day he was talking about the seductive blouse this lady was wearing. I doubt she wore it during the massage. At the time I didn't think it was weird.
Of course, just being a massage therapist appears evil to some. He mentions this from time to time.
The culture where you are matters a lot. Living with singles of the opposite sex means something different in Utah than in a real city. My sisters had male roomates when they lived in Chicago. In Utah, you might start out with a strictly business expectation, but the accumulated expectations of the culture around you might increase the tension. Same with the carpool. Though personally I'd be happier to save the money. Money problems supposedly end more marriages.
The woman with the birth control pills and the vasectomy, it sounds like there is a lot more going on there. Like maybe she wanted a baby after he was sterilized. Just throwing out a possibility, not claiming that it really is the case. We don't know if he had the vasectomy before they were married anyhow.
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
There was a general sense of propriety in generations before ours. But from what I can see in our culture, most of that has disappeared from our society. Most people feel it is too restricting and that personal freedom is more important than what they view as "arbitrary preventative measures". I also mourn the passing of the sense of propriety, but I will try to teach such things to my children.
The funny thing is, my Mom had very strong senses of propriety and growing up in her household (and afterwards), I rebelled against them. Such rules as "not being alone with your boyfriend in your bedroom" and "not staying out too late" or "not spending too much time alone together in a car" felt too restricting to me and I didn't have the wisdom then to give up doing what I wanted because it might lead to "trouble". Incidentally, it did lead to "trouble" for me. It is hard to teach your children wisdom that you yourself did not have.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
quote:we both have noticed in our lives before we got married that when we got close to someone of the opposite sex, we usually developed feeling for them
Maybe us females in engineering are just wierd...
far as the "thought" vs "action" thing, probably the reason why I fall so extremely on the "action" side of things is because as I've stated before I have seen the "thought" thing taken to near the rediculous extremes that Theca describes above.
AJ
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I think thoughts and actions complement each other. Like two feet walking in whatever direction they go. Same with the video games and the violence, or media and whatever behavior we are encouraging or complaining about.
Posted by Annie (Member # 295) on :
And lest anyone bring up the argument that strict rules are what cause people to mystify sex and get in more trouble than they would have, it's important to note the sheer numbers of the issue. Sexual liberation got a lot of people out of their "repressive" lifestyles, but incidences of teen pregnancy, divorce and abandonment, and STDs have skyrocketed since then. Boy, good thing we're not repressed anymore.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
Annie, I should chime in that I find that situation to be unbelievably rude and inappropriate. Similarly, I had a roommate that would make out on the couch of our shared apartment rather than take her fiance to the bedroom, just because it would be improper to be in that room alone with him. (From what I could see, it wasn't the setting that was improper. ) This, however, made studying in the kitchen an impossibility, and I still resent being made to feel unwelcome in my own space.
If she wants to push the envelope of the shared rules, she should push it right out into getting her own apartment.
Sorry you have to put up with such interpersonal shenanigans.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
AJ -- I've seen more harm done because people didn't curtail their passions than by over-curtailing them.
Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
quote: Annie, I should chime in that I find that situation to be unbelievably rude and inappropriate. Similarly, I had a roommate that would make out on the couch of our shared apartment rather than take her fiance to the bedroom, just because it would be improper to be in that room alone with him. (From what I could see, it wasn't the setting that was improper. ) This, however, made studying in the kitchen an impossibility, and I still resent being made to feel unwelcome in my own space.
CT, I know the feeling.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
m_p_h I've seen just as much harm the other way.
AJ
Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
Get real, celia. You were probably the girl making out on the couch.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
She wasn't.
Posted by Annie (Member # 295) on :
I apologize where apologies are due and you know what I'm talking about.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
As a general note, I'm wondering whether or not individual responses to this sort of thing may vary enough that what is best for one person might not be best for all.
Perhaps there is no general rule in this, perhaps what is dangerous for some is innocuous for others, and vice versa?
Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
Are you saying she just headed straight for the bedroom? Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
CT what I suspect though is the people who do have self control are more often the ones that over compensate by making the restrictive rules, and the people who don't and where the rules would actually be helpful aren't going to follow them anyway.
AJ
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
I'm frankly astonished that Annie wasn't valued enough as a friend and a human being to have her discomfort respected. That actually makes me quite mad.
----------------------------------- at celia AND AJ (Hi, guys! Long time ...)
[ April 09, 2004, 03:32 PM: Message edited by: ClaudiaTherese ]
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
My best friend is male. And married. We’ve spent many hours alone together, we’ve traveled to conferences together, and he’s spent the night at my house, both with and without his wife (who I also love dearly.) There is no way either of us would do anything to damage his marriage (or my upcoming one). One, we’re not interested in each other that way. Two, if either of us were we’d squelch it, because it would be completely inappropriate. I love both of them like members of my own family. Actually, I think of them as members of my family (and so does the rest of my family, to some extent.) And I’m happy as a clam that they and Bob are getting along, because there’s no bloody way I’m giving up my not-technically-related twin brother just because I’m getting married.
No way.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Dana you are a goddess*
AJ
*in the non-religious sense of course
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
AJ, interesting. As I think about my mother, she is the sort of person who just isn't "tempted" by a lot of the things that I found tempting. She was never interested in pushing the rules and couldn't understand my desire to. While I believed in the same "end result" as she, I wanted to have my cake and eat it to, so to speak. You see, I believed in chastity, but I wanted to kiss a lot. I wanted to have as much "fun" as I possibly could and stay "chaste".
Not the best way to go about staying chaste. Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I think the best way to to stay chaste is to get married and kiss a lot and have sex. At least, it's been the best way for me. Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
Dana, do you ever worry about what your congregation would think about a man staying overnight at your house? I would think in a congregation the size of yours, everyone would know you well enough that they would know that you weren't up to anything.
So following that rambling train, would you do it differently if you were at a much larger church where people might not know you as well and might be more prone to talk?
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
beverly, maybe I'm just more like your mother then and maybe my mother was more like you, though it isn't obvious from my knowledge of her.
Other than Gordon and the whole hole-digging incident when I was four I've never kissed anyone but Steve.
AJ
So what I'm saying, is that you are talking to someone who *was* good who *didn't* push the rules, and still got yelled at over "appearance of evil" at every turn. I never even stayed out past midnight until I was 20! And the time that I did that I was home from college with friends I hadn't seen while I was away, friends that my parents knew. My father told me to be home by midnight. Whoops, it was 12:30 when I got home after the movie we saw.
I couldn't make myself feel guilty for that no matter how hard I tried.
AJ
[ April 09, 2004, 03:51 PM: Message edited by: BannaOj ]
Posted by jeniwren (Member # 2002) on :
Aside from avoiding temptation, I see some of "avoiding the appearance of evil" as keeping other people who might be MORE tempted by what you're doing than you are. For example, my husband is an alcoholic in recovery (5 years sobriety! yay!), but his alcoholism isn't a day to day, moment to moment longing for what destroys him. I can have a glass of wine and he'll have a coke, and it's no big deal. However, because he is a frequent leader of 12 step groups, he does not go into bars or buy beer (for killing our slugs) at the grocery store. The appearance of his drinking may lead some of his guys who DO struggle with the day to day, moment to moment hunger into giving in to their temptations. He feels that he has to be above reproach when it comes to alcohol if he's to be an effective example.
I don't know why the appearance of the possibility of sexual impropriety wouldn't be the same way.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
but jeniwren this leads to the extreme where you live your entire life based on "what other people think" I've wittnessed it. It isn't healthy.
AJ
Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
I had a friend who was a fairly strict Southern Baptist. He personally didn't believe having an occasional drink was wrong, but would not have a drink in a bar or restaurant where others might see him.
He didn't do this to hide the fact that he enjoyed a beer once in a while, but so as not to affect his Christian witness.
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
AJ, I can understand if your mother's accusations of your innocence might sour you to restrictions. Perhaps that is an example of damage that comes from erring too far on strictness.
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
Zan, in larger towns the neighbors are considerably less snoopy.
I worried about it a little bit. Then I decided that anyone who was obsessing about who was staying at my house and why needed to clean up their own thoughts. I’ve been very open about my friendships, mjk & pjk have been to church here and the congregation knows them. I can’t imagine anyone who knows any of us thinking anything inappropriate is going on.
I am, however, debating what to do the next time Bob visits. He’s going to be here for almost a week in August. The first time he came he stayed at a hotel, which seemed appropriate under the circumstances. But next trip, does it make sense for him to spend money for five nights in a hotel, not to mention having to drive to the nearest hotel which is two towns away, when I have two empty guest rooms? I’m pretty much leaning toward just having him stay here, and assuming that everyone is smart enough to realize that if all we wanted was to be having sex we could easily find a way to sneak around and do that without anyone finding out.
Posted by Yank (Member # 2514) on :
Don't you hate it when people post replies that have absolutely nothing to do with the subject being discussed? Me too. I also hate whiny people. And hateful people. I wish they'd all die.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
zgator, to me that is crossing the line into hypocrisy, or dancing awfully close to it. To me doing something like that destroys integrity just as much, because of the double standard, you compell yourself to hold.
Though I guess double standards exist all over the place too and why this one bothers me more than others I don't know.
AJ
Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
quote: I'm frankly astonished that Annie wasn't valued enough as a friend and a human being to have her discomfort respected. That actually makes me quite mad.
CT, you are so wise. Seriously.
quote: but jeniwren this leads to the extreme where you live your entire life based on "what other people think" I've wittnessed it. It isn't healthy.
It's an interesting line to tread. And I think I tend to fall more to the same side you do.
And zan is very close to making my list. Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
beverly do you honestly think I should have felt guilty about staying out until (barely) after midnight at the age of 20?
AJ
Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
I thought she said your mother sounded overly strict?
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
No, she said I was "soured to restrictions" in your interpretation, the onus is on my mother, in my interpretation I thought the onus was on me.
AJ
Posted by jeniwren (Member # 2002) on :
AJ: That's why it helps to have one of those balancing bars trapese artists use.
You do have to figure out what is reasonable, and that requires personal judgement.
I think it's reasonable for my husband to avoid even the appearance of drinking alcohol, because he has specifically set himself as an example for others. Others who have a weakness that can be life-threatening. To that degree, he should hold himself to a higher standard.
But it is also reasonable not to have the same restrictions on *me*, because I do not have a problem with alcohol and never have had. I do not tell people this has ever been a struggle for me. And I do not encourage people to stop drinking because it was a difficulty I had to work to overcome. It would be outright silly for someone to look at me drinking a beer and go "Hey! If she can drink, I can too!"
It wouldn't be so outrageous to look at my husband going into a bar, handling it okay, and say "Hey, if he can go into a bar and keep from drinking, maybe I can too." He's not a hypocrit to do this...he really can handle it. But many alcoholics can't. He's set himself as an example. It's not a totally unreasonable leap for an alcoholic to look at him walk into a bar, come out sober, an think that maybe they can do it too without any ill effect.
Gotta balance it and not get too extreme, I agree, but I don't think we should just think what we do has no effect on anyone else, because it does. I think celebrities and anyone in the public eye *should* hold themselves to a higher standard of behavior (not *perfection*, just as high as they can), because whether they like it or not, they are examples people watch.
Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
AJ, I talked to him for a while about it and I really believe he didn't do it to hide anything. I'm trying to think of how to explain it. He didn't want anyone who didn't know him to even think he would get drunk. People who knew him casually and know he was Christian might get the wrong idea about him drinking. Getting drunk was not really a temptation to him that I know of, but it might be to others he was indirectly witnessing to.
I'm sorry. That explanation sucked, but I'm not sure how to describe it.
quote: I think it's reasonable for my husband to avoid even the appearance of drinking alcohol, because he has specifically set himself as an example for others.
That's along the lines I was thinking. Dana, it seems like in a small church, you congregation would know you well enough to know that there was no hanky panky going on. In a larger church, maybe not. It seems to me like you can be less worried about appearances in a small church.
Is there a friend in town Bob could stay with? I guess that would be asking a lot of someone though. I wouldn't want you booted out of the clergy for improper conduct and Bob is pretty improper sometimes.
celia, get off the couch and turn that light on.
[ April 09, 2004, 04:29 PM: Message edited by: zgator ]
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
Are you worried about me getting booted out for letting him stay at my house, or for how he might act if he stays at someone else’s house? Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
zgator, I believe you and I know people do split hairs. I guess if your friend while not drinking in public, wasn't also making blanket anti-drinking statments in church, then I wouldn't have a problem with it.
It is the people who do make the sweeping statments, and don't follow up in their personal life that I object to.
AJ
(Like jeniwren's drinking example was perfect, if I was in her husband's group, I *would* have a problem with her husband buying beer, even if for the slugs, because he is in the public eye and making sweeping statments on that issue that I am supposed to follow. On the other hand if he was out in his front yard killing the slugs with the beer, I probably shouldn't have a problem with it, because that is a reasonable use. But if I see him buy it and I don't actually know it is for the slugs then I make an assumption based on appearance.)
Dana I think all you need to do is preach a sermon on the issue explaining why bob will be in your spare bedroom and your problem is solved. <grin>
AJ
[ April 09, 2004, 04:36 PM: Message edited by: BannaOj ]
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I think Annie's roommate, the one who sleeps on the couch because she won't stand up to the other roommate, is in for a rough life if she doesn't learn to stand up for her rights, or even "The" right. Either way, her life is going to stink if she doesn't get over it.
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
AJ, you ask me if I think you ought to feel guilty for that occasion. Easy answer: no. More complicated answer, while I feel that your mother in particular is probably overly strict to the point of being unreasonable, I do believe that it is good to respect your parents "house rules". You were staying in their home, and they asked you to be home at a certain time. You were a little late, but not too bad. I would hope that the exchange would go:
Mother: "AJ, you're late." AJ: "Sorry Mom, I know you wanted me home by midnight, I lost track of time." Mother: "That's OK. I see that you came home pretty close to when I asked you to. You are an adult now, and I am not going to make a big deal out of a half hour."
I am thinking it probably didn't go that way.
Posted by jeniwren (Member # 2002) on :
Zan's probably right about the bigger church thing... Our church is about 3,000 or so, and when our pastor was engaged, you wouldn't believe the number of stupid rumors. Really. It was insane. Only people who didn't know Bob (our pastor, not Dana's beloved) would ever believe any of it, and in a church that big, it's easy to not know Bob or his sweet, lovely wife well.
Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
quote: Are you worried about me getting booted out for letting him stay at my house, or for how he might act if he stays at someone else’s house?
I guess you'd probably be better off if you don't let him out of your sight.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
actually it was my father.
And while in their home I have generally done my utmost to respect their rules.
There is a reason why I haven't visited them in four years.
AJ
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
Banna, I COMPLETELY sympathize with you about that. My mom still gives me "rules" when my husband and I visit, and threatens to make us leave if we don't follow them. There's a reason we'll NEVER see her again.
I'm talking rules like this. We get up in the morning, she's gone to work, and there's a full-sized sheet of paper on the table listing the CHORES we have to do while we're visiting. It's scary. Like I wouldn't clean while she was gone without her MAKING me. Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
PSI, I would so stay in a hotel. Maybe that's the message she is trying to send. So know we know the solution to dana's problem- Bob stays at her house but he has to do a lot of chores. Have I got that right?
And since I've got the top of the page, I have heard rumors of church members who felt that if keeping the mind pure while not sinning is good, keeping the mind pure while committing sin must be better. And I do mean sins of the nature we have been talking around. I suspect this is somewhat the mentality of Annie's roommate with the fiance, though not as extreme.
Edit: I added about five things, then saw a typo. But while I was adding stuff no one had replied...
[ April 09, 2004, 04:48 PM: Message edited by: pooka ]
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
Small town gossip is nothing to sneeze at, though. My poor friends and congregants are kept busy putting down rumors that I’m marrying a guy I met on the internet.
Oh, wait . . .
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
quote: PSI, I would so stay in a hotel. Maybe that's the message she is trying to send.
We offered, but she actually started crying. "But I want to spend time with Little Jesse! Are you trying to keep him away from me? You DO show him pictures of me when I'm talking to him on the phone, right?"
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
PSI: Alert! Alert! Psycho Mom!
AJ, I appreciate that you have always tried to respect their rules. I don't think I would have been willing to be as respectful as you, especially if I were being wrongfully accused all the time! It sounds like a lot of the authority figures in your life have been a bit psycho (I'm thinking of your grandma too).
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
*thank you beverly*
As I've said before I know this tinges my view of the world. How could it not?
The strange thing is that while we disagree, I understand that my parents were just doing what they believed was best, and I'm not actually angry for it.
But they view my disagreement as anger, and won't believe me when I say they are "forgiven" because there really isn't anything to forgive. They were doing the best they could. And I haven't turned out horribly either way. Yet, they make the assumption that if I "forgave" them then I would come back in line with their brand of thinking.
I guess life is long and I am relatively young and it is possible, but I don't view it as terribly probable.
AJ
[ April 09, 2004, 05:12 PM: Message edited by: BannaOj ]
Posted by Kama (Member # 3022) on :
[off topic]
When did Yank come back?
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
Kama, check out this thread. I guess he just barely got back!
AJ, interesting that they think that you believing differently than them is a result of you not forgiving them. There may not be any way to change their minds on that, especially if they keep doing things that make it hard for you to enjoy their company!
I sympathize with both you and PSI on this. I know for me that not living near my parents helps ensure that we get along as well as we do. Not as many opportunities for conflict. They are such great people, but right now I am happy to have a little bit of distance between our house and theirs. I think a lot of people feel that way about their parents.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
I don't know if I talked about it at the time bev, and it was before you were here.
However would you consider it appropriate, to lecture your daughter on her lifestyle choices a day after she's gotten out of surgery and while she is doped up on vicadin, but a captive audience because you are driving her car since she can't?
She said she had to say "her peice" and then she wouldn't bring it up again. And she then got mad at me for laughing.
AJ
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
It's situations like this that make OSC's works like Women of Genesis so powerful -- people honestly trying to do what's right, and yet hurting each other deeply. It's depressing and hope-inspiring at the same time. Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
That's pretty funny, and really sad at the same time. Does she feel that you won't listen to her any other way?
Still, I certainly don't think those are good circumstances under which to communicate. It seems... disrespectful. Like she wanted to make sure you heard her without being able to share your own thoughts. Very one-sided.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Probably she thought it was the only way to pin me down, because she thinks if I acutally listened to what she said I would agree, when it is obvious I don't. I try not to argue with her, because I don't want to damage what relationship we have left.
The laugh wasn't a happy laugh, it was a sad and trying not to be bitter while under the influence of powerful drugs laugh.
I don't think she realizes in her phone conversations how often I take her sage advice with reference to her. "If you can't say anything nice don't say it at all." I wish I had nicer things to say to her, really I do.
AJ
[ April 09, 2004, 05:41 PM: Message edited by: BannaOj ]
Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
i may need to retitle this thread. i'm very much enjoying the discussion, but it isn't at all related to the title.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
no don't... I think it applies, even if we are discussing more double standards now...
AJ
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
Celia: ^_^
AJ: So, was your mother hoping that your drugs would act like a sort of truth serum so that you wouldn't automatically agree with her? Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I have had the EXACT same experiences as beverly, except it was my dad who was freaked out about propriety.
I wasn't. I'm still not, actually, but I think it's because so many of my guy friends were so harmless. I couldn't imagine why anyone would think sleeping in the same hotel with a guy friend was the slightest bit of a problem - they are just a friend, and they know me! - but I suspect it is because the guys I hang out with are invariably more conservative than I am. When that isn't true, then it's a problem.
I don't know how my mother did it, but she wasn't worried about propriety so much as making sure I knew the possible consequences of my actions. I remember her saying once that she'd hate for me to have something happen that I hadn't planned on.
As for house rules... I agree with the "Their house; their rules" bit, but you have to be consistent. I hate it when the rules change to become MORE restrictive. When I hit sixteen, I didn't have a curfew and was trusted. The summer my mom died (when I was 21!), one of the first things my dad did was institute a midnight curfew for me, and if I was late, there was yelling on a Screwtape Grandma scale.
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
Wow, Katharina, your Mom sounds like she was pretty cool. I would like to have the wisdom to teach my children wisdom. I don't want to be all about blank, arbitrary rules. I want them to understand and make right decisions based on that understanding.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
She was. It was really cool. Now if only I could remember how she said it...*smacks forehead*
Posted by Evil (Member # 4830) on :
This thread is officially a lost cause.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
For about 6 months I had to get off the phone at midnight every night. I was so good about following that rule that my mom changed it to 11:30. Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I'm going to officially plug People of the Lie . (I linked to this through Hatrack, that's supposed to be of some benefit to the site)
It's all about how folks can seem to be doing all the "right" things but still give you the creeps. In the LDS religion we believe Satan was the one who didn't want anyone to have choices or free will, but force everyone to fulfill the law so that we wouldn't need a Savior. Or rather, that he would be our Savior, in a sense, but he wouldn't have to suffer. It is so hard as a Mom to not try to "save" your kids, keep them from ever experiencing life.
Another book I really like is Bringing up Moral Children . This author is LDS (unlike M. Scott Peck) but the style is very principle based rather than rule based.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
)![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
s*![[Wink]](wink.gif)
) So I try to be very careful that my kids don't get the wrong impression about things that I do that are not wrong because of circumstances (like AJ's lying to hide Jews example in the other thread).![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Taunt]](graemlins/taunt.gif)
zgator You know my bf IS a geotech right? It was eerily scary in a way. I suspect it is deeply freudian on my part, since my father was a Civil/environmental...![[Kiss]](graemlins/kiss.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Monkeys]](graemlins/monkeys.gif)
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
at celia AND AJ ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)