I walked out of the "Oral Sex" instruction meeting today, anti witness! (page 4)

momzcrazy

That's what I am wondering. Who and how do we contact to have it looked into?

My local Kingdom Hall has around 70 kids under 18.

momz

aniron

The material this week included a very detailed description of oral sex

Having read this article can you tell me in which paragraph the "very detailed description of oral sex" can be found?

As I can't find it.

Though I agree that its not a subject to discuss where very young children are present.

But sex education classes in schools go into more detail than this Watchtower does.

The WT went on about this subject 20+ years ago. It didn't stop most JW's back then and it won't now.

It didn't stop my wife and I back then. I'm sure it won't stop many now. Whether married or not.

beginnersmind

Having read this article can you tell me in which paragraph the "very detailed description of oral sex" can be found?
As I can't find it.

If by a detailed description you mean a how to guide your right there isnt one. I think the words 'oral sex' are mentioned only a few times in the article but you have to bear in mind every meeting will be different in what exactly will be said about it by the instructor and the rank and files comments. Some instructors might have wanted to go through those paragraphs in double quick time while others of a dubious nature would have liked to have spent more time on them fleshing them out as it were.

SirNose586

If by a detailed description you mean a how to guide your right there isnt one. I think the words 'oral sex' are mentioned only a few times in the article but you have to bear in mind every meeting will be different in what exactly will be said about it by the instructor and the rank and files comments. Some instructors might have wanted to go through those paragraphs in double quick time while others of a dubious nature would have liked to have spent more time on them fleshing them out as it were.

I agree. Folks, as much as we hate the Borg, calling the world's attention to this article would get you nowhere. They did not actually describe the act in explicit terms, they just mentioned the words "oral sex" over and over again.

Now, if they said, "Oral sex means when a woman puts a man's *blank* into her mouth and then stimulates him to ejaculation," THEN you'd have a case.

Inappropriate for little kids? Yes. Something to write the paper over, or call the cops on? No. No graphic description = no case. MinisterAmos, you did the right thing in pulling the kids out of there, but folks, this is not something we can nail them on--not yet.

And BTW my conductor wanted plenty of mouths to wrap around those questions.

lv4fer

Can someone put this article up so I can copy it. I've had some interesting conversations with people at work and this will be great for some laughs:)

WTWizard

but folks, this is not something we can nail them on--not yet.

But we can walk out on such matters, making as much of a scene as we might if we saw a movie that we weren't warned about graphic content. And we can vow not to put even a penny into the Worldwide Pedophile Defense Fund.

True, this wasn't graphic. But, as I see it, if that were on a TV program, it would likely be rated TV14. In a movie, it would probably be PG-13 with adult themes. And notice the ages of the children in the Kingdumb Hells. Children as young as 6 are being showcased for getting baptized, and hence we would expect those children that young, and younger, to be expected to be present in the meeting where this is being discussed.

No, if it were mostly teenagers, I would not be worried about inappropriateness. However, when children are present from birth up, and expected to be there, that creates another situation. Very young children are not able to comprehend matters like these like children ages 13 and up might. And it is causing them an unhealthy inhibition on sex, which is going to cause more repression in marriages. Which is enough for anyone to pull their children out and possibly even walk out themselves, if just to protest. If their money dries up, they lose their ability to put out crap like this.

BluesBrother

I was not there last Sunday, but I guess the study went on with the same clockwork arm movements and rote answers from the paragraph as usual, without anybody thinking or expressing what they really think.

I do agree that the comments on oral sex seemed way out of line for a congregation WT study, and totally unnecessary and out context with the article which was discussing how to deal with things that are a matter of conscience . Rather inappropriately the theme scripture was the one that says "All things are clean to clean people "

I walked out of the "Oral Sex" instruction meeting today, anti witness!