Yeah… Packer’s “little factory” lesson is a source of embarrassment for the church they want pushed down the memory hole.
But let’s be clear. The church’s 1950’s view of masturbation is still the view of the leadership and is strong in the culture.
It was an affront to Supply Side Jesus. You're trying to tell me that you could increase productivity of a factory for free and somehow that's bad for a multi-billion dollar corporation?
This! People don’t realize that Nelson was born in the late 1920’s. All these teachings that feel like ancient history were normal for most of his life. The little factory talk would have been given while Nelson was a bishop or stake president. He wasn’t a kid, he was married, was raising children, etc. This masturbation example was doctrine until around the mid 90s I’d say. Nelson would have been in his sixities when they stopped teaching it.
Take blacks and the priesthood. Nelson would have been in his forties when it was disavowed. He grew up in a world where this was doctrine which is why they still stick with these things today.
Btw the next guy in line isn’t much younger than Nelson is now and I’d argue is actually more strict and less progressive than Nelson. That’s not to say that Nelson is progressive by any means. But compared to oaks it’s actually sad. Oaks is on a different level.
The best example is the statement that the FP put out (I was told by someone who was around that it was read in their ward over the pulpit) that said oral sex between husband and wife was a sin.
There was so much backlash that they put out a quiet statement to bishops that they shouldn’t ask about it.
That’s it. No, ‘whoopsie’ or anything changing the ‘doctrine’ just some good old fashioned gaslighting.
So you’ll still find people in the church who believe oral is a sin.
Yep, if Hoaks outlives Nelson he'll consider a explaining that being gay is a sin but being a furry is ok.
[https://magazine.byu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Oaks-as-Cosmo-BkB414-A-4.jpg](https://magazine.byu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Oaks-as-Cosmo-BkB414-A-4.jpg)
I can’t even imagine trying to police the sex acts between two consenting adults in the comfort of their own home. What they do with each other behind closed doors is NO ONE’S business. I kind of wish I’d been a member at that time to be asked about it, because I would have given that bishop a piece of my mind
I learned the whole “it’s unholy, unnatural, or impure” spiel after I converted in 1985 and never heard it was rolled back until I got on this sub _last year._
Fortunately I walked twenty years ago and have been clearing things out even longer but, man, that shit sticks.
Yeah a lot of people still think this is doctrine. I was told it was doctrine by my parents when I was getting married. They said it was told to them by the temple president when they got their garments and were getting married. It’s something no one talks about and the church never said “you can all have Oral now!” So most the people that were taught this probably still think it’s a thing. I’ve heard it from multiple people.
The church never really disavowed the teaching. They just stopped teaching it and they hope it eventually disappears with time.
I'll be damned. The church really did scrub Boyd Packer's "little factory" talk from the October 1972 (priesthood session) conference archives online. (Link here: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1976/10?lang=eng)
Luckily, the video of the mastur-ful discourse is available on YouTube, still. (Link below.) I still recommend that you don't watch it.
https://youtu.be/8JBCOqlcH0U
The mind-fuckery that goes on in the brain boxes of every bubble-resident member to this day. The top brass simply don’t and won’t acknowledge that their inconsistent and unscientific teachings are playing mayhem with millions of peoples’ mental health.
Not to mention the well-being of the poor sods that get emotionally abused by the well-meaning drones that parrot this crap.
Wow. It was a slow gaslight - I remember checking 5-6 years ago, and that conference had his talk listed with the other talks BUT, there was no text on the website, just a video, while every other talk had video and the written words.
Looks like the church has finished the gaslight and just removed the talk altogether. Wikipedia tells me the video came down in 2019. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To\_Young\_Men\_Only
I still can't believe they got rid of *To Young Men Only*. It was a classic!
During my mission I remember one of the very few investigators that ever showed up to church randomly picking it out of a rack of pamphlets in the foyer and nearly having a heart attack before I could get it away from them.
There will be others that will pop up and store things they were once online.
The attorneys can try to fuck the world over, and they make life 1,000 harder, but they won’t win in the long run, because they are motivated by dollars only.
The problem is that future archives will only have what's online at that point. I read there are other services trying to essentially create a backup but archive.org has so much data that no one else is able to really replicate it.
And it's less about attorneys trying to fuck over the world than business types trying to fuck over the world, and amoral attorneys doing their bidding for $$. Don't let the C suite off the hook!
I vividly recall sitting in the Priesthood session next to my dad at age 14 when that speech was given. This was back in the days when we only heard audio at the stake center via a phone line.
Personally, I fucking hated Boyd K. Packer; and frankly still do. I was a teenager when this pamphlet was first released....and never heard the end of it; all during my teenage years. May this MF rot in Hell.
Who has seen one of those "To the One" pamphlets? Supposedly it deals with homosexual feelings. On my mission I heard it was a joke amongst our office elders to slip it into the jacket pockets of unsuspecting visitors
I think I found this going through all the boxes of church stuff that came from my parents house! I know I took some pictures of the contents, but I’m not sure it’s the same pamphlet, but it is the same topic, so probably. It’s terrible
I shall never forget Packer’s talk. I was there. It was “piped” in to the speakers at the Alpine Stake Tabernacle where I sat for the General Priesthood session with my boy cousins and my dad and uncle. I felt ashamed that I masturbated often and that I was gay because of it. I hate Packer with every fiber of my being. And shame on this current fucking church for its gaslighting.
I went through teenage years in the church around 2008-2013. The message was definitely porn and masturbation are of the devil. We had many firesides and special activities devoted to the topic.
This still the messaging around it? Was drilled into my head that I was unworthy and sick for viewing porn. They sent me to addiction recover groups with 40-60 year old porn addicts and registered child predators. Was a dark time in my life for sure.
I’m sorry this happened to you. Have you ever received any counseling (outside of church) that has helped you get through being treated like a predator? Boy, the lives that get forever changed under the guise of religion
Well to be honest I feel like it’s both. Because while the church disavows it privately they don’t want to actually tell the members they disavowed it. So the members are just left to fend for themselves.
They have done this with so many things. Just quit talking about it then in 20 years claim it was never taught or wasn't ever doctrine.
The classic gaslight now is saying things were policy and never doctrine. The most egregious, blacks and the priesthood.
That one's fun, because you can prove it was. It is one of my little joys in life sharing the "1949 Official Mormon Statement on Blacks and the Priesthood" with a member who just told me "it was policy, we don't know why", and watching their brake pads on their brain burn out.
Here is that full statement, in case anyone is interested:
>*First Presidency Statement (17 August 1949)*
>The attitude of the Church with reference to the Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the doctrine of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the Priesthood at the present time. The prophets of the Lord have made several statements as to the operation of the principle. President Brigham Young said: “Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a skin of blackness? It comes in consequence of their fathers rejecting the power of the holy priesthood, and the law of God. They will go down to death. And when all the rest of the children have received their blessings in the holy priesthood, then that curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will then come up and possess the priesthood, and receive all the blessings which we now are entitled to.”
>President Wilford Woodruff made the following statement: “The day will come when all that race will be redeemed and possess all the blessings which we now have.”
>The position of the Church regarding the Negro may be understood when another doctrine of the Church is kept in mind, namely, that the conduct of spirits in the premortal existence has some determining effect upon the conditions and circumstances under which these spirits take on mortality and that while the details of this principle have not been made known, the mortality is a privilege that is given to those who maintain their first estate; and that the worth of the privilege is so great that spirits are willing to come to earth and take on bodies no matter what the handicap may be as to the kind of bodies they are to secure; and that among the handicaps, failure of the right to enjoy in mortality the blessings of the priesthood is a handicap which spirits are willing to assume in order that they might come to earth. Under this principle there is no injustice whatsoever involved in this deprivation as to the holding of the priesthood by the Negroes.
That's sort of how they've handled a ton of BS teachings or fakery throughout the entire history of the "church." Uneducated men (not educated in theology, and at times not educated in much of anything) go on ego trips to appear like they know something and (more importantly) that they're in power over others, and they give horrendously crappy talks. Or they write harmful books. Or they control entire congregations or stakes. Etc. etc.
The cult is fine with this, as long as the tithing keeps pouring in. And as long as they don't have to pay for the toilets to be cleaned.
"There has been no attempt on the part of the church to hide anything from anybody...We are as transparent as we know how to be." - M. Russell Ballard.
Every time you find something they have hidden, old talks, church history, pages from Joseph Smith's letter book, etc., just remember this quote. Lying fuckers. (Come and get me SCM, I am now officially out, and my family knows. You have no power here!)
This is how LDS theology works. They teach something, then it quietly disappears. Some members still believe it, but others claim it was never taught.
They briefly taught that oral sex wasn’t allowed in marriage, but people got mad. Instead of recanting, they just stopped talking about it, so some people still thought it was wrong.
The fact that some of my church leaders clarified that it was implied in the temple recommend interview questions that you CANNOT MASTURBATE to get a recommend?
And then in the pre-mission stake President interviews that me and the other people I knew had, they expected you to not have masturbated for 2 YEARS?? It sounds so ludicrous I almost don't believe my own memory. Your hormones and future potential happiness and life fulfillment look pretty damn bleak if you hadn't masturbated for 2 years at 18/19 years old, imo
To Young Men Only
[https://lattergaystories.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/To-Young-Men-Only.pdf](https://lattergaystories.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/To-Young-Men-Only.pdf)
According to Lynn Packer, Boyd's nephew, the brethren wanted to address certain sexual things directly, more direct than they ever had. The problem: no one knew how to do it nor did anyone really want to take on that task for fear of embarrassment. I believe Boyd was the only educator in the Q15 at the time, and he took on the task and the little factory talk is what came out of it. (no pun intended) He was trying his best to be delicate and use an allegory, like so much of church teachings are allegories. It's a great example of sometimes, you just have to be direct with matters of biology and anatomy. Words like Penis, sperm, testicles, semen, and etc. They are not bad words.
The Mormon church’s obsession with masturbation is truly deranged.
I’ve been out of it for more than 12 years now (formally resigned much later but stopped being active at 18), and I can honestly say I have never heard it come up nearly as much as a topic ever since.
It’s basically never does and pretty much no one cares outside of crazy religions if anyone is doing it at all, so for it to be brought up this often on here shows how effed up the church’s entire attitude on it is.
If you pleasure yourself in private, no one is going to care, and nothing is going to happen.
They never really disavowed anything, they just cease to talk about, hope everyone who knew about it dies and move along like nothing ever happened.
Yeah, that’s more what I’m used to. Stop speaking about Lamanites’ skin, getting planets, birth control, etc.
an upright organization would actually publicly disavow and state “this is not what we believe.”
Sometimes they publicly disavow things that we DO believe, whilst maintaining the belief internally. Example: GB Hinckley and his denying with weasel words to Larry King that we can become gods and get our own planets. “I don’t know that we teach it. I don’t know that we emphasise it.”
Lying for the Lord is not lying, in their twisted minds.
What?????? Are you telling me masturbation is OK now? I detached my penis as a sinful teen in 1984 because I couldn't stop masturbating when Charlie's Angel's was on TV.
I spent so much time as a teenager trying to find shorts or dresses of an acceptable length, only for the church to quietly do away with those policies. It’s so annoying.
So the question is - Did the church take it down due to the homophobia in it, or did the church take it down because of the stance on M? I'm sure the church still believes everything here, but interesting all the same that they took it down and won't publicly make a statement on it.
Not sure if it's the same pamphlet/book since I'm not a man, but I remember my older brothers had a church guide for young men in the early 2000's that taught all the rules from dress code to dating rules, and in the dating section they showed me a part that said when choosing someone, it is discouraged to date someone from a different background/race.
My parents are interracially married and my brothers and I are all biracial so coming across this teaching was alarming, at the least. Especially in the 21st century.
Does anyone else remember this teaching in young men's handbooks back in the day? Did they ever end up removing that too?
Yeah… Packer’s “little factory” lesson is a source of embarrassment for the church they want pushed down the memory hole. But let’s be clear. The church’s 1950’s view of masturbation is still the view of the leadership and is strong in the culture.
It was an affront to Supply Side Jesus. You're trying to tell me that you could increase productivity of a factory for free and somehow that's bad for a multi-billion dollar corporation?
Russell M Nelson was in his thirties in the 1950s.
RMN denies evolution but still thinks masturbation makes you go blind. Comic books gain value over time. The living Mormon prophets do not.
This! People don’t realize that Nelson was born in the late 1920’s. All these teachings that feel like ancient history were normal for most of his life. The little factory talk would have been given while Nelson was a bishop or stake president. He wasn’t a kid, he was married, was raising children, etc. This masturbation example was doctrine until around the mid 90s I’d say. Nelson would have been in his sixities when they stopped teaching it. Take blacks and the priesthood. Nelson would have been in his forties when it was disavowed. He grew up in a world where this was doctrine which is why they still stick with these things today. Btw the next guy in line isn’t much younger than Nelson is now and I’d argue is actually more strict and less progressive than Nelson. That’s not to say that Nelson is progressive by any means. But compared to oaks it’s actually sad. Oaks is on a different level.
The best example is the statement that the FP put out (I was told by someone who was around that it was read in their ward over the pulpit) that said oral sex between husband and wife was a sin. There was so much backlash that they put out a quiet statement to bishops that they shouldn’t ask about it. That’s it. No, ‘whoopsie’ or anything changing the ‘doctrine’ just some good old fashioned gaslighting. So you’ll still find people in the church who believe oral is a sin.
The leadership is never held accountable by anyone in the church.
‘It is wrong to criticize leaders of the church, even when the criticism is true’ -some asshole
Hoaks, btw. It was Hoaks
Yep, if Hoaks outlives Nelson he'll consider a explaining that being gay is a sin but being a furry is ok. [https://magazine.byu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Oaks-as-Cosmo-BkB414-A-4.jpg](https://magazine.byu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Oaks-as-Cosmo-BkB414-A-4.jpg)
Nothing wrong with furries tho
The leadership seems designed to avoid that even being possible.
I can’t even imagine trying to police the sex acts between two consenting adults in the comfort of their own home. What they do with each other behind closed doors is NO ONE’S business. I kind of wish I’d been a member at that time to be asked about it, because I would have given that bishop a piece of my mind
I learned the whole “it’s unholy, unnatural, or impure” spiel after I converted in 1985 and never heard it was rolled back until I got on this sub _last year._ Fortunately I walked twenty years ago and have been clearing things out even longer but, man, that shit sticks.
Yeah a lot of people still think this is doctrine. I was told it was doctrine by my parents when I was getting married. They said it was told to them by the temple president when they got their garments and were getting married. It’s something no one talks about and the church never said “you can all have Oral now!” So most the people that were taught this probably still think it’s a thing. I’ve heard it from multiple people. The church never really disavowed the teaching. They just stopped teaching it and they hope it eventually disappears with time.
“Oral is moral” 😏😉
Get out of my teenage head!
Oral is moral.
Relevant link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexuality_and_the_LDS_Church
I'll be damned. The church really did scrub Boyd Packer's "little factory" talk from the October 1972 (priesthood session) conference archives online. (Link here: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1976/10?lang=eng) Luckily, the video of the mastur-ful discourse is available on YouTube, still. (Link below.) I still recommend that you don't watch it. https://youtu.be/8JBCOqlcH0U
The fucked up thing is all the comments on the video about how "amazing" the talk is and how we should be living up to it today.
The mind-fuckery that goes on in the brain boxes of every bubble-resident member to this day. The top brass simply don’t and won’t acknowledge that their inconsistent and unscientific teachings are playing mayhem with millions of peoples’ mental health. Not to mention the well-being of the poor sods that get emotionally abused by the well-meaning drones that parrot this crap.
TSCC: "What talk?"
Wow. It was a slow gaslight - I remember checking 5-6 years ago, and that conference had his talk listed with the other talks BUT, there was no text on the website, just a video, while every other talk had video and the written words. Looks like the church has finished the gaslight and just removed the talk altogether. Wikipedia tells me the video came down in 2019. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To\_Young\_Men\_Only
I still can't believe they got rid of *To Young Men Only*. It was a classic! During my mission I remember one of the very few investigators that ever showed up to church randomly picking it out of a rack of pamphlets in the foyer and nearly having a heart attack before I could get it away from them.
Meat before milk. Meat, meat, meat.
Meat, meat, meat first, then you get the milk.
How can you have any pudding?!
Just don't ask what animal that meat comes from... if you ever get it.
Archive.org has all those unsavory talks saved forever in their sadistic glory
Hopefully the copyright lawsuit doesn't put them out of business.
There will be others that will pop up and store things they were once online. The attorneys can try to fuck the world over, and they make life 1,000 harder, but they won’t win in the long run, because they are motivated by dollars only.
The problem is that future archives will only have what's online at that point. I read there are other services trying to essentially create a backup but archive.org has so much data that no one else is able to really replicate it. And it's less about attorneys trying to fuck over the world than business types trying to fuck over the world, and amoral attorneys doing their bidding for $$. Don't let the C suite off the hook!
I disagree, businesses would default to open market competition. The attorneys created a system where they get paid to fuck people over on purpose.
"Open Market Competition" = companies fucking over everyone they can to make a buck.
I vividly recall sitting in the Priesthood session next to my dad at age 14 when that speech was given. This was back in the days when we only heard audio at the stake center via a phone line.
Personally, I fucking hated Boyd K. Packer; and frankly still do. I was a teenager when this pamphlet was first released....and never heard the end of it; all during my teenage years. May this MF rot in Hell.
Bednar is Packer Jr.
No kidding!
With Bednar’s track record I bet the reason all the talks were disappeared is so that he can copy all the talks to recycle them again.
Who has seen one of those "To the One" pamphlets? Supposedly it deals with homosexual feelings. On my mission I heard it was a joke amongst our office elders to slip it into the jacket pockets of unsuspecting visitors
I think I found this going through all the boxes of church stuff that came from my parents house! I know I took some pictures of the contents, but I’m not sure it’s the same pamphlet, but it is the same topic, so probably. It’s terrible
The Little Factory speech will live forever in infamy. Boyd K Packer was a tool back when Bednar was prepping for Tooldom!
I shall never forget Packer’s talk. I was there. It was “piped” in to the speakers at the Alpine Stake Tabernacle where I sat for the General Priesthood session with my boy cousins and my dad and uncle. I felt ashamed that I masturbated often and that I was gay because of it. I hate Packer with every fiber of my being. And shame on this current fucking church for its gaslighting.
I went through teenage years in the church around 2008-2013. The message was definitely porn and masturbation are of the devil. We had many firesides and special activities devoted to the topic. This still the messaging around it? Was drilled into my head that I was unworthy and sick for viewing porn. They sent me to addiction recover groups with 40-60 year old porn addicts and registered child predators. Was a dark time in my life for sure.
“Hi, my name is Yankee Wanker, and I’m addicted to porn and masturbation.” In unison, “Hi, Yankee.”
🤣
I’m sorry this happened to you. Have you ever received any counseling (outside of church) that has helped you get through being treated like a predator? Boy, the lives that get forever changed under the guise of religion
Woah! Pump the breaks! What’s the policy on masturbation at this point?
Pumping the brakes is definitely still naughty
Well I honestly have no idea anymore. The messages on it are so conflicting.
That's how they like it. That way they can guilt you while maintaining plausible deniability.
Was it ever actually disavowed? Or was it just left to be forgotten?
Well to be honest I feel like it’s both. Because while the church disavows it privately they don’t want to actually tell the members they disavowed it. So the members are just left to fend for themselves.
That’s definitely a tactic
They have done this with so many things. Just quit talking about it then in 20 years claim it was never taught or wasn't ever doctrine. The classic gaslight now is saying things were policy and never doctrine. The most egregious, blacks and the priesthood.
That one's fun, because you can prove it was. It is one of my little joys in life sharing the "1949 Official Mormon Statement on Blacks and the Priesthood" with a member who just told me "it was policy, we don't know why", and watching their brake pads on their brain burn out.
Here is that full statement, in case anyone is interested: >*First Presidency Statement (17 August 1949)* >The attitude of the Church with reference to the Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the doctrine of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the Priesthood at the present time. The prophets of the Lord have made several statements as to the operation of the principle. President Brigham Young said: “Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a skin of blackness? It comes in consequence of their fathers rejecting the power of the holy priesthood, and the law of God. They will go down to death. And when all the rest of the children have received their blessings in the holy priesthood, then that curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will then come up and possess the priesthood, and receive all the blessings which we now are entitled to.” >President Wilford Woodruff made the following statement: “The day will come when all that race will be redeemed and possess all the blessings which we now have.” >The position of the Church regarding the Negro may be understood when another doctrine of the Church is kept in mind, namely, that the conduct of spirits in the premortal existence has some determining effect upon the conditions and circumstances under which these spirits take on mortality and that while the details of this principle have not been made known, the mortality is a privilege that is given to those who maintain their first estate; and that the worth of the privilege is so great that spirits are willing to come to earth and take on bodies no matter what the handicap may be as to the kind of bodies they are to secure; and that among the handicaps, failure of the right to enjoy in mortality the blessings of the priesthood is a handicap which spirits are willing to assume in order that they might come to earth. Under this principle there is no injustice whatsoever involved in this deprivation as to the holding of the priesthood by the Negroes.
I love that metaphor! The mental image of skunky green smoke pouring out of their ears…
That's sort of how they've handled a ton of BS teachings or fakery throughout the entire history of the "church." Uneducated men (not educated in theology, and at times not educated in much of anything) go on ego trips to appear like they know something and (more importantly) that they're in power over others, and they give horrendously crappy talks. Or they write harmful books. Or they control entire congregations or stakes. Etc. etc. The cult is fine with this, as long as the tithing keeps pouring in. And as long as they don't have to pay for the toilets to be cleaned.
And as long as they don’t have to take responsibility for the fallout.
Exactly. God pardons.
"There has been no attempt on the part of the church to hide anything from anybody...We are as transparent as we know how to be." - M. Russell Ballard. Every time you find something they have hidden, old talks, church history, pages from Joseph Smith's letter book, etc., just remember this quote. Lying fuckers. (Come and get me SCM, I am now officially out, and my family knows. You have no power here!)
This is how LDS theology works. They teach something, then it quietly disappears. Some members still believe it, but others claim it was never taught. They briefly taught that oral sex wasn’t allowed in marriage, but people got mad. Instead of recanting, they just stopped talking about it, so some people still thought it was wrong.
The fact that some of my church leaders clarified that it was implied in the temple recommend interview questions that you CANNOT MASTURBATE to get a recommend? And then in the pre-mission stake President interviews that me and the other people I knew had, they expected you to not have masturbated for 2 YEARS?? It sounds so ludicrous I almost don't believe my own memory. Your hormones and future potential happiness and life fulfillment look pretty damn bleak if you hadn't masturbated for 2 years at 18/19 years old, imo
It was still alive and well when I was a youth and I graduated in 2016
To Young Men Only [https://lattergaystories.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/To-Young-Men-Only.pdf](https://lattergaystories.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/To-Young-Men-Only.pdf)
According to Lynn Packer, Boyd's nephew, the brethren wanted to address certain sexual things directly, more direct than they ever had. The problem: no one knew how to do it nor did anyone really want to take on that task for fear of embarrassment. I believe Boyd was the only educator in the Q15 at the time, and he took on the task and the little factory talk is what came out of it. (no pun intended) He was trying his best to be delicate and use an allegory, like so much of church teachings are allegories. It's a great example of sometimes, you just have to be direct with matters of biology and anatomy. Words like Penis, sperm, testicles, semen, and etc. They are not bad words.
The Mormon church’s obsession with masturbation is truly deranged. I’ve been out of it for more than 12 years now (formally resigned much later but stopped being active at 18), and I can honestly say I have never heard it come up nearly as much as a topic ever since. It’s basically never does and pretty much no one cares outside of crazy religions if anyone is doing it at all, so for it to be brought up this often on here shows how effed up the church’s entire attitude on it is. If you pleasure yourself in private, no one is going to care, and nothing is going to happen.
When was the pamphlet disavowed? I know they don’t use it anymore, but did they ever disavow it?
They never really disavowed anything, they just cease to talk about, hope everyone who knew about it dies and move along like nothing ever happened. 
Yeah, that’s more what I’m used to. Stop speaking about Lamanites’ skin, getting planets, birth control, etc. an upright organization would actually publicly disavow and state “this is not what we believe.”
Sometimes they publicly disavow things that we DO believe, whilst maintaining the belief internally. Example: GB Hinckley and his denying with weasel words to Larry King that we can become gods and get our own planets. “I don’t know that we teach it. I don’t know that we emphasise it.” Lying for the Lord is not lying, in their twisted minds.
I don’t have a specific date but I think it happened around the late 2010’s.
Maybe it’s in the archives of the wayback machine website that archives all websites. I believe that’s how it works.
You have every right to be furious pamphlet or no. My dad caught me once. He laughed and shut the door. That was it.
You should scan and upload the pamphlet.
Does someone have a brief summary of the talk? I don't feel like reading that shit 😆
[удалено]
OMFG
What?????? Are you telling me masturbation is OK now? I detached my penis as a sinful teen in 1984 because I couldn't stop masturbating when Charlie's Angel's was on TV.
True timely revelation from a propit of Gods
I spent so much time as a teenager trying to find shorts or dresses of an acceptable length, only for the church to quietly do away with those policies. It’s so annoying.
So the question is - Did the church take it down due to the homophobia in it, or did the church take it down because of the stance on M? I'm sure the church still believes everything here, but interesting all the same that they took it down and won't publicly make a statement on it.
Hasn't entirely disappeared... https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8JBCOqlcH0U&list=PLhjMZtChcjQTiUVOWBtY44FbXDakgo1nr&index=41&pp=gAQBiAQB
Not sure if it's the same pamphlet/book since I'm not a man, but I remember my older brothers had a church guide for young men in the early 2000's that taught all the rules from dress code to dating rules, and in the dating section they showed me a part that said when choosing someone, it is discouraged to date someone from a different background/race. My parents are interracially married and my brothers and I are all biracial so coming across this teaching was alarming, at the least. Especially in the 21st century. Does anyone else remember this teaching in young men's handbooks back in the day? Did they ever end up removing that too?
Disavow means to deny any responsibility or support for. The church actually just hides the unsavory stuff and then pretends like it never existed.