First off, this was my favorite class from TWI. By far. I had a ton of fun and laughed.
Secondly. I was only 13, so my judgment is suspect.
I also remember him teaching that if a man didn't have a wife, or if for some reason his wife was unable to have sex, he "oughta learn how to masturbate." Too bad he didn't practice what he preached.
masturbating is healthy for the prostate. Whether you're shooting alone or with someone else, keep on shooting. And I'm 100% serious about this.
I disagree. It appeared that he taught that the human body is beautiful. While I have never had the experiences with leadership that some had, I have no doubt that all this "teaching" was designed to break down barriers. Why? because I know what it is like to be "groomed". I know how he looked at me and I wasn't "so inclined," but I knew what it was like to be around the "so inclined." You don't teach that the body is "beautiful" and show explicit pictures in the context of a "Christian" ministry - unless every last one of those people is married and they know up front that it's going to happen, and we know that didn't happen. I have taken Christian marriage courses where discussions about sex are frank, but not explicit, and certainly not offered to people not married along with people who are married. If this is so good, right, and pure, why is this not the way all Christian organizations handle the topic of Christian family and sex?
While you can't believe it could happen, I am amazed at how good he was at doing what he did. He operated openly and yet most never saw it, or they denied it, or turned a blind eye.
I agree. I have joked about the class being Christian SEX and oh yeah, family. But that seems to have been the emphasis in most people's minds. There wasn't a lot of teaching about how to love one another in a marriage, as I recall.
First off, this was my favorite class from TWI. By far. I had a ton of fun and laughed.
Secondly. I was only 13, so my judgment is suspect.
This proves my point. I don't know that 13-year-olds needed to see the kind of stuff in that class.
I can hardly remember this class (thank God) but certainly parts of it would have been far more appropriately taught (that's if it needed to be taught at all) by Dr Rawlins, as a gynaecologist.
I have a recollection of some talk about a dog and a woman but in what I saw that had been excluded and it was, "I once saw a video of a dog and a woman, the dog wasn't interested, had more sense than the woman." Perhaps it had been remade.
I do remember a lengthy consideration of the Song of Solomon and the various figures of speech for sex acts, positions, and names for parts of the body associated with the activity.
The very name of the class is deceptive. Nothing about Christian Family - it was all about sex (not even "Christian sex" if there is such a thing, LOL!).
In rez, Dr Rawlins did teach us something about the raising of children and breastfeeding and some stuff about kids. All that did seem to make sense at the time; whether it still would ... I dunno.
Her teaching was followed by a gynaecological examination of the elder Corps women. Then, it seemed a little odd. Now, it seems like pandering.
First off, this was my favorite class from TWI. By far. I had a ton of fun and laughed.
Secondly. I was only 13, so my judgment is suspect.
masturbating is healthy for the prostate. Whether you're shooting alone or with someone else, keep on shooting. And I'm 100% serious about this.
I'm sure at 13 it was wildly entertaining, but inappropriate.
If you want to masturbate - fine. You don't need a note from the doctor. There is no proven link between "shooting" and prostate health. There is a link between what you eat and prostate health.
Her teaching was followed by a gynaecological examination of the elder Corps women. Then, it seemed a little odd. Now, it seems like pandering.
I believe what is being objected to here is not so much the validity or viability of saliva as a sexual lubricant, or whether Christians have sexual relations but rather the format in which it was openly presented and misrepresented as being relevant to Biblical research and teaching.
And the fact that a minister feels the need to teach his flock about sex is WEIRD!!! Showing large, erect penises to children was not the best teaching IMHO.
Tzaia: Well, there was a line of elder Corps women. Examined one right after the other. Not much privacy. Dr R was assisted in this task by someone else, a nurse who was also in the Corps; I'd never met her before. It was very cramped in the little room in Founders Hall where this took place. So yes - there were witnesses.
Pander (noun): a person who procures for another the means of gratifying his or her base passions. (vt) to act as a pander.
I reckon (now I know of LCM's habits) that she was checking us out for LCM. We had to submit to a gynae/pap exam BEFORE ENTERING THE CORPS and our own doctors had to sign to say we were in good health in this regard, which form was submitted with the Corps application form. My doc was appalled at the request and simply asked if I'd had a smear test recently and took my word for it.
Dr. Wierwille taught that the human body is beautiful and as part of the class showed us pictures of it .... nothing wrong with nude pictures in and of themselves. This is not porn. Porn is designed to encourage lust and lasciviousness, perhaps covetousness, those are the sins we need stay away from. But viewing pics to show how beautiful the body is is nothing ... its vanilla. I don't believe VP was encouraging those sins and can't imagine someone getting caught up in lust and evil imaginations from viewing those vanilla images unless they wanted to. Similarly I suppose someone can say looking at a beautiful woman in a bikini leads to lust and lasciviousness and porn but I dont think so. (Maybe Islam says that, don't know.)
Oldies...
I seem to recall a LOT more explicit pics in that class than simple nudies. Maybe you had a different version of that class, but the one I saw was fit for viewing in a booth with a pocket full of quarters. The only difference being it cost a LOT more and you had to sit there, nervously, in a crowd.
Do you think Larry Flynt is a MOG, also? At least Flynt is more honest about what he's all about than VP ever was.
I can hardly remember this class (thank God) but certainly parts of it would have been far more appropriately taught (that's if it needed to be taught at all) by Dr Rawlins, as a gynaecologist.
I have a recollection of some talk about a dog and a woman but in what I saw that had been excluded and it was, "I once saw a video of a dog and a woman, the dog wasn't interested, had more sense than the woman." Perhaps it had been remade.
I do remember a lengthy consideration of the Song of Solomon and the various figures of speech for sex acts, positions, and names for parts of the body associated with the activity.
The very name of the class is deceptive. Nothing about Christian Family - it was all about sex (not even "Christian sex" if there is such a thing, LOL!).
In rez, Dr Rawlins did teach us something about the raising of children and breastfeeding and some stuff about kids. All that did seem to make sense at the time; whether it still would ... I dunno.
Her teaching was followed by a gynaecological examination of the elder Corps women. Then, it seemed a little odd. Now, it seems like pandering.
I can hardly remember this class (thank God)
Nothing about Christian Family - it was all about sex
I'd say that your first statement was true, I can hardly remember this class. I suppose it was all about sex if you left out about half the sesions Session three alone is a scripture sheet., session 14 is about dating. Session 5 Virtuous woman While the quality of the information is debatable that it was all about sex seems from the content not.
I'd say that your first statement was true, I can hardly remember this class. I suppose it was all about sex if you left out about half the sesions Session three alone is a scripture sheet., session 14 is about dating. Session 5 Virtuous woman While the quality of the information is debatable that it was all about sex seems from the content not.
Maybe so, but the parts that were about sex were presented in an inappropriately explicit way for a "Christian" class, especially considering there would be 13-year-olds taking it.
I also remember him teaching that if a man didn't have a wife, or if for some reason his wife was unable to have sex, he "oughta learn how to masturbate." Too bad he didn't practice what he preached.
I took "CF&S" in the early 80's when it was taught by Victor. It appears from some posts here that the format of that class has changed over time.
I believe the quote above was also the portion of the class where his messianic bent peeked out for all to see...when he said something like "go ahead and masturbate! If it's sinful, I'll take the blame for it." At that point (well, at many points in that setting) I, like anyone else there, should've closed the syllabus and left. Unfortunately, I was still new to The Way and already learned well to put on the back burner anything questionable.
My husband and I got married and hadn't had the newest version of "the family class" SHAME ON US! Thank GOD the newest version of the class was going to be starting the DAY AFTER we got married! NO NEED FOR A HONEYMOON!!! We could just TAKE THE CLASS!!
(WTF???)
We declined and decided we would go put things into practice for ourselves without the "present truth" on the subject.
We had to submit to a gynae/pap exam BEFORE ENTERING THE CORPS and our own doctors had to sign to say we were in good health in this regard, which form was submitted with the Corps application form. My doc was appalled at the request and simply asked if I'd had a smear test recently and took my word for it.
I seem to recall a LOT more explicit pics in that class than simple nudies. Maybe you had a different version of that class, but the one I saw was fit for viewing in a booth with a pocket full of quarters. The only difference being it cost a LOT more and you had to sit there, nervously, in a crowd.
Do you think Larry Flynt is a MOG, also? At least Flynt is more honest about what he's all about than VP ever was.
The quality of the teaching was no deeper than a sex ed class.
The photos used were FAR more explicit than in a sex ed class.
I kept MENTALLY censoring what he was saying, but upon later reflection and
once the subject was broached, he sure spent significant amounts of time
with women's body parts onscreen, commenting on how nice they looked.
I think women are beautiful, but I don't think the point need be made with
nude photos of women....
Maybe so, but the parts that were about sex were presented in an inappropriately explicit way for a "Christian" class, especially considering there would be 13-year-olds taking it.
The class was 7 sessions long.
If one stretched it, the Christian-related materials MIGHT cover ONE class.
That left 6 sessions that were on biology and sex ed.
"Dealing with the Adversary" had pages of material.
"The Renewed Mind" had pages of material.
"CFS" had TWO SHEETS.
One was vpw's gonzo idea that the original sin was masturbation,
the other sheet was that chapter in Proverbs.
The rest of the class was sex ed.
First off, this was my favorite class from TWI. By far. I had a ton of fun and laughed.
Secondly. I was only 13, so my judgment is suspect.
(snip)
This class was inappropriate, IMHO, for 17-year olds, and 13 should have been
out-of-the-question.
Then again, since this class added nothing to the student, the entire class
was inappropriate and should have been out-of-the-question.
Dr. Wierwille taught that the human body is beautiful and as part of the class showed us pictures of it .... nothing wrong with nude pictures in and of themselves. This is not porn. Porn is designed to encourage lust and lasciviousness, perhaps covetousness, those are the sins we need stay away from. But viewing pics to show how beautiful the body is is nothing ... its vanilla. I don't believe VP was encouraging those sins and can't imagine someone getting caught up in lust and evil imaginations from viewing those vanilla images unless they wanted to.
You can still believe this statement KNOWING that it was a serial sexual predator and rapist made these claims?
He lied Oldies. VPW lusted AND was lascivious, AND coveted other men`s wives...AND worse taught it to others as necessary in order to become great mogs.
Might want to examine that view point fella, apparently it WAS porn, and it DID encourage sin, and no, judging from the results in this man`s life and the damage his doctrines, caused....I don`t see this as vanilla at all.
Quite the contrary, I see it as sick, desensitizing and grooming for future sexual predation. Showing it to minors is also prosecutable by law.
This is the SAME man BTW whom insisted that victims of incest and rape needed to be healed by him sexually. He also insisted that a suicidal woman have sex with him in order to feel the need to live.
I hardly think that his view point on sexual norm (or any OTHER thing for that matter) is either healthy or innocuous. He was one sick b-stard.
Recommended Posts
nandon
First off, this was my favorite class from TWI. By far. I had a ton of fun and laughed.
Secondly. I was only 13, so my judgment is suspect.
masturbating is healthy for the prostate. Whether you're shooting alone or with someone else, keep on shooting. And I'm 100% serious about this.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NewParadigm
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Clarke
I agree. I have joked about the class being Christian SEX and oh yeah, family. But that seems to have been the emphasis in most people's minds. There wasn't a lot of teaching about how to love one another in a marriage, as I recall.
This proves my point. I don't know that 13-year-olds needed to see the kind of stuff in that class.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
I can hardly remember this class (thank God) but certainly parts of it would have been far more appropriately taught (that's if it needed to be taught at all) by Dr Rawlins, as a gynaecologist.
I have a recollection of some talk about a dog and a woman but in what I saw that had been excluded and it was, "I once saw a video of a dog and a woman, the dog wasn't interested, had more sense than the woman." Perhaps it had been remade.
I do remember a lengthy consideration of the Song of Solomon and the various figures of speech for sex acts, positions, and names for parts of the body associated with the activity.
The very name of the class is deceptive. Nothing about Christian Family - it was all about sex (not even "Christian sex" if there is such a thing, LOL!).
In rez, Dr Rawlins did teach us something about the raising of children and breastfeeding and some stuff about kids. All that did seem to make sense at the time; whether it still would ... I dunno.
Her teaching was followed by a gynaecological examination of the elder Corps women. Then, it seemed a little odd. Now, it seems like pandering.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tzaia
I'm sure at 13 it was wildly entertaining, but inappropriate.
If you want to masturbate - fine. You don't need a note from the doctor. There is no proven link between "shooting" and prostate health. There is a link between what you eat and prostate health.
With all you there as witnesses?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nottawayfer
And the fact that a minister feels the need to teach his flock about sex is WEIRD!!! Showing large, erect penises to children was not the best teaching IMHO.
BTW, Jenna Jameson says spit is the best lube.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Tzaia: Well, there was a line of elder Corps women. Examined one right after the other. Not much privacy. Dr R was assisted in this task by someone else, a nurse who was also in the Corps; I'd never met her before. It was very cramped in the little room in Founders Hall where this took place. So yes - there were witnesses.
Pander (noun): a person who procures for another the means of gratifying his or her base passions. (vt) to act as a pander.
I reckon (now I know of LCM's habits) that she was checking us out for LCM. We had to submit to a gynae/pap exam BEFORE ENTERING THE CORPS and our own doctors had to sign to say we were in good health in this regard, which form was submitted with the Corps application form. My doc was appalled at the request and simply asked if I'd had a smear test recently and took my word for it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ron G.
Oldies...
I seem to recall a LOT more explicit pics in that class than simple nudies. Maybe you had a different version of that class, but the one I saw was fit for viewing in a booth with a pocket full of quarters. The only difference being it cost a LOT more and you had to sit there, nervously, in a crowd.
Do you think Larry Flynt is a MOG, also? At least Flynt is more honest about what he's all about than VP ever was.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
I'd say that your first statement was true, I can hardly remember this class. I suppose it was all about sex if you left out about half the sesions Session three alone is a scripture sheet., session 14 is about dating. Session 5 Virtuous woman While the quality of the information is debatable that it was all about sex seems from the content not.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Clarke
Maybe so, but the parts that were about sex were presented in an inappropriately explicit way for a "Christian" class, especially considering there would be 13-year-olds taking it.
Edited by Mark ClarkeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Walk This Way...
I took "CF&S" in the early 80's when it was taught by Victor. It appears from some posts here that the format of that class has changed over time.
I believe the quote above was also the portion of the class where his messianic bent peeked out for all to see...when he said something like "go ahead and masturbate! If it's sinful, I'll take the blame for it." At that point (well, at many points in that setting) I, like anyone else there, should've closed the syllabus and left. Unfortunately, I was still new to The Way and already learned well to put on the back burner anything questionable.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
Vic Wierwille teaching "Christian family and sex" is like Jeffery Dahmer teaching a cooking class...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RumRunner
OK - this is way off color but it's Saturday 3:15 Pacific and I've had a beer so...
Dammed fine analogy Groucho...those two had some things in common...as in they both drilled their victims.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JavaJane
True story -
My husband and I got married and hadn't had the newest version of "the family class" SHAME ON US! Thank GOD the newest version of the class was going to be starting the DAY AFTER we got married! NO NEED FOR A HONEYMOON!!! We could just TAKE THE CLASS!!
(WTF???)
We declined and decided we would go put things into practice for ourselves without the "present truth" on the subject.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
hey great posts on this weirdo subject
WTF?
I mean, I meant to say, WTF?????????
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
The quality of the teaching was no deeper than a sex ed class.
The photos used were FAR more explicit than in a sex ed class.
I kept MENTALLY censoring what he was saying, but upon later reflection and
once the subject was broached, he sure spent significant amounts of time
with women's body parts onscreen, commenting on how nice they looked.
I think women are beautiful, but I don't think the point need be made with
nude photos of women....
The class was 7 sessions long.
If one stretched it, the Christian-related materials MIGHT cover ONE class.
That left 6 sessions that were on biology and sex ed.
"Dealing with the Adversary" had pages of material.
"The Renewed Mind" had pages of material.
"CFS" had TWO SHEETS.
One was vpw's gonzo idea that the original sin was masturbation,
the other sheet was that chapter in Proverbs.
The rest of the class was sex ed.
This class was inappropriate, IMHO, for 17-year olds, and 13 should have been
out-of-the-question.
Then again, since this class added nothing to the student, the entire class
was inappropriate and should have been out-of-the-question.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
You can still believe this statement KNOWING that it was a serial sexual predator and rapist made these claims?
He lied Oldies. VPW lusted AND was lascivious, AND coveted other men`s wives...AND worse taught it to others as necessary in order to become great mogs.
Might want to examine that view point fella, apparently it WAS porn, and it DID encourage sin, and no, judging from the results in this man`s life and the damage his doctrines, caused....I don`t see this as vanilla at all.
Quite the contrary, I see it as sick, desensitizing and grooming for future sexual predation. Showing it to minors is also prosecutable by law.
Edited by rascalLink to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
This is the SAME man BTW whom insisted that victims of incest and rape needed to be healed by him sexually. He also insisted that a suicidal woman have sex with him in order to feel the need to live.
I hardly think that his view point on sexual norm (or any OTHER thing for that matter) is either healthy or innocuous. He was one sick b-stard.
Edited by rascalLink to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.