Yup.
This claim has been causing quite a stir—the poster in our window has gotten a lot of disgusted looks and laughs. Which frankly makes me want to fling open the door and wave my hands around and yell.
But, back to being objective. Or at least factual.
So, why is a non-committal make out abuse? The whole point of NCMO is that it’s a mutual agreement, right? An agreement that you don’t want a relationship but just want to mack it for a few hours, right? Isn’t the definition of abuse coercion, action without consent?
Well, abuse really includes the misuse and mistreatment of other human beings, regardless of the victim’s consent or opposition. So NCMO, for example, is a form of objectification—what is this person to you, other than a pair of lips? NCMOs slander the purpose of kissing, and you can’t do it without negative consequences to yourself and your partner.
Kissing CANNOT be a physical act with no emotional reactions. It can’t. We’re wired for connection, which is part of the reason we desire physical intimacy. But severing the physical from the emotional and spiritual requirements that come with real intimacy is a sure setup for failure. Kissing without commitment is pure frosting—delicious, but leaves one unfulfilled—not to mention the nasty fuzz on your teeth and cavities if that’s all your eating.
These effects are not immediately visible, so the temptation to think, what does it hurt? is strong. However, conditioning yourself through NCMO to believe that a kiss doesn’t mean anything takes work, and undoing it when you decide to settle into a relationship, and eventually a marriage, can be extremely difficult. NCMO is a sorry attempt to get something for nothing, and that laziness is going to bleed through other aspects of your life and relationships.
What about those folks who believe they need to kiss to figure out how they feel about someone? You’d never buy a car without test-driving it, sooo….
Nope. (and again, objectification, people—just a note, women despise being compared to cars.) A kiss is an expression of your feelings—why would you participate in a gesture that should be an expression of respect, admiration, and love, without feeling any of those things? In my mind, these people are on the same train as those who insist on sleeping with a partner before marriage to see if they are sexually compatible. I think we’d agree about that?
We would never condone having non-committal sex with someone—why is making out an (apparently) entirely different story?
Please, your thoughts. Be anonymous if you desire, but seriously. I’d really love your opinion!!
17 comments:
I don't really agree with a lot of this... which is fine.
I agree with this. However, we still need to make a difference between making out and peck kissing. I think that peck kissing is fine. I don't think one can be turned on by that. However, I think that making out should be conserved by people who are pretty deep in a relationship or for married folks. Making out feels really good and probably will turn people on. So, couple really have to be careful about making out before they are married because it can lead to other things like petting.
Wow, I had never thought of it in this way before but it is so true! I've never done/participated in a NCMO because of the reason that I would probably begin to have feelings for that person. Thanks for addressing this.
speaking as a family life major, ncmo is byu's (and probably the active lds's) version of casual sex, according to a lot of surveys professors here have conducted. that blew my mind (because i never heard of the term before coming here...and in such quantities) and made me glad i think ncmos are ridiculous in the first place. is it really THAT hard to keep your hormones under wraps until you find someone you want to give your all to (or at least commit to trying to?)?
not sure about it being abuse (though your argument makes sense), but it definitely isn't a real forward step in finding a relationship that may turn into marriage. i think if a relationship starts with a ncmo, it's more-than-likely not going to turn into a relationship with spiritual, intellectual, mental, and physical aspects (at least, not right away). there's a focus on the physical from the beginning, and hormonal, passionate relationships fare less well than those with better balance. so abuse? ncmo definitely abuses in the fact that it hinders relationship success (if you're getting your ncmo on often).
NCMO is definitely abuse, to both parties, no matter who started it. Just speaking from experience.
Thanks so much for your comments and thoughts!
I'm interested to hear more.
Granted, I think NCMOs are for people without discipline in regards to their hormones, but to make them akin to casual sex is pretty out there. In the tiers of physical intimacy there are things reserved soley for your spouse. Making out is not one of those things. I mean by the same stretch of already exacerbated logic we can conclude that dating is also an abuse of emotions for another person since chances are you won't likely marry that person that you will "give it all to" one the first try. Please let's steer clear of zealous hyperspirituality when there are actual cases of actual sexual abuse that are actually a problem afflicting BYU.
Courtney,
Maybe it would make more sense to you to consider NCMO on a continuum of sexual abuse--obviously not as extreme as sexual assault, but something that if perpetuated and condoned by the culture could definitely lead to more extreme misuse and objectification of partners.
The point of labeling NCMO as abuse is not to take a stand on whether or not unmarried people should make out. It's to help people realize that any time someone objectifies and uses another person solely for his/her benefit, it is abuse.
There's also another post you might be interested in about NCMO--
here's the link: http://byuwsr.blogspot.com/2010/05/follow-up-on-ncmo.html
from which my favorite quote is this: "Affection should never be sought after as an end in itself, because this does violence to a person." -Bruce Monson, Speaking of Kissing, New Era, June 2001
Hope that helps!
I completely agree. It's interesting how when people read material like this their emotional reaction is usually to extrapolate what is said to have implications that were never meant to be expressed. What you said was very beautifully expressed and very clear and to the point and I could not agree more.
I never really thought it was a big deal, but then I fell in love with someone, and kissing became an expression of how much I cared about him. Now I realize that all those other kisses were meaningless, and I wish I hadn't given them. A kiss that says I love you is the best thing in the world--why settle for simple pleasure???
I never used to have a problem with NCMO, but then I fell in love with someone. Now I realize how meaningless those kisses were, and I wish I hadn't given them. When I kiss my boyfriend, I am telling him how much I care about him, that I love him. The idea of kissing someone just for fun now seems crazy!! Those other kisses were so pathetic in comparison...cheap knock-offs of the real thing. Pleasure cannot come even close to love...the kisses are immeasurably different in quality. save it guys, and wait until it's the real thing. then you have something meaningful to give that hasn't been given for free a million times already.
it's not abuse. calling something so trivial abuse degrades the real definition. this is a non-issue. young people will do what they want; if it's consensual then get over it. no one should be telling people how to live their lives, especially if no contrived moral codes are being shattered.
Okay confusing the definition of abuse is really, really dangerous and irresponsible...just saying. I agree with your general point about "ncmos"(I'm out of state and learned what this meant from your article),and agree that there is a moral problem with the concept. However, grouping it with abuse? I find this extremely demeaning and frankly juvenile. Personally having been sexually abused as a child, I know what's like to go through the emotional trauma of abuse and I can tell you "ncmos" are nowhere in the same category. As a women's resource center I feel like you should be more concerned with real serious issues that thousands of people suffer through daily rather than flighty moral ones however valid the concerns maybe.
I can see where people are coming from, but really?!? One question to those who think NCMO is okay - why are people so quick to make exceptions? I want to quote For The Strength of Youth:
"Before marriage, do not do anything to arouse the powerful emotions that must be expressed only in marriage. Do not participate in passionate kissing, lie on top of another person, or touch the private, sacred parts of another person’s body, with or without clothing. Do not allow anyone to do that with you. Do not arouse those emotions in your own body."
"BEFORE MARRIAGE." I also want to point out that "passionate kissing" is included in the same sentence as petting. Yes, that is in a pamphlet that many say is solely for the "Youth" of the Church. Are you saying that because you're a little bit older you're above some of the counsel from our Prophets, and therefore, the counsel of God? That doesn't make sense...
NCMO can lead to more serious things. President Spencer W. Kimball said, "Immorality does not begin in adultery or perversion. It begins with little indiscretions like sex thoughts, sex discussions, passionate kissing, petting and such, growing with every exercise." NCMO is just another step. If you're saying to yourself, "it's just NCMO, I'm not going to take the next step," Why even take the first step?
To those concerned about NCMO being considered "abuse." Abuse as a noun: "The improper use of something;" and as a verb: "Use (something) to bad effect or for a bad purpose; misuse," as defined by dictionary.com. If something is being used in an improper fashion it is abuse.
NCMO is abuse. It is lust. It is going against the counsels of God. I might be extreme in my views, but really, how much is eternal salvation worth to you? Why not be the BEST you can be instead of making little exceptions here and there? "As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord," (Joshua 24:15)
Reidheadc, I totally agree with you. I don't think that your view is extreme. I've had experience which leads me to want to be on the safe side of things because our covenants should not be trifled with and taken lightly. I think that people's basic drives really gets in the way of logical thinking concerning what our Prophets have told us. Thanks adding support to your comment.
Okay, IF you believe in the teachings of the followings of Christ and what the LDS religion teaches then NCMO is not moral. It's not moral and is very selfish. It's only done to meet your instant desire. You are the ones setting the example... If you don't believe in the teachings then don't worry about the comments. This obviously isn't for you and you will do as you please. I myself don't claim to be LDS and still think this is an immoral act.
I never thought of it like that.
That's an interesting point, it makes sense & I see where you're coming from, but I don't think it's ALWAYs abusive or even objectifying by definition.
I strongly disagree with kissing HAVING to have an emotional/spiritual reaction. People are wired differently (due to both nature & nurture) so we have unique ways of connecting, even if it's just a slight difference. Kissing can be a way to connect with people. But does it work like that for everyone & in the same way or to the same extent? No. The same can be said for rituals or sex or touch or talking or any other way we may typically bond. In some cases, for some people, some of those things just don't mean anything emotionally.
And also as for it being objectifying, it definitely is if doing x with this person is literally the only reason you see that this person exists. But just because you aren't committed to someone doesn't mean you don't have any care or respect for them as a person, it just means can't/don't want a certain kind of relationship (with them).
Post a Comment