I am, however, pointing out that whenever old-fashion terms are used to discuss these issues (which they still are on many many occasions in both public and private counsel, although the church seems to have done much to clarify these instructions in their official publications and guidelines) that there is bound to be some youth who don’t know exactly what those terms refer to. This doesn’t make the standards themselves a point of possible confusion, it simply makes communication surrounding the issues rather inefficient. If you are using a language that your audience doesn’t understand then there is an obvious problem.

Again, I don’t think that this creates any confusion whatsoever about what the standards actually are. It just makes particular statements containing words from a previous generation’s vernacular incomprehensible, and I think this is something that church leaders and parents should take note of. If you are using a word like “necking” to describe a particular activity then you ought to be sure that those whom you are addressing know what that particular activity is.

Let me clarify myself somewhat. The confusion has never been over what is and isn’t appropriate in these discussions with other youth or members. That much can pretty much be gleaned from a handful of various sources within the church. The confusion I was referring to was due to the use and misunderstanding of a particular set of terms that come from 1950’s (or earlier?), such as “petting” and “necking” that many of today’s youth simply have no idea what they mean, and they most certainly don’t use those terms when talking with each other. (I’m sure there are other confusing and old-fashion terms but I just can’t think of them right now).

I find this interesting, as I think our leaders have been really, really clear about what is and isn’t appropriate. For example, from True to the Faith:

“[N]ever do anything outside of marriage to arouse the powerful emotions that must be expressed only in marriage. Do not arouse those emotions in another person’s body or in your own body….Do not participate in conversations or activities that arouse sexual feelings. Do not participate in passionate kissing, lie with or 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 such things with you.”

This is pretty clear in my mind. ANYTHING that someone chooses to do that causes sexual arousal is wrong before marriage. (This is not to say that any arousal ever is wrong, but choosing to do something to arouse those passions is. Important distinction, imo.)

I have received similar baffling responses from other LDS adults with whom I have discussed the matter. There is certainly not a widespread understanding among today’s youth about what many of these terms that are tossed around actually mean. To discuss what they actually mean, however, would inevitably involve crossing the boundary into explicit detail; the very reason why these “safe” terms are used in the first place.

Within LDS culture the vocabulary used to describe particular activities seems ancient, and rather old-fashioned, but most importantly I didn’t know what any of the words meant because they were derived from a culture, time and place that was completely foreign to me.

I know what it means to “make-out” but I still don’t know what “petting” means! I still am not quite sure what “necking” means! I can come up with my own vague ideas, but who knows if they are the same ideas that the general and local authorities have when they use these terms.

I have always found the language used within the LDS culture to discuss chastity completely incomprehensible, and I think the language used in the discourse deserves a fair amount of attention.

I don’t remember ever being asked those questions during that time, myself.