Things to know

Regularly read by 50,000+ readers in over 140 countries around the world, "Dear Bro Jo" is published several times a month.

This is column is just one guy's opinion, and while he does his best to keep what he thinks, says and writes in-line with the Gospel of Jesus Christ, "Dear Bro Jo" is not an LDS Church website. (And Sister Jo thinks you should know that he's sometimes wrong, and often way too opinionated for his own good.)

Nothing here is meant to take the place of talking with parents, leaders, or Church authorities. Please, if you need serious help, talk to a trusted adult, leader, and / or professional counselor.

Please like our Facebook page, and check it often for Discussions, Notes, Events and just General Good Stuff!

Everything here is copyrighted. If you're going to quote any part of anything here, please get Bro Jo's written permission. You can reach him at dearbrojo@gmail.com.

Monday, February 13, 2017

New-member Dating Questions

Dear Bro Jo,

I'd like to first start off by saying I really enjoy reading your blog. I'm 17 and I have just recently come upon The Church (I'm getting baptized this weekend). So being at this age and this stage in joining the church, and without much guidance on the topic of relationships from the church's view (not only relationships but the social dynamics in the church as well), your blog really helps to give insight and help me understand these things and these views, as I don't have any family or close friends that are members to really observe or learn from, so thank you for that!

After reading your blog for a while I had a few questions.

On the right hand side of the website in the "dating rules for teens" section it says "date in groups of 2 or more couples" and "no dating the same person twice in a row." These two statements stood out to me and were confusing and odd to me.

So my first question was: I could understand for a young teen to need to date in a group, but as teens get older and more mature it seems like they would be okay with dating on their own (However this may just be me being used to the normal dating and relationship ways of most teenagers today), so what age (if any) would you say was acceptable for a 1-on-1 date?

Secondly, how would you pursue a relationship with a person if you were simply dating different people every time and were unable to continually date someone? I guess my only guess of the answer to these questions are maybe how you define "dating" and "in a relationship."

And my last question is that in a recent post you responded to a girl who was waiting for a missionary, and you stated that she should continue dating other people while he was gone and then maybe try to purse something once he returned. You also said that someone should not wait for a missionary unless some serious guarantee is in place. What would you constitute as a reasonable situation to wait for a missionary?

Thank you very much for your time and response!

- Name Withheld




Dear NW,

Congratulations on your baptism!

The purpose of Serious Single Dating is to find a spouse.  Until we're at the age where we should be doing that, we should Casual Group Date.

Getting in "relationships" while we're in our teens invites drama, temptation, heart ache and limits our fun and opportunities.

One-on-one dates,  IMO, are something a young man should save for after his mission, and a young woman should save at least until she's graduated high school (or the local cultural equivalent).

I think you've identified the issue well.

People often say they are "dating" but they never actually go out on dates.

A date needs a Plan, the guys to Pick Up their dates (that's what a proper escort does), and to Pay for anything that you've invited your date to do.  (That does not mean that a Date needs to be expensive.  Some of the best dates the Jo Boys have gone on involved a hike and a picnic. )

As for missionaries ... in my opinion there are no circumstances where a young woman (or young man, even with all of the sisters out there) should "wait" for a missionary.

- Bro Jo

No comments: