Why the stigma about masturbation?

[Rilchiam]

A great many cultures and religions have told, and are still telling, people, especially young people, that Touching Yourself is Wrong, Wrong, Wrong.

Why? Maybe because some religions prohibit anything that might be pleasurable, including sweets, secular reading, and clothes that let you breathe comfortably? Maybe because, even though it won't get anyone pregnant, and it can't be adultery because it doesn't involve another person, it's still a sexual act? And for that matter, why were the warnings so often so extreme---not just "Don't do it" but "It'll turn black/it'll fall off/you'll go blind/you'll go to hell"?

Just curious. (So to speak.)

[Genghis Bob]

Huh . . . I always heard you would grow hair on your palms. Big gaping holes, though? {Shudder}

[Genghis Bob]

Damn! I could have sworn that the title of the thread was "Why the Stigmata about masturbation"!

:smack:

[duffer]

I don't know about other religions, but I can offer a practical reason (IMO) why it's frowned upon in the Catholic Church. And it's the same reasoning (again IMO) that birth control is frowned upon.

When you masturbate, or use any kind of birth control, you lessen the chances of creating new life that will, by default, probably become Catholic. By masturbating, you lessen the sex drive, and therefore decrease chances of reproducing. Also, the sex before marriage deal helps lock you into a relationship that almost guarantees more and more Catholics.

(I've been having a bit of a crisis of faith lately, so don't take this as any sort of a defacto denial of faith. In the last week I've learned of 2 kids taking into CPS care while my wife and I are looking at starting IVF next month. I'm a little bitter.)

[HealThySelf]

I like the way the mormons aproach it. They issue these magic underwear that somehow shield the genitals from wandering hands, or those pesky night time incubus and sucubus visitations.

[duffer]

I like the way the mormons aproach it. They issue these magic underwear that somehow shield the genitals from wandering hands, or those pesky night time incubus and sucubus visitations.

One of my sisters married a non-practicing Mormon. I always thought he was whooshing me with the magic underwear thing. He alluded to LDS members having to wear them to get to heaven or some such, but never gave enough detail to take him seriously. Now I see this. Is this really something in the Church? Can anyone elaborate?

[RedFury]

Why the stigma about masturbation?

Are you sure you don't mean "smegma." 'Cause that, I might be able to explain.

[An Arky]

Because everyone who does it is a wanker...

:D

Religion/morality is part of it, but I'd also wager that a good bit of is is just plain old modesty.

[duality72]

From Wild Utah (http://www.wildutah.net/2-12-02/htmldocs/Mormon.htm):


Mormons wear strange underwear called “Temple garments” because they get them when they attend the Temple for the first time and take their oaths of allegiance to the Church. These “gar-ments” are worn beneath all other clothing, including bras and normal-people underwear. They’ve even been known to keep them on while they have sex, and while bathing, leaving one leg outside the tub with the garment on, then switching sides and letting the other leg contain the garment. The garments supposedly have “magic” powers and will protect the faithful from harm, which is why you might hear the term “magic underwear” if you hang out in Utah long enough.


:smack:

[braintree]

My opinion which is absolutely, 100% guaranteed correct.

In this ghastly old world there are a few things that make us want to hang on. Sex is one, religion is another. But sex is more than just pleasuring ourselves like denizens of the ape house at the Bronx Zoo. Sexuality in particular and worldliness in general also stimulates some of our greatest creative endeavors, be it racous entertainments like "The Producers" to Boticelli who, admittedly, managed to get both in depending on the occassion.

Religion, unfortunately, can be a jealous mistress who thinks that she has all the answers. What to do about the competition? Stigmatize it, that's what. Hell, in Catholic World, you're not even supposed to have standard vanilla sex among married couples (or did this change?) unless it's to pop one out of the oven. See, sex itself is insufficiently spiritual but the need for the dirty deed is recognized as an unfortunate necessity so they have to dress it up in a lot of joy-killing hoo-ha resulting in an ethos of hold-your-nose lovemaking, praise Jesus.

Take the Virgin Mary. The reason she and Our Savior are supposed to be so freakin' holy is because she was impregnated without suffering the debasement of enjoying the experience.

Well, if that's the way they feel, can you imagine what people like that are going to think about whacking off? Jesus!

[RTFirefly]

I can offer a practical reason (IMO) why it's frowned upon in the Catholic Church....

When you masturbate, or use any kind of birth control, you lessen the chances of creating new life that will, by default, probably become Catholic. But sexual relations when you're single are also bad, saith the Roman Catholic Church. So that argument only makes sense if we're talking about married people.
By masturbating, you lessen the sex drive, and therefore decrease chances of reproducing. For how many decades does one have to masturbate before the sex drive starts dropping off? Just wondering.

[braintree]

For how many decades does one have to masturbate before the sex drive starts dropping off? Just wondering.

I'll let you know when I get there.

[dotchan]

This is purly speculation on my part, but it might have something to do with the philosophical view that matter is evil.

Of course Christianity adapted this to a variety of good and bad effects, but they were hardly the first to say that "sex = dirty". The New Testament had its share of people who withdrew to a life of strict self denial, both among Judaic splinter groups (such as the Essenes) and Hellenistic philosophers (such as the Stoics). It didn't help that a lot of local fertility cults involved rites with temple prostitutes and the like.

[silenus]

35 years of wanking, and still going strong! :D

[kellner]

But sexual relations when you're single are also bad, saith the Roman Catholic Church. So that argument only makes sense if we're talking about married people.Perhaps you are more motivated to get married if the alternatives are restricted. :)

[GIGObuster]

Thanks to Pius XII (out of all the modern popes this one had to do it!) the 1950 papal encyclical entitled "Humani Generis" gave Catholics the freedom to accept evolution.

Ever since 1858, the descent of man from other species was accepted by science as very likely (and lately -by science- as a fact with theories to explain it).
Just recently, masturbation has been found to be a good safeguard against prostate cancer.

Therefore, the Catholic Church at least, will do the right thing; and it will approve of masturbation around the time the Boston Red Sox win another pennant. :)

[Maastricht]

I've always suspected, in my more cynical moods, that the Church uses guilt to keep people in line. It would work like this:

1. Label a behaviour as sinful.
It's got to be something everybody does, yet everybody must think they're the only ones doing it.
Masturbating, or dirty thoughts, works the purpose just fine. It is done in private and every man thinks he's the only one who does it. Or, the only one who does it that much. That still applies, even in these modern times. Most of my boyfriends thought they masturbated more then the average guy, and were slightly ashamed of it.

2. When everybody thinks they've got something to be ashamed of, they are easier to be kept in line. Divide 'em and rule 'em. When a guy is singled out for "impurity", no-one will come to his defense, because everybody feels they've got something to hide too and nobody wants to draw attention to their own secretly sinful selves.

3. The mechanism further perpetuates itself because those who "sin" will try to make up for sinning by fiercely condemning "sinning" in others.

The Church has done this for ages, with, I daresay, results the opposite of what they say they want to achieve. Making sex sinful ensures it has a foremost place in everybody's minds. It's basically the "you must not, not think of a purple elephant"-paradox.
Making sex a dirty secret ensures people won't get informed well, and won't report abuse.
What's the region with the lowest rate of teenage pregnancy in the world? A devoutly Roman-catholic country? The USA-Bible-belt? No! It used to be the Netherlands, with its totally permissive, practical young-people-will-do-it-anyway so-here's-your-contraceptive-and-here's-how-you-use-it-and-have-fun-now-dears-attitude.

[Kel Varnsen - Latex Division]

The Bible may or may not have something to say about this depending on how you interpret this passage:

And Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the Lord; and the Lord slew him.
And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother.
And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother.
And the thing which he did displeased the Lord: wherefore he slew him also.

-- Genesis 38: 7-10 (KJV)

[vetbridge]

35 years of wanking, and still going strong! :D

Well, I've got you beat...lemme rephrase that...nevermind. ;)

[Anaamika]

I don't know about other religions, but I can offer a practical reason (IMO) why it's frowned upon in the Catholic Church. And it's the same reasoning (again IMO) that birth control is frowned upon.



But not for women.

I agree with Maastricht (had to copy and paste that name!), I think it's a form of control. I think if more teens were encouraged to masturbate, they might be getting into sexual relationships less casually, as well as knowing what a healthy sexual relationship is when they do have one.

[Happy Scrappy Hero Pup]

Not that I hold this opinion personally, mind you, but there are a few basic ideas behind it:

1. Simple survival: This is also where the initial prohibitions against homosexuality come into play: If you're going to expend the sexual effort, there should be a result that benefits the community, specifically, making that community bigger. See Desert, Jews in the.

2. Distraction: Masturbation (and, by extension, homosexuality) is simply an expression of lust; it is a desire to achieve gratification solely for its own purpose- it is an act that specifically and purposely eliminates the possibility of procreation and is therefore base because it subverts God's purpose in creating the procreative act.


As an aside, I don't believe that any church looks at sex or other pleasures as "competition," and I don't think that the purpose of any religion is to enslave the masses. While certain groups of people espousing one version or another of ANY religion might exploit that for their own ends, I think that God will look much less kindly on those people than on a guy who "spills his seed upon the ground," or the female equivalent thereof.

[blowero]

35 years of wanking, and still going strong! :D
Yeah, I accomplished 35 years worth too. It took me about a year. :D

[Knorf]

By masturbating, you lessen the sex drive, and therefore decrease chances of reproducing.
Bullshit.

[ouryL]

The Bible may or may not have something to say about this depending on how you interpret this passage:


It seems to me that GOD was displeased not with masturbation but with the method of birth control called the withdrawal.

[bughunter]

Or, in the latin, coitus interruptus blasphemus

[nitroglycerine]

< sings> Every sperm is sacred, every sperm is great, If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate < /sings>


Whats with you people.....this should have been the second post in this thread! :p

[mrunlucky]

< sings >Every sperm is useful/ Every sperm is fine/ God needs everybody's/ Mine, and mine, and mine

Let the pagans spill theirs/ O'er mountain, hill and plain/ God shall strike them down for/ Each sperm that's spilt in vain</ sings >

I can't even believe I'm quoting Monty Python, but it has to be done.

[NDP]

And Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the Lord; and the Lord slew him.
And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother.
And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother.
And the thing which he did displeased the Lord: wherefore he slew him also.

-- Genesis 38: 7-10 (KJV)

It seems to me that GOD was displeased not with masturbation but with the method of birth control called the withdrawal.
The fact that he openly disobeyed and defied an order from the Almighty was also a big factor in why he was smited.

As for the OP, perhaps it's because some people find the whole procedure icky?

[Maastricht]

But not for women.

I agree with Maastricht (had to copy and paste that name!), I think it's a form of control.

What is so hard about my name? It is spelled just like it is pronounced. ;)

When duffer is right, the Church would condemn any form of sex that can't lead to offspring within the "official" family. And that does seem to be the case. .

It is interesting, as Elenia28 remarked, that the church on the whole is silent on female masturbation. If my theory of control is right, female masturbation wouldn't be an issue precisely because many women aren't interested in masturbating, so they canot be made feel guilty about something they just don't do.
Instead, women are/were kept in line because they had to worry about their sexual reputation (even more then their actual behavior). A reputation is a very fragile thing, easily damaged by even such innocent behaviour as talking to a guy or looking at him too long. (which is something every girl will do). The fear of being called a "slut" keeps women divided and subdued in much the same way as men can be kept in line by condemning masturbation and sexual thoughts.

[aruvqan]

But not for women.

I agree with Maastricht (had to copy and paste that name!), I think it's a form of control. I think if more teens were encouraged to masturbate, they might be getting into sexual relationships less casually, as well as knowing what a healthy sexual relationship is when they do have one.

All I know is that mrAru and I agree on one thing about any possible Arulettes, not that it seems likely we will ever acquire one :rolleyes:

When she hits menarch, she will be escorted to a good OB/GYN, and he/she/it will be told to go ahead and issue any form of birth control the sprog wants, and to treat her medical requirements with all the discretion she asks for. mrAru and I don't need the details, we will pay for what ever she needs. She will be given as much information about sexuality as she asks and treated as an adult with respect.

At home, she will be given access to any onformation she wants to get privately on her ocmputer [chatrooms to be monitored, but if she wants to surf porn sites, that is up to her, I have a number of good sex-information non-porn sites bookmarked just in case :D And if she wants to experiment, I want her to bring the boy home and experiment where we know she wont be in a car in a dark alley or any other sort of physical danger. I always thought open honesty and respect should be part of every parent/child relationship.

[duffer]

Bullshit.

Nope, [George Carlin] It's...no...Bullshit![/George Carlin]

Let's see if I can phrase that better. When a man masturbates, the immediate desire for sex decreases, not the overall sex drive. Poorly worded before, sorry. However, if you take masturbation out of it, the drive for sex becomes much more pronounced and the chances of finding a partner are increased.

That's probably still not the best way to put it, but I trust you understand what I mean. :)

[seosamh]

Somewhere at the back of my legs I seem to remember reading that the practice of circumcision in Judaism - in addition to Abraham's covenant with the man upstairs - was an attempt to hinder masturbation, since it's easier and maybe more tempting if you have more, er, material to play with. The same might also be true in Islam and any other religion which has specific rules about it.

It's a bit late for me to find out first-hand (so to speak) and I am certainly not going to ask any of my mates, especially as I haven't a clue who is and who isn't.

[davenportavenger]

I always figured it had to do with not wanting to waste sperm. If you believe that every cell in a dude's product is half of a potential "life," then you don't want to just flush that down the toilet. Think of all the great composers and artists and heart surgeons you're killing! </sarcasm> Though I suppose that wouldn't explain the stigma against female masturbation. In that case, though, a woman is being sinful if she doesn't have unprotected sex with a man every month from the beginning of her period to menopause. Think of all those poor little egg cells, totally wasted.

[GorillaMan]

Somewhere at the back of my legs I seem to remember reading that the practice of circumcision in Judaism - in addition to Abraham's covenant with the man upstairs - was an attempt to hinder masturbation, since it's easier and maybe more tempting if you have more, er, material to play with. The same might also be true in Islam and any other religion which has specific rules about it.
There's a far more prosaic explanation for circumcision being common in middle eastern cultures. For peoples living in a hot dusty environment, without modern sanitation, it was a preventative health measure. In the same way as eg Mesopotamian cultural and ethical codes found their way into later religious teachings, so did circumcision.

[seosamh]

There's a far more prosaic explanation for circumcision being common in middle eastern cultures. For peoples living in a hot dusty environment, without modern sanitation, it was a preventative health measure. In the same way as eg Mesopotamian cultural and ethical codes found their way into later religious teachings, so did circumcision.

Well, aye: that's the usual excuse. But I'm afraid I don't buy it. I find it hard to fathom how a society chose to prevent a bit of smegma build-up by whapping off the foreskin rather than by the rather simpler method of "washing your knob every now and then". They didn't elect to prevent ear wax by lopping ears off, did they?

[look!ninjas]

It is interesting, as Elenia28 remarked, that the church on the whole is silent on female masturbation. If my theory of control is right, female masturbation wouldn't be an issue precisely because many women aren't interested in masturbating...

Who told you that one?

[GorillaMan]

Well, aye: that's the usual excuse. But I'm afraid I don't buy it. I find it hard to fathom how a society chose to prevent a bit of smegma build-up by whapping off the foreskin rather than by the rather simpler method of "washing your knob every now and then". They didn't elect to prevent ear wax by lopping ears off, did they?
If you're living in a desert, you don't necessarily have enough water for a daily genital wash. And it's not just about smegma - get caught in a sandstorm, and dust gets everywhere. And if you've got no tight-woven synthetic fibres, that really does mean every single crevice. Scratches & abrasions....infections....no penicillin....goodbye appendage.

[Annie-Xmas]

35 years of wanking, and still going strong! :D

When come back, bring pie.

[Zagadka]

If you ask me, and you must realize that you did, even if by accident...

Religion developed largely as an explanation of the world around. Religion is really the earliest science. Anyhow, a major part of early religion was fertility. As religion developed, as things tend to develop out of chaos, into organized religion, fertility became one of the primary rites of the organized religious people, from the ancients onward. As religion became bureaucraticized (Roman Catholic Chuch comes to mind), the goal is controlling fertility - a very primal religious instinct.

Some religions have this "thing" about masturbation and sexuality in general, demonizing it because, obviously, it is religious, and should thus come under the control of the religious state (aka, marriage). Other religions (the ones I like) see sex and masturbation and other fertility rites as part of daily life.

[Israfel]

It seems to me that the negative take of masturbation is a result of the negative take on promiscuous sex. To say that an action is immoral and then to fantasize about freely engaging in that action may seem to some as a case of ignoring the spirit of the law.

This idea of "purifying" one's mind is present in several religions.

[Maastricht]

Who told you that one?

Well, for starters, the Kinsey report (http://www.indiana.edu/~kinsey/research/ak-data.html#masturbation) says:
62% of females reported that they had masturbated (p. 142, Female).
45% of females who reported having masturbated indicated that they could reach orgasm within 3 minutes (p. 163, Female).

Yeah, but that's 1956, you say? Well, I couldn't find more recent data this quickly, but I did a survey myself, among female psychology students, in my second year of studying psychology in the Netherlands (1990, that must have been). Of 70 returned questionaires, 70 % of women indicated that they masturbated. I could see no reason why that percentage would be higher among women who didn't fill in the questionaire, so I think 70% is about as high as it gets, at least in that group.

My point is, that this leaves at least 25 % of women who never masturbated, as opposed to fewer then 2 % of men. For the point of view of a control-seeking mechanism, 25 %of the group to whom your damnations don't apply just leaves too large a group who can't be made to feel guilty.

[El Zagna]

I'm always skeptical of these numbers. Who are those men and women who "don't masturbate"? Are they saying that they have never masturbated, haven't masturbated recently, don't masturbate regularly, or are so ashamed that they do that they can't even admit it on an anonymous questionnaire?

[Zagadka]

I'm always skeptical of these numbers. Who are those men and women who "don't masturbate"? Are they saying that they have never masturbated, haven't masturbated recently, don't masturbate regularly, or are so ashamed that they do that they can't even admit it on an anonymous questionnaire?
See, this is why I advocate taking the population of one of those states in the middle that no one cares about, and putting them under controlled blind scientific observation.

[Maastricht]

I'm always skeptical of these numbers. Who are those men and women who "don't masturbate"? Are they saying that they have never masturbated, haven't masturbated recently, don't masturbate regularly, or are so ashamed that they do that they can't even admit it on an anonymous questionnaire?

Well, in this thread (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=164303&highlight=masturbate%2A) a few Dopers described themselves as having never masturbated, some after having tried it, say, ten times.

I believe the question Kinsey asked in his questionnaire was if they had ever masturbated, but no doubt the exact question, answers, and a description of the selected group can be found in Kinseys book itself.
For the rest of your question, you might want to check out the most renowned sources: Kinsey, Masters and Johnson, or the Hite report (http://www.britannica.com/women/articles/Hite_Report_The.html) by Shere Hite, published in 1976. (So it is about time somebody got famous by publishing an update ;j )
All are extensive studies of what, how and how often people do it, and you'd be surprised at the wide range of "it." :)

People come in all varieties. Those who masturbate and those who don't; those who are shocked to find out so many people do masturbate, and those who are shocked that not everybody masturbates. ;)

[Rilchiam]

Interesting answers, all!

And count me among those who don't believe that "most girls aren't interested". More like, most of them are damn liars, same as boys who say they don't. Or they really don't, but only because they've repressed their sexual urges to an unhealthy degree.

Now what I also wonder is, where did all the old wives' tales come from, like "It'll turn black and fall off"? Just more ignorance, from the same school that said to put butter on a burn and beefsteak on a black eye?

[Chimpy]

When come back, bring pie.
Dude... I don't want that sorta pie...

[asc165]

Therefore, the Catholic Church at least, will do the right thing; and it will approve of masturbation around the time the Boston Red Sox win another pennant. :)

Praise the Lord . . . I'm good to go!

[Eric II]

Obviously you people, smart though you may be, have missed the most definitive psychological study done so far.

It found that 95% of the people in the country masterbate and the other 5% are liars.

So there...

And don't ask for a cite, either!

[Lamia]

And count me among those who don't believe that "most girls aren't interested". More like, most of them are damn liars, same as boys who say they don't. Or they really don't, but only because they've repressed their sexual urges to an unhealthy degree.
In middle school, during a "girl talk" conversation, an aquaintance (not a friend) of mine expressed surprised at some reference I made to female masturbation.

"Girls can't masturbate!" she said. Can't, not don't. She really thought it was physically impossible for females. I set her straight as best I could (no thanks to a friend who kept saying "You use a broomstick!"), but since then I've always wondered if some of the women who say they don't masturbate aren't actually masturbating without realizing that's what they're doing. I mean, if you think females cannot masturbate, then whatever you're doing with yourself alone in the bathtub couldn't be masturbation, right?

I get the impression that some guys have a notion of female masturbation as always involving penetration of some kind (either with the fingers or another object), and if there are any women who have the same notion then they might not consider other forms of self-pleasure to be actual masturbation.

And of course some people are just liars. I'm sure there are a fair few women who genuinely don't masturbate, but I have trouble believing it's as many as 25%. To throw out another anecdote, a friend of mine in college had a very devout fundamentalist roommate who she caught -- several times -- masturbating in her sleep.

[Maastricht]

Interesting answers, all! And count me among those who don't believe that "most girls aren't interested".

I said: "many" not "most". And I didn't say "interested", I said "have masturbated". There's a difference, you know. ;j

[GorillaMan]

To throw out another anecdote, a friend of mine in college had a very devout fundamentalist roommate who she caught -- several times -- masturbating in her sleep.
LMFAO......"Huh, what....errr...you just woke me up!! Honest!!"


FWIW, I had one long-term girlfriend who masturbated about once every six months. In the surveys mentioned, she'd probably have said 'no, never'. Not that she didn't have a 'normal' sex drive - quite the oppostie ;) . Just that she didn't feel sexual when alone.

[Zagadka]

To throw out another anecdote, a friend of mine in college had a very devout fundamentalist roommate who she caught -- several times -- masturbating in her sleep.
Masturbating in who's sleep, the friend or the room mate? O_o

Doctor, help! I sleep-masturbate! (And God will smite me!)

[Maastricht]

Good point, Lamia. I've heard many anecdotes of women simply not knowing how to masturbate. Me too. As a kid, my parents gave me a fairly openminded sex-ed booklet. It told me women can get a nice feeling by,

quote "stroking a little spot above their vagina" /quote

I remembered stroking my every piece of skin below and above my bellybutton, before finally giving up. It didn't occur to me to stroke a hidden, sticky spot.
A clitoris is just not obvious, as a penis is, and most sex-ed directed at women is just so vague.

[Zagadka]

It didn't occur to me to stroke a hidden, sticky spot.
A clitoris is just not obvious, as a penis is, and most sex-ed directed at women is just so vague.
Welcome to being a young man frustrated with his first girl ;-)

[Lamia]

Masturbating in who's sleep, the friend or the room mate? O_o

Doctor, help! I sleep-masturbate! (And God will smite me!)The first time I think they were actually both asleep. My friend slept in the upper bunk, and IIRC later reported that she was awakened from a light sleep by soft grunting/shaking from below. I know she later "walked in" on her sleeping-but-busy roommate when returning from late-night parties of the sort that nice fundamentalist girls don't attend.

When my friend told these stories we all asked her if it wasn't possible that her roommate was just pretending to be asleep, but she said that she was sure it wasn't an act...mostly because the roommate continued masturbating. (She rejected our suggestion that the roommate was just an exhibitionist.) Even after my friend made some "Ahem" noises to make her presence obvious.

This did leave her with an interesting moral question -- do you tell your fundamentalist roommate that she's masturbating in her sleep? My friend chose not to, although she said she might bring it up if the roommate got too annoying about my friend's various "sinful" activities.

[Zagadka]

The first time I think they were actually both asleep. My friend slept in the upper bunk, and IIRC later reported that she was awakened from a light sleep by soft grunting/shaking from below. I know she later "walked in" on her sleeping-but-busy roommate when returning from late-night parties of the sort that nice fundamentalist girls don't attend.

When my friend told these stories we all asked her if it wasn't possible that her roommate was just pretending to be asleep, but she said that she was sure it wasn't an act...mostly because the roommate continued masturbating. (She rejected our suggestion that the roommate was just an exhibitionist.) Even after my friend made some "Ahem" noises to make her presence obvious.

This did leave her with an interesting moral question -- do you tell your fundamentalist roommate that she's masturbating in her sleep? My friend chose not to, although she said she might bring it up if the roommate got too annoying about my friend's various "sinful" activities.
I had an upper bunk my first year... good god, I still hear and feel grunting and moaning and shaking of my room mate and his gf... and the smell... sometimes dorm life sucks.

*shudders*

[look!ninjas]

Maastricht - Fair enough. You did say "many," not "most." However, I'm still not sure that supports your conclusion. 25-30% of women say they don't masturbate. It's a lot of people. But 70-75% of women do admit to masturbating, and that's a lot more people. So I don't think the Church would focus primarily on men masturbating because it's not an issue that women have - clearly, we do masturbate, and most of us even admit to it.

An alternate explanation has come up though - the idea that women somehow are incapable of masturbating. Everyone understands the mechanics of men's self-abuse. But there's been a lot more confusion about women's anatomy, and some people still think women don't even orgasm. It's possible that early religious leaders thought that masturbation wasn't a problem for women. That doesn't mean that women don't masturbate or didn't masturbate in the past, only that it wasn't fully understood back then.

[GorillaMan]

[An alternate explanation has come up though - the idea that women somehow are incapable of masturbating. Everyone understands the mechanics of men's self-abuse. But there's been a lot more confusion about women's anatomy, and some people still think women don't even orgasm. It's possible that early religious leaders thought that masturbation wasn't a problem for women. That doesn't mean that women don't masturbate or didn't masturbate in the past, only that it wasn't fully understood back then.
I think this is a very likely explanation for it. It's similar to the numerous situations where male homosexual acts hve been (or are) illegal, but there's no legislative reference to female homosexuality.

[Yookeroo]

Welcome to being a young man frustrated with his first girl ;-)

I think the frustration works both ways in that case.

This did leave her with an interesting moral question -- do you tell your fundamentalist roommate that she's masturbating in her sleep?

I know the Penthouse Forum solution :D.

[GorillaMan]

I think the frustration works both ways in that case.
Should've got yerself seduced by an elder woman :p
(Well, she was 20. She seemed elder....)

[Zagadka]

I think the frustration works both ways in that case.
I am quite sure it does. But still, clumsy as they were, the early days of sexual fumbling on my first romantic tryst are certainly never to be forgotten, and are held closely to my heart. Some of the happiest days of my life (I was lucky and had an absolutely perfect partner - and I don't mean she was a playboy model or that crap)

[matt_mcl]

Do you think it has something to do with the fact that everyone who has masturbated has, technically speaking, brought a person of the same sex to orgasm and enjoyed it?

[Chimpy]

Do you think it has something to do with the fact that everyone who has masturbated has, technically speaking, brought a person of the same sex to orgasm and enjoyed it?
Or are commiting incest:
in·cest ( P ) Pronunciation Key (nsst)
n.

1. Sexual relations between persons who are so closely related that their marriage is illegal or forbidden by custom.

You are too closely related to yourself to marry yourself, thus masturbation is incest.

[Maastricht]

It's possible that early religious leaders thought that masturbation wasn't a problem for women. That doesn't mean that women don't masturbate or didn't masturbate in the past, only that it wasn't fully understood back then.

I agree with you and Gorillaman, that's quite likely.
Also, it's mostly men who make the rules, (usually not men with happy sex-lives) and they would have been even less aware of the possibility of female masturbating then women themselves were.

(I've noticed that it's usually men who lay down the law, but -apart from Saoedi Arabia with their mostly elderly male "religious police"- but mostly women who act as law-enforcers, through constant scrutiny and gossipping)

So where does that leave my argument, that there being no ban on female masturbation, because there would be too large a group that wouldn't feel guilty?
I think it can both be true.

[Excalibre]

(I've been having a bit of a crisis of faith lately, so don't take this as any sort of a defacto denial of faith. In the last week I've learned of 2 kids taking into CPS care while my wife and I are looking at starting IVF next month. I'm a little bitter.)
Not to get into your personal life (he says as he gets into your personal life), but isn't there kind of a disconnect here? I mean, have you thought about adoption? The process isn't necessarily cheap but IVF is expensive as all hell. I mean, it would help with the "some kids get treated like crap and we can't even have any" issue - you get a kid, one less kid gets treated like crap, she doesn't get stretch marks, etc. Everyone's a winner.

[Largo62]

For how many decades does one have to masturbate before the sex drive starts dropping off? Just wondering.
More than six!

[Largo62]

I always figured it had to do with not wanting to waste sperm. If you believe that every cell in a dude's product is half of a potential "life," then you don't want to just flush that down the toilet. Think of all the great composers and artists and heart surgeons you're killing! </sarcasm>
Sounds reasonable. . .until you realize that in every ejaculate there are perhaps millions of sperm, only one of which can fertalize an egg, and the majority ejaculations even in the "right" place do not result in a pregnancy. All those uncountable trillions of sperm that don't "complete the journey" in a man's lifetime are wasted. If it were really that important to a god that mankind replenish itself, why did he/she/it make it so extraordinarily difficult for sperm and egg to come together?

Also, if "wasting sperm" is a reason for making masturbation a sin, why is totally involuntary nocturnal emission built into the system? Does god just enjoy f***ing with our minds?

[Largo62]

Obviously you people, smart though you may be, have missed the most definitive psychological study done so far.

It found that 95% of the people in the country masterbate and the other 5% are liars.

So there...

And don't ask for a cite, either!
I can't cite it either, but when I was in high school in what I thought were the dark ages (graduated in 1961) there was an assembly of all the boys in which a sex talk was given by some supposed expert. He said exactly the same thing. It was his way of telling us that we were not unnatural, sinful, awful or idiotic because we did what every other male in history had done, and we needn't feel guilty about it. My upbringing was a little repressed, but by that time I had already sneaked a look (or two, or...) at the Kinsey Report, and I knew I was okay.

[CandidGamera]

Also, if "wasting sperm" is a reason for making masturbation a sin, why is totally involuntary nocturnal emission built into the system? Does god just enjoy f***ing with our minds?

Well, of course there's some built-in inescapable guilt. What, did you forget that God is, after all, a Jewish parent? ;) ;j You should be grateful for that guilt!

I kid, I kid.

[rwjefferson]

Touching Yourself is Wrong, Wrong, Wrong.
Why?
Sorry about the late entry.

God sometimes punishes promiscuous sex: Crabs, Syphilis, Gonorrhea, AIDS, etc.
Therefore ALL sex must be evil and a sin and must not be enjoyed.

Commandment 11
Thou should suffer through sex only for sanctified and procreative purposes.

(This was on the tablet Moses broke on the way down the mountain.)

Not.

rwj

[GorillaMan]

Does god just enjoy f***ing with our minds?

[Bill Hicks] Mwah ha haa!! I am a prankster God!! [/Bill Hicks]

[Hypno-Toad]

They say that idle hands are the devils tool.

Then why am I supposed to keep my hands idle when they're near my tool?

It seems like, coming or going, they've got you beat...

[Hypno-Toad]

But seriously, it seems that the religious objection to flying solo is the general objection to hedonism. Masturbation is done only for pleasure (nevermind donating samples. That didn't start until much later than the ban on the hand.) Therefore, it is hedonistic. A person giving themselves up to empty pleasure is distracted from that which is truly important: the spiritual world. And what's a quick wank compared to everlasting heaven or roasting in hell?

Whatever. I think they're just jerking us around.

[ralph124c]

I always found the religious arguments against jerking off pretty weird. To summarize:
-masturbation cannot result in conception; therefore it is pleasure without the chance of creating life
-masturbation can substitute for intercourse, which produces human life
-masturbation induces "impure" thoughts (whatever they are)Oddly enough, Freud believed that wacking off might be harmful (something about depleting precious bodily fluids, or something).
What's the latest take (of the RC Church) on this?

[Maastricht]

What's the latest take (of the RC Church) on this?

Well, according to this article (http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1453/is_n12_v40/ai_14784305) the 1993 papal encyclical 'Veritatis Splendor' condemns masturbation as heavily as ever.


The encyclical contains some useful extensions of papal teaching into areas dealing with the honesty and charity of economic practices, as well as with several life-damaging sins peculiar to our age. But its hairsplitting attitudes toward sex and procreation are mostly as unrelenting as ever. The encyclical can thus be seen as either a very brave statement or yet another instance of that absolute Caesaro-Papism that has periodically daunted the faithful since the death of Constantine.

With respect to individual conduct, Veritatis Splendor stands on two fundamental assertions: that certain acts are always "intrinsically evil" and that the church's moral teachings are firmly based in scripture and "tradition" and are, therefore, not negotiable.

The first assertion is a replay of the old pre-Vatican II attacks on "situational ethics." Yet Christ himself clearly taught out of real-fife situations. No moral act can be isolated from its temporal and human context. As for tradition," Catholic teachings have been by no means cast in stone. Saint Thomas Aquinas taught with respect to abortion that people are given souls only when the fetus bears recognizable human features. The church later realized that new findings in embryology made it more prudent to teach that the soul is infused at conception. Quite reasonable as a revised view, but surely only God can know the truth.

The church taught for centuries that lending money for interest (usury) was sinful. The doctrine was allowed to lapse in the 15th century, with momentous consequences for modern economic practice. If the church can change its tack on questions such as this, why is it still so unyielding on questions related to contraception and masturbation?

Tragically, sexual conduct remains the central fixation of Catholicism. The coital obligations the church demands have grown in complexity as the scientific manipulation of reproduction has become more ingenious. The seductiveness of an agnostic science at odds with rigid theological intransigence produces the sort of tense dilemma that works against true conjugal love and the spontaneity that true conjugal love requires. Virtue, as Aquinas once observed, should lie in the good rather than the difficult.

Homosexuality is now belatedly recognized as an unavoidable state, but unfortunate Christian gay folk must still conduct themselves as neuters. Recent biological findings that masturbation can have a "clearing" function that can actually ally assist conception makes the categorization of it as an "intrinsically disordered act" more absurd than ever. No wonder modem Western apostates have lately surrendered to libertine ways. A morally negative Christianity - one that emphasizes too many don'ts - is reaping in rebellion a harvest it has long sown by its intricate demands.


I also found a link to a Catholic forum with answers to somebody asking: "Is masturbation ever a mortal sin? ' (http://www.catholic-forum.com/dcforum/DCForumID2/800.html) The answers (a big resounding yes) cite recent and less recent encyclics, the Catechism and official viewpoints of Church officials (who, as we know, can all speak directly for Jesus :rolleyes: ).

[Polerius]

A great many cultures and religions have told, and are still telling, people, especially young people, that Touching Yourself is Wrong, Wrong, Wrong.

Why? Maybe because some religions prohibit anything that might be pleasurable, including sweets, secular reading, and clothes that let you breathe comfortably?
Maybe it's the way we were all brought up, but if there are a bunch of people in a room, and one of them starts masturbating in front of the others, it would be hard for the others to just continue regular conversation.

If he/she does something else that is pleasurable to him/her (eating sweets, reading a book, etc), there is no problem, and the others can continue their conversation.

But for some reason, if a woman just slips her fingers down her panties and starts masturbating in front of the other people in the room, it cannot be ignored.

Why is that? Theoretically speaking, why can't we treat it the same as if she was eating a very tasty cake?

The answer to this may help us understand the answer to the original question in the OP, that is, "why a great many cultures and religions have told, and are still telling, people, especially young people, that Touching Yourself is Wrong"

If mastubating gives people a kind of pleasure that makes others uncomfortable, then it must make people uncomfortable to think that their son or daughter is having this pleasure, even if it is done in private.

So, maybe the question becomes, why does mastubating give people a kind of pleasure that makes others uncomfortable? (as opposed to other pleasures which don't make people uncomfortable)

[Maastricht]

Maybe it's the way we were all brought up, but if there are a bunch of people in a room, and one of them starts masturbating in front of the others, it would be hard for the others to just continue regular conversation.

If mastubating gives people a kind of pleasure that makes others uncomfortable, then it must make people uncomfortable to think that their son or daughter is having this pleasure, even if it is done in private.

So, maybe the question becomes, why does mastubating give people a kind of pleasure that makes others uncomfortable? (as opposed to other pleasures which don't make people uncomfortable)

Whoa ! That comparison doesn't hold up. Most people would get uncomfortable when somebody with them in the room sits down and takes a dump. In todays' culture, such acts are private. Not condemned, but private. What kind of parent would rather have their seven-year olds stop having bowelmovements alltogether, just because they no longer change the kids diapers?

Actually, such customs are heavily culture bound. I've seen in museums pottychairs designed for generals so they could sit down and have a dump without ahving to remove themselves from their staffmeeting.
Norbert Elias book on civilisation quoted an early etiquettebook (I'll find the cite if anyone asks me too) that asked men not ot masturbate on the dinnertable. Apparently, that was such a normal practice an explicit rule against it was necessary.

[Largo62]

What's the latest take (of the RC Church) on this?
Masturbating oneself is a mortal sin, but if you are a priest, masturbating an altar boy only gets you transferred. ;)

[Polerius]

Whoa ! That comparison doesn't hold up. Most people would get uncomfortable when somebody with them in the room sits down and takes a dump. In todays' culture, such acts are private. Not condemned, but private.

I would claim that masturbating is closer to enjoying a cake than it is to taking a dump. Taking a dump or urinating necessarily involves the excretion of odorous fluids and solids, and that is why those acts are private.

Masturbation, especially female masturbation, does not necessarily involve the excretion of odorous fluids and solids, so I don't see the difference between this and eating a cake, for example.

And if you object that the person's hands will get dirty, what about remote-controlled vibrators in women's underware? That is, there are some gadgets that enable a woman or her partner to press a button and it activates a small vibrator in the woman's underware. If someone openly does this at a dinner party, and the woman is enjoying herself, why should people consider this awkward? How is this different than other ways of enjoying herself ? (like reading a good book or eating delicious food)

I should note that I would find it awkward myself, but I can't seem to find a good enough reason for it.

Actually, such customs are heavily culture bound. I've seen in museums pottychairs designed for generals so they could sit down and have a dump without ahving to remove themselves from their staffmeeting.
Norbert Elias book on civilisation quoted an early etiquettebook (I'll find the cite if anyone asks me too) that asked men not ot masturbate on the dinnertable. Apparently, that was such a normal practice an explicit rule against it was necessary.
If you can dig up a cite, that would be very interesting.

[Maastricht]

Okay, so you argue taking a dump is necessary, but masturbation is voluntary. And therefore, peoples aversion to seeing someone masturbate, signifies we feel at a gut level that masturbation is "bad".

How's about another example then: heavy french kissing? If I were at a dining table and a couple at the same table started some heavy French kissing, I'd definately feel uncomfortable. They, obviously, had forgotten about my existence (which is impolite) or are sending out a signal that they want to be alone (which makes me feel uncomfortable). Besides, watching anyone but tastefully filmed moviestars at it is not an pleasant sight (slobbering and wet, ew).

Kissing is voluntary. Would I want my kids to stop French kissing their loved ones when they were alone? Sure not. I would teach them not to do it at the dinner table, in front of their reatives though. Kissing, like masturbation is private. Not bad.

[Polerius]

Okay, so you argue taking a dump is necessary, but masturbation is voluntary. And therefore, peoples aversion to seeing someone masturbate, signifies we feel at a gut level that masturbation is "bad".

Where on earth did I say such a thing?

I said that taking a dump always results in smelly stuff coming out of your body.
Masturbating doesn't always result in smelly stuff coming out of your body.

So, taking a dump has to be private (so as not to stink up the living room for everyone else), but masturbation doesn't have to be private (since you are not ruining anyone's "airspace")

How's about another example then: heavy french kissing? If I were at a dining table and a couple at the same table started some heavy French kissing, I'd definately feel uncomfortable. They, obviously, had forgotten about my existence (which is impolite) or are sending out a signal that they want to be alone (which makes me feel uncomfortable). Besides, watching anyone but tastefully filmed moviestars at it is not an pleasant sight (slobbering and wet, ew).

Why do we feel uncomfortable if two people french kiss next to us?
When someone is enjoying a good meal, a lot of times they forget about your existence, and it is sometimes a bit sloppy, but I don't see why eating a good meal should be a private act?

Why is french-kissing different?

Kissing, like masturbation is private.
The question is: why?

[dotchan]

Re: the dinner ethics, I also seem to remember reading someting along the lines of,

"It's bad manners to eat and scratch your codpiece with the same hand."

(We so need a TMI smiley.)

[ouryL]

Re: the dinner ethics, I also seem to remember reading someting along the lines of,

"It's bad manners to eat and scratch your codpiece with the same hand."

(We so need a TMI smiley.)

Unless you're eating a piece of cod.
:eek:

[Mirasawa]

I agree with Maastricht. Men are usually the ones who create religious law, but women are the guardians of what's considered "proper" in a society. That way female masturbation is more likely to be deemed proper because the people who say it's proper enjoy it. Immensely. :D The religious law in the west, the Bible, has barely anything about greasin the pole... only a story about a guy who jettisoned his baby batter in order to steal an inheritance. It's quite clear the "stealing" is what pissed off El-Shaddai, not the vaginaless shuddering shangri-la. :( The lack of rules against beating the baloney shows that the men who wrote the Bible themselves enjoyed it. Immensely. :D

And how about this for non-constructively cynical?: Women don't want men to masturbate because they want to have complete control of when and how much their husband's get their much-needed orgasms. Label the act "disgusting" and now you can lead your guy around by his :wally

I would appreciate being disabused of this conjecture.
_
_

[smilingscar]

Polerius was close when he compared masturbation to eating cake. the basic philosophy behind condemning masturbation is this

God gave us certain pleasures to enjoy on earth. some examples being food, rest, and sex. these pleasures become sins when one abuses them. when you abuse such gifts from god they become gluttony, slouth, and adultery. to masturbate usurps god's gift of sexual pleasure to mankind and perverts it into a selfish act.

so spaketh the theologian.

[Maastricht]

Polerius, I misunderstood you. You were trying to find a logic reason why the one behaviour can't be engagd in in public and another one can. And you couldn't find such a logic reason.


I said that taking a dump always results in smelly stuff coming out of your body.
Masturbating doesn't always result in smelly stuff coming out of your body.
So, taking a dump has to be private (so as not to stink up the living room for everyone else), but masturbation doesn't have to be private (since you are not ruining anyone's "airspace")

True. If social customs were invented for practical reasons, like contaminating other persons airspace, farting and sneezing should be considered much more intensely private then masturbation. So, as you said, no logic there.


Why do we feel uncomfortable if two people french kiss next to us?
When someone is enjoying a good meal, a lot of times they forget about your existence, and it is sometimes a bit sloppy, but I don't see why eating a good meal should be a private act?
Why is french-kissing different?

I'm afraid the answer is "because". Once an act is socially labeled as private, it is impolite to do it the presence of others. Ignoring that custom, and sitting at the dinnertable while French kissing, masturbating or nosepicking, effectively says to the other guests: "You're not somebody whose feelings I have to take into account" or even worse "You're not there".

A friend of mine actually was insulted when we said that it made us uncomfortable that she was kissing and cuddling her boyfriend non stop in our company. She thought it had to do with us being "stuck-up", jealous, disapproving of her boyfriend, or that we weren't happy enough for her.
I had to explain that her petting her boyfriend just made me feel that they wanted me to go away so they'd could be alone together.

So, because. In the UK, making the V-sign (palms facing the audience) is a friendly sign. Making the same sign with the back of your hand facing the audience is the UK's equavalent of the USA "giving someone the finger". There's no logic to that either. It's just a social agreement that one sign is an insult, and the other means a shared triumph.

[Maastricht]

Polerius was close when he compared masturbation to eating cake. the basic philosophy behind condemning masturbation is this

God gave us certain pleasures to enjoy on earth. some examples being food, rest, and sex. these pleasures become sins when one abuses them. when you abuse such gifts from god they become gluttony, slouth, and adultery. to masturbate usurps god's gift of sexual pleasure to mankind and perverts it into a selfish act.

so spaketh the theologian.

Yes, but this thread is about why the theologian picked out masturbation, spcifically as THE abuse and an usurpation. The Church has condemned gluttony and slouth, sure. But eating cake and taking afternoon naps have never been as fiercely prosecuted as masturbation has been. The question adressed in this thread is: why?

[smilingscar]

But eating cake and taking afternoon naps have never been as fiercely prosecuted as masturbation has been. The question adressed in this thread is: why?

but they were bad enough to make into the list of the seven deadly sins. many sins are either an abuse or denial of god's gifts and i wanted to show how masturbation fit in with this. and i did answer why. this answer is no different from the ones who told about the loss of sperm, this is just a different way of answering the questions. i merely thought that instead of just the problem with with wasted sperm, this is another reason jesus cries when you touch yourself! instead of accusing the church of political motives, i thought i would suggest a case where they interpreted the will of god.

by and by, no one has mentioned that back in the day people thought each ejaculation took a certain amount of time off your life. because it was the life essence.

nobody better call me a crazy religious person that's the last thing i need and the least thing i am

[Smartass]

How come no one's quoting the masturbation song?

Masturbation is artificial sex...
Your body is for the Lord!

The fact that masturbation is being compared to any cake I think shows how you're wandering off course. Orgasm is the most intense pleasure that most humans ever experience. I remember reading that an Asian word (I don't remember which language) for it translated as "the little death". We're talking pleasure that is described as rapturous. A number of ancient religions viewed orgasm as a spiritual event. The Church does not like competition.

Also, remember that God is for pain and against pleasure. When you want something from God, you have to buy it with pain (sacrifice a goat, forgo something that you like). The extreme example is the Christian belief that mankind's salvation could be purchased by a painful death. Christ traded suffering for our soul's and apparently God accepts suffering in the same way that drug dealers accept cash.

Forgoing masturbation is a sacrifice. You are making a downpayment on your heavenly reward; whereas, experiencing pleasure is like making a withdrawal from the account. For those who were raised Catholic, you should remember that, while married people are expected to have sex, they are not expected to enjoy it. In fact, it is sinful to get lustful pleasure from the act. It should be performed in the missionary position with an attitude of respectful reverence for God's mysteries.

So let go of that ceiling fan and start thinking of ways you can suffer for God's pleasure.

[catsix]

Smartass said:
I remember reading that an Asian word (I don't remember which language) for it translated as "the little death".

Or as I heard it in French, le petit mort.

I believe the prohibition, religiously, is like all things religious. You take something that the masses do on a regular basis, and demonize it to the point that the magical sky pixie will punish them for all eternity for engaging in it. It makes them feel guilty about themselves, it makes them turn on their neighbors in an effort to minimize their own 'transgressions', and it keeps them in fear of something they can't actually see or prove doesn't exist.

If you want total control of people, teach them to be fearful of something that is all powerful, all knowing, everlasting, and that they can't see. The only worry you have after that is if they figure out that the 'Great and Powerful Oz' is a smoke hologram and the short guy with the moustache in behind the curtain is really pulling the strings. Of course if you keep them mostly uneducated (as the underclass was throughout much of history) and unable to read, they'll never be able to glean that there are reasons other than god for the sun coming up, the plants growing, etc.

It's a marvelous invention. I wish I'd thought of it first.

[Smartass]

If you want total control of people, teach them to be fearful of something that is all powerful...


It's a start, but it's not devious enough. Better: Teach them that when they experience pain that it is an investment in a future reward that is better than anything that they have ever experienced. All they need is to do what you say and to suffer their pain without complaint. And make sure that you support them while they suffer their pain. You have to empathize without actually trying to help.

If you pull it off, not only will they do what you say, but they'll fucking love you for it. They'll start looking for ways to hurt themselves just to please you. And you will love them because of the way they suffer.

Fear of punishment is a start, but it's not as great of a behavior modifier as anticipation of areward. I can tell you you'll probably never get my kids to clean their rooms by threatening them. But if you've got candy, negotiations can begin immediately.