Catholic reply to masturbation argument?

[OraLabora]

And to be moral, the procreative and unitive dimensions of the act cannot be frustrated. Masturbation frustrates both of these dimensions.

I don’t see how masturbation can “frustrate” either the unitive or procreative aspects of sex, unless one was planning to have sex with one’s spouse and chooses to masturbate instead.

I think you’ll instead find that folks masturbate because they don’t have a sexual partner, for the most part. Or if they do, he or she isn’t available for whatever reason.

It comes down to a misuse of the faculty but it’s wrong to say it “frustrates” a process that cannot be engaged in at that point in time. The Thomist approach borrows a bit too much from Aristotle who had no proper knowledge of how human reproductive physiology worked.

There may be moral grounds against masturbation, but there are few physical grounds unless the person is masturbating to avoid sex with their spouse. Usually the opposite is true, they can’t have sex, so they masturbate instead to relieve the sex urge. If there’s any “frustration” involved, it’s not having a natural outlet for the sex urge. Masturbation is one such natural outlet.

The argument is really whether humans, as conscious beings, are capable of rising above nature, or not.

And the Church is interested in making sure we have the resources to overcome our habituation to sin, by telling us plainly – over against our rationalizations and doubts, reasonable though they may be – that yes, it is indeed sin, and is not to be done.

Perhaps she is interested in letting us know but she is doing a very poor job of it. In the 13 years since I returned to the fold after being lapsed, I have heard exactly one homily touching on sexual matters. And it was in terms so vague as to be useless as a teaching moment for the man (or woman, or boy or girl) in the pew.

The clergy appears to be too squeamish to really tackle the issue, for fear of offending parishioners.

So, can the faithful be blamed for being so confused on sexual matters? With the level of teaching that I’ve seen (i.e. essentially zero), it would almost ensure that very few have “full knowledge”, and thus capable of sinning mortally.

 

[jayabbott]

Good points… You’re right, the preaching should definitely be better. But nevertheless, the resources are there for anyone interested enough to look into it: the Catechism, instructions from the Vatican on human sexuality (available on the Vatican website), and even different books of moral theology, not to mention The Theology of the Body proposed by Pope John Paul II.

So even if our pastors locally are, for whatever reason, not vocal about this or any other matter of Church teaching, let’s not let their failure to proclaim the teaching of the Church hinder us from hearing it, because if we look into it, the teaching is there, and readily available (in a way unprecedented in history, thanks to the internet).

 

[silverware]

Many of us, including me, have disturbing memories of what we were taught about sex as adolescents. Sex was dirty and sinful (even thoughts about it were “impure”). It would seem that a better approach would be to emphasize the beauty of sex, portraying it (correcty) as a gift from God but for married couples only. Procreation as a purpose naturally fits this approach.
Also, the desire for sex is good and God-given as well. Impure thougts should be redefined as sexual thoughts, and as having a noble purpose. Atually, sexual intercourse is virtually impossible without sexual thoughts. That would mean to me that such thoughts are good, not sindul. Indeed, nocturnal sexual dreams are natural even for unmarried teenagers. I remember worrying about whether I “entertained these thoughts” and had a difficult time with confession. Had someone taught me that these are not impure, relate to God’s gift to those married, and arise in my sleep naturally in accord with a natural purpose, I would have had a more natural adolescence.
I think that some carryover occurs into marriage, causing confusion about how to enjoy what was formerly taught as dirty and sinful. In addition to the procreative purpose, teach the young that God made sex fun and beautiful, as it really is. To do otherwise is an insult to God’s design. With this shift of emphasis, the contrast with the emptiness of masturbation is more easily explained and understood.

 

[just_came_back]

as a single Catholic 35 year old male who has struggled with masturbation since I was 14 and has no qualms admitting it, YES, it is a mortal sin. Now, we are sexual by nature, we are sexually attracted by nature and we will have sexual thoughts by nature. The key is not to dwell on them to the point that you willfully commit a sin by carnal deed. Is this always easy? Uh…see my opening line for that answer.

At 14, I embraced all the porn and taboo thoughts in my head that I could, thinking “well this is what I’m supposed to do.” Being raised Protestant, my church NEVER discussed this. Had sex with a girl for the 1st time at 18, enjoyed it, but even she could not pleasure me the way my fantasies could. WARNING SIGN SHOULD’VE GOT ME THERE

Make a long story short, became Catholic at age 24 and when I was told it was a habit by a priest, well heck yeah…why stop if it’s not my fault? Years of not wanting to waste the time by dating, out partying, etc, etc, etc. made me never to want a meaninful relationship.

The older I got, the more vile my sexual fanatasies have become. It’s like a drug. You may start out with a puff of weed, but you need more. So is masturbation. What may start out as the chick in PLAYBOY you’re fulfilling the deed to later becomes the lady you once worked with that you pretend is your mother and you’re acting out the Oedipus taboo, then you think of having orgies with your friends mothers/sisters, etc and there you go, YOU ARE BOUND and Asmodeus, the demon of lust has you firmly in his power.

I am both ashamed and not ashamed to be sharing just a sample of my struggles here. If my stories can but help JUST ONE YOUNG Catholic out, male or female, then it’s been worth it. And hey, I am not cured in the least bit, but I know I can conquer. I have Jesus, Mary, Joseph and the entire prayers of the Saints on my side.

Masturbation addiction is real, strong, and very sinful. Do NOT be fooled. May God bless any and all who struggle with it. Peace!

 

[stringbeanduck]

as a single Catholic 35 year old male who has struggled with masturbation since I was 14 and has no qualms admitting it, YES, it is a mortal sin. Now, we are sexual by nature, we are sexually attracted by nature and we will have sexual thoughts by nature. The key is not to dwell on them to the point that you willfully commit a sin by carnal deed. Is this always easy? Uh…see my opening line for that answer.

At 14, I embraced all the porn and taboo thoughts in my head that I could, thinking “well this is what I’m supposed to do.” Being raised Protestant, my church NEVER discussed this. Had sex with a girl for the 1st time at 18, enjoyed it, but even she could not pleasure me the way my fantasies could. WARNING SIGN SHOULD’VE GOT ME THERE

Make a long story short, became Catholic at age 24 and when I was told it was a habit by a priest, well heck yeah…why stop if it’s not my fault? Years of not wanting to waste the time by dating, out partying, etc, etc, etc. made me never to want a meaninful relationship.

The older I got, the more vile my sexual fanatasies have become. It’s like a drug. You may start out with a puff of weed, but you need more. So is masturbation. What may start out as the chick in PLAYBOY you’re fulfilling the deed to later becomes the lady you once worked with that you pretend is your mother and you’re acting out the Oedipus taboo, then you think of having orgies with your friends mothers/sisters, etc and there you go, YOU ARE BOUND and Asmodeus, the demon of lust has you firmly in his power.

I am both ashamed and not ashamed to be sharing just a sample of my struggles here. If my stories can but help JUST ONE YOUNG Catholic out, male or female, then it’s been worth it. And hey, I am not cured in the least bit, but I know I can conquer. I have Jesus, Mary, Joseph and the entire prayers of the Saints on my side.

Masturbation addiction is real, strong, and very sinful. Do NOT be fooled. May God bless any and all who struggle with it. Peace!

Wow! This is very good story. You will be in my prayers.

 

[silverware]

Wow! This is very good story. You will be in my prayers.

Sorry to hear of your struggles. I guess it’s not only us kids who were raised Catholic that had problems with sexual maturing. It was just different with us, in that we received distorted teachings whereas others apparently received little or no teaching on the subject.

Hard to say which was worse. Thanks for your insights on the matter.

 

[jegow]

As you can see from the replies you’ve received so far, the answer always comes down to some version of “It’s wrong because the Church says it’s wrong”. I’ve never seen an intellectually defensible argument - one that doesn’t depend on declarative Church teaching - as to why masturbation is inherently wrong.

The problem with saying that is that it is not possible to find an intellectual argument for that teaching which is not at the same time Church teaching because the teaching of the Church, while being guided by the Holy Spirit, is in itself intellectual. Faith is never separated from reason - so you won’t find arguments that defend teaching to be separated from the Church’s stance on it.

From Fides et ratio

Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth; and God has placed in the human heart a desire to know the truth—in a word, to know himself—so that, by knowing and loving God, men and women may also come to the fullness of truth about themselves (cf. Ex 33:18; Ps 27:8-9; 63:2-3; Jn 14:8; 1 Jn 3:2).

 

[just_came_back]

as a single Catholic 35 year old male who has struggled with masturbation since I was 14 and has no qualms admitting it, YES, it is a mortal sin. Now, we are sexual by nature, we are sexually attracted by nature and we will have sexual thoughts by nature. The key is not to dwell on them to the point that you willfully commit a sin by carnal deed. Is this always easy? Uh…see my opening line for that answer.

At 14, I embraced all the porn and taboo thoughts in my head that I could, thinking “well this is what I’m supposed to do.” Being raised Protestant, my church NEVER discussed this. Had sex with a girl for the 1st time at 18, enjoyed it, but even she could not pleasure me the way my fantasies could. WARNING SIGN SHOULD’VE GOT ME THERE

Make a long story short, became Catholic at age 24 and when I was told it was a habit by a priest, well heck yeah…why stop if it’s not my fault? Years of not wanting to waste the time by dating, out partying, etc, etc, etc. made me never to want a meaninful relationship.

The older I got, the more vile my sexual fanatasies have become. It’s like a drug. You may start out with a puff of weed, but you need more. So is masturbation. What may start out as the chick in PLAYBOY you’re fulfilling the deed to later becomes the lady you once worked with that you pretend is your mother and you’re acting out the Oedipus taboo, then you think of having orgies with your friends mothers/sisters, etc and there you go, YOU ARE BOUND and Asmodeus, the demon of lust has you firmly in his power.

I am both ashamed and not ashamed to be sharing just a sample of my struggles here. If my stories can but help JUST ONE YOUNG Catholic out, male or female, then it’s been worth it. And hey, I am not cured in the least bit, but I know I can conquer. I have Jesus, Mary, Joseph and the entire prayers of the Saints on my side.

Masturbation addiction is real, strong, and very sinful. Do NOT be fooled. May God bless any and all who struggle with it. Peace!

Keep me in your prayers. I went nearly one week but lapsed twice in the last 12 hours. Will be hitting Confession today. I am proud that I went nearly 1 full week though. Progress. St.Joseph, model of chastity, pray for me.

 

[canuck3777]

What if a man had a vasectomy? Yes that also is a greivous mortal sin and another discussion. If there is no porn, no lust and no possible procreation possible… then is it a sin?

 

[bingbang]

Although I certainly do not agree that no such independent argument exists, do you think one is necessary? If the Church is true–if it is really Christ speaking–then we shouldn’t question its teachings even if they fly in the face of all intellectual arguments. This idea that we must be able to defend every aspect of our faith using arguments that would convince a non-Catholic or an atheist is a very strange one.

The problem with this type of thinking is there is always a possibility that the Church isn’t actually Christ speaking. In fact I bet more than 90% of people don’t accept that the Church speaks for Christ. You can say that you are 100% that your beliefs are right, but Muslim suicide bombers would say the same thing about their beliefs. So when you believe something to be right just because your religion says it is right, ESPECIALLY when it “flies in the face of intellectual arguments” you are going to get a LOT of backlash. Because if your religion is wrong, then your moral opinion is based on falsehoods and is intellectually dishonest.

 

[Melek]

That website, and other websites associated with it, utterly reject nearly all of Catholic morality. Masturbation, porn, fantasies, homosexual sex, all is declared to be acceptable. Hah, it even advocates naturalism (being naked all the time).

The main reply for a Catholic is that if one cannot trust the Church on these issues, why trust the Church on anything? That website claims sexual morality is a “contemporary issue” subject to “study and reflection.” Sexual morality is not a contemporary issue, fantasies and masturbation have existed since Christ.

I’ve never found any arguments against Catholic sexual morality to be very compelling, but this website is one of the worst.

I’m not saying this is an excuse, but surely you have to admit that resisting sexual temptation is much more difficult for people growing up in this era than any other time. American media/entertainment is perverted with lustful material. Modern TV shows and movies show off so much explicit sexual content and with the rise of the Internet, pornography has a new medium to thrive in.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

I’m really enjoying this discussion. I struggle with the sin of “Onanism” on a regular basis so I know where both sides are coming from. My sexual desires are strong but fight an almost dailt battle to overcome them. Sometimes the flesh wins, sometimes God wins.
May I find the strength to completely overcome this and live TOTALLY sinlessly.

My personal take on this (besides the teachings of the Church) is that masturbation is an act of inherent selfishness and vanity. It takes the pleasure of a sacred act meant to consecrate God and His covenat with his creation and turns it into an act of self-love for self-gratification.

To paraphrase Blaise Pascal, one of the greatest advantages of the Christian religion is that it teaches us to hate ourselves. That self-love is wrong and Love Of God Only is the Only True Love.

 

[slywakka250]

Catholicism’s sexual morality is centered around marriage between a man and a woman. Masturbation is said to be unnatural because the purpose of sexuality is ONLY fulfilled in a marriage. So any sexual activity that occurs outside of marriage is wrong.

The problem with this for me, is that it elevates the one man/one woman lifelong relationship to having a profound ontological significance, such as that the marriage relationship becomes nearly as foundational to reality as God himself. It means that marriage is in fact written into the nature of reality, such as to be an unalterable, singular, and perfect structure, to be lived by all men for all times and all places.

I don’t get why this has to be so. its not “obvious” that marriages are the best way of organizing society. Many other species have polyandrous and polygamous structures, asexual reproduction, incest, homosexuality, masturbation, and other sexual behavior that us humans with reason are supposed to “naturally” and clearly reject. so why don’t us enlightened men see these “deviant sexual expressions” as clearly unnatural, as simply as say we recognize that it is “natural” to eat food when we are hungry, so that we stay alive.???

I think the reason is because sexual morality is simply a social construct which has changed much through the evolution of man. That marriage has been generally accepted the last few thousands years, does not mean it it will be in the future, or that it was in the past. In fact marriage seems to be on the decline now? Our society is evolving; at first the decline of marriage may shake things up, but maybe something better and much more highly evolved will take its place???

I always find that the only support we have for marriage being this highly privileged reality, is the creation accounts in Genesis. Other than that, what do we have to show us that marriage is the foundation of all morality that it is??

 

[Hendrick]

I posted my situation a while back and received basically the same arguments I am reading on this threads. Put concisely, I had prostate surgery five years ago which prohibits me from achieving an erection; medical measures have not helped (i.e. viagra, pumps, etc.) My wife had a hysterectomy at age 26 following the birth of our only child. We are now 63 and 55, well beyond the child bearing years both in age and ability. We have been able to satisfy each other through masturbation and it has helped our life immensely. But to read what is being said in this thread and my previous venture on these boards, I assume I must accept the fact that we are sinning. It’s difficult to believe that God would find what we are doing as a monogomas married couple abhorrent.

 

[davidv]

The problem with this type of thinking is there is always a possibility that the Church isn’t actually Christ speaking. In fact I bet more than 90% of people don’t accept that the Church speaks for Christ.

If not one single person accepted that the Church is the Body of Christ, this would not made that claim false.

You can say that you are 100% that your beliefs are right, but Muslim suicide bombers would say the same thing about their beliefs. So when you believe something to be right just because your religion says it is right, ESPECIALLY when it “flies in the face of intellectual arguments” you are going to get a LOT of backlash. Because if your religion is wrong, then your moral opinion is based on falsehoods and is intellectually dishonest.

This is called a strawman argument. In the context of the OP there is very little “because the Church says so” argument. The presence of, and the nature of, Natural Law is accessible to human reason.
Fortunately the Church (and not “religion”) is a divine institution. It is protected by God from teaching error regarding faith and morals.

 

[teachccd]

Catholicism’s sexual morality is centered around marriage between a man and a woman. Masturbation is said to be unnatural because the purpose of sexuality is ONLY fulfilled in a marriage. So any sexual activity that occurs outside of marriage is wrong.

The problem with this for me, is that it elevates the one man/one woman lifelong relationship to having a profound ontological significance, such as that the marriage relationship becomes nearly as foundational to reality as God himself. It means that marriage is in fact written into the nature of reality, such as to be an unalterable, singular, and perfect structure, to be lived by all men for all times and all places.

I don’t get why this has to be so. its not “obvious” that marriages are the best way of organizing society. Many other species have polyandrous and polygamous structures, asexual reproduction, incest, homosexuality, masturbation, and other sexual behavior that us humans with reason are supposed to “naturally” and clearly reject. so why don’t us enlightened men see these “deviant sexual expressions” as clearly unnatural, as simply as say we recognize that it is “natural” to eat food when we are hungry, so that we stay alive.???

I think the reason is because sexual morality is simply a social construct which has changed much through the evolution of man. That marriage has been generally accepted the last few thousands years, does not mean it it will be in the future, or that it was in the past. In fact marriage seems to be on the decline now? Our society is evolving; at first the decline of marriage may shake things up, but maybe something better and much more highly evolved will take its place???

I always find that the only support we have for marriage being this highly privileged reality, is the creation accounts in Genesis. Other than that, what do we have to show us that marriage is the foundation of all morality that it is??

Really? It seems to me that much of the Gospel expresses marriage as an example of our relationship with our God. Remember the Bride of Christ as being the Church? The Book of Revelation describes in detail the wedding supper of the Lamb. I would have to say that the covenant of marriage is very much upheld in the New Testament.

Oh and the thing about other species and their sexual behavior? Well some eat their young. Is that the example we follow?

 

[slywakka250]

Really? It seems to me that much of the Gospel expresses marriage as an example of our relationship with our God. Remember the Bride of Christ as being the Church? The Book of Revelation describes in detail the wedding supper of the Lamb. I would have to say that the covenant of marriage is very much upheld in the New Testament.

Oh and the thing about other species and their sexual behavior? Well some eat their young. Is that the example we follow?

Yes you’re right about the New Testament. I was looking for something outside of the scriptures which would show that marriage is not only a solid foundation for society, but the foundational relationship instituted by God himself, at the exclusion of all others. How are we to “discover” marriage in nature?? Is marriage supposed to be obvious to our reason?? Or must we depend on divine revelation to understand marriage, (which as mentioned earlier in this thread, makes it come down to believing in marriage"because the Church says so").

not many people eat their young, but many do masturbate. both of these are acts are condemned by the Church, as unnatural. So basically if eating our young is more obviously wrong than masturbation, why is that?? if masturbation is as bad as its made out to be, why don’t the same people who don’t eat their young, also not masturbate???

because masturbation is not so obvious to understand. It is fairly socially acceptable. There are no laws here in America against it. The harm it does (if it does any) is not nearly as obviously wrong as the deaths of all our children would be if we ate them. sexual pleasure seems to be valuable, so many people pursue it. are all these people seriously deluded? (The Church would say yes, but how come the majority of non-christians don’t see it that way?)

 

[MarkInOregon]

Many of us, including me, have disturbing memories of what we were taught about sex as adolescents. Sex was dirty and sinful (even thoughts about it were “impure”). I know this is an old post but I routinely see this claim maid on this website in various threads–and I ask is this really what we were taught? I don’t remember being taught this–that sex was dirty and sinful? I remember being taught that I should not engage in sexual intercourse outside of marriage–but thats not the same thing as being taught that sex is dirty and sinful. I always thought sex was something special and that it was to be saved for the one I married–not that it was dirty and sinful. Isn’t that what most of us were really taught–no sex outside of marriage–i.e. sex outside of marriage is sinful and bad–and that is a far cry from sex is sinful and bad.

 

[ForAll]

I would like to point out that civilization has gotten a lot further when it evolves away from polyamorous relationships than when it stays marred in such social mores. Marriage is the building block of society because (without divorce) it creates stability, gives people roots to others which connects and orients them to society, and creates obligations and responsibilities that form the basis on which to build other foundations of society. Surely this is accessible to our reason by watching which nations have prospered (Western, Christianized nations) and which have not.
This is not the only hallmark of civilized society (which has its own problems, I’ll grant you), but is certainly a large one–and of course, it’s not a guarantee of a civilized society. But it is a great part of most civilized societies.
We can also observe that the ancient Greeks, whose gods were certainly no “saints,” frequently argued for the control of the so-called “passions” because of the effect it had on the brain. It was observed how easily the lusts could overrun rational thinking and make someone rather dull and primitive in their slavery to themselves. Mastery over self was often defined as self-discipline; although the Greeks weren’t so great at practicing it. At least we can observe that the idea has been around for a while.

For women, an orgasm releases oxytocin, the bonding neurotransmitter that is also released following birth to bond her to the infant. These orgasms when released during sex make the woman bond to her partner. What happens, then, in absence of a partner? We cannot say definitively (since experiences of and responses to sex are very individual), but I can say anecdotally that it’s very isolating for the woman. Where is the oxytocin to go? She is alone; there is no one to care for her. The moment after orgasm can be an experience of shame, loneliness, and lowering of self-esteem (likewise, this forms the basis for the strong biological argument for having sex with only one person–see Dr. Miriam Grossman’s book “Unprotected”).

For men, we might propose the idea that masturbation offends the natural use of sex organs, as has already been stated, but also, for those men in a steady relationship, that masturbation is infidelity.
Having sex with another woman is definitely infidelity, I think we can all agree. But what is infidelity and how is it different from masturbation? It is getting aroused by another woman and fulfilling that desire by means of her. What about a strip club? This is a form of infidelity as well–allowing another woman to sexually arouse the man, oftentimes to the point of later ejaculation. Does it matter that the other woman isn’t there when he orgasms? No; anymore than if he were in a hotel room watching his mistress strip tease and ejaculated before she could touch him, would it not be cheating. Lets remove it one step further to pornography–it seems to be the same thing. Usually a “fantasy woman” arousing him, in his mind, to the point of orgasm. The next step removed is masturbation when thinking about his partner…but to what degree are our thoughts of our partner accurate? We can manipulate them to be what we want–they orgasm when we want, they wear what we want, etc. It’s not our real partner–the one with needs, a bad day, an ingrown hair, a lack of desire, etc. We make another person out of the one we are in a relationship with, in this way.
So in a way, from the most extreme of actually having sex with another woman to masturbation, we can see that this is bringing “another woman” into the sexual sphere of a relationship, where presumably both persons have agreed they will only be with one another.

For both sexes, masturbation at the very least is poor training to be a good sexual partner. I’ve heard the “if you don’t know how you like it, how can you teach your partner?” argument, but that just emphasizes the fact that people want sex to be about their pleasure–or for the pleasure they give to the other person to be a reflection of how “great” they are. It isn’t what ideal sex should be–mutual giving. Masturbation trains a person to focus on themselves and their pleasure, and sexual fantasies train a person to want others to live up to idealized images. It makes persons not individuals, but an object to be consumed. When the act of sex becomes a “better” way to fulfill the sexual desires you usually fulfill, then it becomes about a person’s own fulfillment–not a giving relationship.

These are secular arguments, confirmable through common experience and common sense, and some of them by sound science.

The bigger question for those who do not agree with this is: why is masturbation right? Why would we use an organ that it meant to be stimulated by another person (to incentivize continuation of the human race) for our own personal pleasure, and expect our body to process it in the same way? If “evolution” or “biology” arranged it this way, what are our motivations for changing this orientation, besides for our own pleasure?

Asking these questions and thinking of their likely answers points me to a confirmation bias. In fact, every human being has an incentive to say “pleasure is The Good!” so that they can do what is pleasurable. It is the truest freedom to free oneself from the domination of the appetites, and to examine if pleasure really is the ultimate good, or if we might say there is a higher goal in life. If there is, and indulging our every whim does not lead us to that, then we may be *truly *free rational beings by rejecting what we want to do in favor of what is actually good for us.
But of course…this all depends on a non-hedonistic outlook. And unfortunately, this is what most detractors on this thread seem to be.

 

[milos7]

You have done it ForAll !!! Congratulations.
Don’t call them “secular arguments” They are just plain true.

Chemistry:
Thank you for the information about oxytocin. I believe that men would also have their “oxytocin” after sex. I only speak out of my deep insight in how I experience orgasms with my wife (16 years). To men sex means giving, filling-in the emptiness, realising the purpose of the potential, exercising our care … the physics, the movements of sex teach us that. I give myself to my dear and I HAVE PLEASURE IN&FROM THAT GIVING. It may remind us of “… and God saw that it was good”. I remember, so many times I felt so happy and proud after the orgasm because I achieved something for her and me, for both of us really. If it was only for her, then I wouldn’t have had to be there at all, and if it was only for me, then she wouldn’t have had to be. So sex can BE ONLY MUTUAL. And we both laughed and it was so beautiful and childishly merry. I remember these times as utterly bonding me to her. So perhaps there is some kind of bonding chemical involved also in the men’s body.
What purpose do we fulfil when we have orgasms without the dear one? What vacancy we fill-in? What are we achieving? Where does that chemical go to? I would say, that the feelings are too of shame, lowering self-esteem…
Can this be seen as keeping the amber of your good passion alive (for as a sex partner you are responsible for it!) and ready for action when the opportunity comes?

Physics:
Sex organs are truly unique. I have one organ and that can be matched with one opposite organ at a time (and mind you, in love, that “time” is actually without an end - it is eternity, there are no conditions), and it almost impossible to do it without embracing. At the high moment your hands are gonna reach for the dear one to sort of secure her in the place, to confirm the bond, to enhance the pleasure, to pull closer and ever closer. And she is embracing at least with her organ. Sorry that just physics, not being overly explicit. And that teaches us that true PLEASURE IS THE RESULT OF EMBRACE. When masturbating, who do we embrace? Does our eternity finish then?
Is there a space for mental embracing without projecting an idealistic person/idol? Or can this be done thoughtlessly?
Sex organs are located at the centre of our body, male and female. Is that telling us that sex is the ultimate focus of our lives and strives? I would say so. To maintain life. Does the word “sex” have anything to do with “section”, intersection, crossing, pairing… ? This is very important, it means life, new life and more life. It is kind of in the centre, so we should get it right.

Spirit:
Sex is spiritual in essence. Before it on the surface it happens inside. Men, we know. And ladies, I would say it’s ALL inside…? Want it or nor, sex points to the heart. It is PRIMARILY A CONTEMPLATIVE MATTER. You transmit life by spirit first. You gaze her/him, you connect, you feel a profound unity… well, you fall in … love - first. When it then comes out physically, very bodily, it is no different. You just realise it, incarnate it. When alone, who do you transfer the life to? Who do you contemplate? Or what? What is higher: to contemplate someTHING or someONE? No wonder unruly sex used to be put into a parallel with idolatry.
And this is a good thing about sex that is can be active even if it doesn’t come out. How? Hold her/him in you prayer up to God. Give up yourself, give yourself UP as a sacrifice and it shall unite you, mystically, crossing distances, physical inabilities… Masturbation make no sense here, it’s self-defying, isn’t it? Or can masturbation be put in service of this?

Can this uniqueness make it different from other physical/bodily needs, such as eating (grass), breathing (cigaret smokes), cleaning or even scratching itchy place, or building, or getting rid of built-up, body chemicals …?

YET, I can’t imagine God condemning anybody for masturbating.
Should we rather de-mystify the subject of sex at all? Surely we don’t analyse to such extent our eating habits and surely we do not ALWAYS eat only for keeping alive, we eat chocolate merely for the taste, we have a useless beer or two, we eat alone and that isn’t a sin is it? Would we then be better positioned for heading towards paradise ???

Please answer someone.

Thank you, you are all wonderful.