Define masturbation

  • Thread starter Thread starter twoangels
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

twoangels

Guest
Ok so the Catechism says that masturbation is the deliberate stimulation of genitals to derive sexual pleasure.

Ok I pointed this out in another post that it says sexual pleasure. It does not say sexual climax. Meanwhile I have seen countless people say that couples who engage in sexual behavior while abstaining from intercourse are morally ok so long as they do not masturbate. However are you really going to try to argue that a teenage boy fondling himself but stopping short of a climax is not guilty of masturbation?
 
twoangels said:
Ok so the Catechism says that masturbation is the deliberate stimulation of genitals to derive sexual pleasure.

Ok I pointed this out in another post that it says sexual pleasure. It does not say sexual climax. Meanwhile I have seen countless people say that couples who engage in sexual behavior while abstaining from intercourse are morally ok so long as they do not masturbate. However are you really going to try to argue that a teenage boy fondling himself but stopping short of a climax is not guilty of masturbation?
Click to expand...
The Catechism also states that in weighing up the moral status of the act, we must take into account the developmental stage and level of anxiety of the person concerned. In the case you outline, there is still grave matter but the questions of clear knowledge and full consent remain unanswered.
 
Personally, I believe the Catechism’s definition to be lacking. This isn’t universal, but there are erogenous zones on the body, some sensitive enough to induce orgasm without any stimulation to the genitals whatsoever. What of those? (I don’t want to be too graphic, so I’m using my better judgment and not saying exactly which ones).
 
Corpus_Cristi said:
Personally, I believe the Catechism’s definition to be lacking. This isn’t universal, but there are erogenous zones on the body, some sensitive enough to induce orgasm without any stimulation to the genitals whatsoever. What of those? (I don’t want to be too graphic, so I’m using my better judgment and not saying exactly which ones).
Click to expand...
I would have to agree with you that the definition needs further clarification, especially in this day and age. I imagine if someone was inducing sexual pleasure without use of the genitals, but use of erogenous zones, that surely there would be some fantasising in their that would come under the definition and sin of lust?
 
twoangels said:
Ok so the Catechism says that masturbation is the deliberate stimulation of genitals to derive sexual pleasure.

Ok I pointed this out in another post that it says sexual pleasure. It does not say sexual climax. Meanwhile I have seen countless people say that couples who engage in sexual behavior while abstaining from intercourse are morally ok so long as they do not masturbate. However are you really going to try to argue that a teenage boy fondling himself but stopping short of a climax is not guilty of masturbation?
Click to expand...
Sexual pleasure would include climax.

Then because the definition of masturbation is any sexual pleasure by stimulation of the genitals. So if the couples you are talking about are doing anything that stimulates the genitals then they are sinning. But if its sexual pleasure not derived from the gentils then im not sure. As I said earlier, perhaps the sin of lust?
Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes. Paragraph: 2351.
Click to expand...
They could be committing this sin because they are going out of their way to have sexual pleasure as it is isolated from the procreative and unitive purpose as it is outside the realm of marriage.
 
David89 said:
Sexual pleasure would include climax.

Then because the definition of masturbation is any sexual pleasure by stimulation of the genitals. So if the couples you are talking about are doing anything that stimulates the genitals then they are sinning. But if its sexual pleasure not derived from the gentils then im not sure. As I said earlier, perhaps the sin of lust?

They could be committing this sin because they are going out of their way to have sexual pleasure as it is isolated from the procreative and unitive purpose as it is outside the realm of marriage.
Click to expand...
Married couples are allowed to engage in foreplay provided the final sex act ends with the husband climaxing inside his wife.
Stimulating genitals without a final act inside his wife would be a sin but stimulating the genitals and climaxing inside his wife is not a sin.
 
thistle said:
Married couples are allowed to engage in foreplay provided the final sex act ends with the husband climaxing inside his wife.
Stimulating genitals without a final act inside his wife would be a sin but stimulating the genitals and climaxing inside his wife is not a sin.
Click to expand...
Sorry my discussion was based on non-married people. Yes I would agree with your statement. I presumed the couples the OP was talking about were unmarried.
 
David89 said:
Sorry my discussion was based on non-married people. Yes I would agree with your statement. I presumed the couples the OP was talking about were unmarried.
Click to expand...
For non-married people no sex act at all is allowed (with or without climax).
 
Corpus_Cristi said:
Personally, I believe the Catechism’s definition to be lacking. This isn’t universal, but there are erogenous zones on the body, some sensitive enough to induce orgasm without any stimulation to the genitals whatsoever. What of those? (I don’t want to be too graphic, so I’m using my better judgment and not saying exactly which ones).
Click to expand...
Every time I read this definition, I am reminded of the scene in James Michener’s novel Hawaii where the American missionaries were translating the Bible into Hawaiian, and they got to “Thou shalt not commit adultery.” The Hawaiian informants told them that there were 20-odd types of adultery in their society. On one hand, if the translation simply said “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” two people might say, “They’re not talking about our relationship,” and continue as they had been doing. On the other hand, if they listed all 20-odd forms of adultery, two people might say, “Hey, I’ve never heard of that one – let’s try it.” The missionaries wound up translating that commandment as “Thou shalt not sleep mischievously.” (BTW, I just did some googling, and this story appears to be historically accurate.)

The Catechism item on masturbation appears to be the result of a similar kind of fudging that would require a Clintonesque type of parsing to reach any kind of interpretation, and any interpretation that is reached would be subject to argument. One can always fall back on a paraphrase SCOTUS Justice Potter Stewart’s definition of obscenity: I can’t define masturbation, but I know it when I see it."
 
Tybourne said:
The Catechism also states that in weighing up the moral status of the act, we must take into account the developmental stage and level of anxiety of the person concerned. In the case you outline, there is still grave matter but the questions of clear knowledge and full consent remain unanswered.
Click to expand...
What on earth does that have to do with defining what masturbation is?
 
masturbation is self stimulation of your sexual organs to derive sexual pleasure. In regards to deriving sexual pleasure but not specifically from your sexual organs, it may not be masturbation per se, but its still a sin of lust by trying to experience sexual pleasure outside of the only proper context which is in marriage. If one were to confess such a thing I assume it would best be done by saying they were impure with their body for the purpose of lust distinct from masturbation. different fruit same tree in my opinion.
 
If your touching yourself for pleasure its masturbation. Common sense.
 
Jordan719 said:
If your touching yourself for pleasure its masturbation. Common sense.
Click to expand...
Not so. Scratching a mosquite bite on my arm is touching myself for the pleasure of alleviating the itch, but it is not masturbation.
 
DaveBj said:
Not so. Scratching a mosquite bite on my arm is touching myself for the pleasure of alleviating the itch, but it is not masturbation.
Click to expand...
Haha! My Dad told me that masturbation was like having sex with yourself. I found a journal of mine where I starting going on and on about “How can it be morally ok to use a tampon? I won’t do it. I don’t care what my Mom says. My mom will not force me to sin. I will sacrifice and just not go swimming!”
 
twoangels said:
Haha! My Dad told me that masturbation was like having sex with yourself. I found a journal of mine where I starting going on and on about “How can it be morally ok to use a tampon? I won’t do it. I don’t care what my Mom says. My mom will not force me to sin. I will sacrifice and just not go swimming!”
Click to expand...
lol
 
DaveBj said:
Not so. Scratching a mosquite bite on my arm is touching myself for the pleasure of alleviating the itch, but it is not masturbation.
Click to expand...
Under the Church definition of masturbation it makes no difference if there is an orgasm or not. Stimulating the genitals for sexual pleasure even without orgasm is masturbation.
Scratching your arm is not for sexual pleasure.
 
twoangels said:
Ok so the Catechism says that masturbation is the deliberate stimulation of genitals to derive sexual pleasure.

Ok I pointed this out in another post that it says sexual pleasure. It does not say sexual climax. Meanwhile I have seen countless people say that couples who engage in sexual behavior while abstaining from intercourse are morally ok so long as they do not masturbate. However are you really going to try to argue that a teenage boy fondling himself but stopping short of a climax is not guilty of masturbation?
Click to expand...
this is disgusting. i dont think a definition is in question we all know what masterbation is unless we are a perfect virgin. dont you know that it can make you blind? seriously you see but you dont see, it can make you blind so that you cant see that its wrong, and that you cant see what is right. its not like no one has done it, its not that “people” want to make every sin something to look apon and waste time bieng angry about. but if you are really strugglin with this question than i think you are blind. some people become sexual addicts because they masterbate, and no you have to make a choice in oder to do it, until you go blind to why its something to repent of and then who cares if you have eyes to see anymore? call what is good good. and what is bad bad, or else you are blind. and dont tell me that sexual addicts acting out arent sinning, so if by abstaining they can not be loosed into thier sexual desires of carnal nature and that they could then be pure and not forget what is right then what makes it so hard to “see” its a sin to masterbate? because its a vice for sinful nature. and sexual addicts arent the only people in danger of becoming blind spiritually.
 
thistle said:
Under the Church definition of masturbation it makes no difference if there is an orgasm or not. Stimulating the genitals for sexual pleasure even without orgasm is masturbation.
Scratching your arm is not for sexual pleasure.
Click to expand...
I was responding to Jordan719’s vague and mis-spelled post that touching oneself (without specifying what part of the body was being touched) for pleasure (without specifying sexual pleasure) was wrong. Your post quoted above has nothing to do with my post.
 
DaveBj said:
I was responding to Jordan719’s vague and mis-spelled post that touching oneself (without specifying what part of the body was being touched) for pleasure (without specifying sexual pleasure) was wrong. Your post quoted above has nothing to do with my post.
Click to expand...
Re-read. Misunderstood you. My apologies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top