Female orgasm during foreplay?

[Emily91]

I had a question, is female orgasm ok during foreplay as long as it leads directly to inter course? I know I can sometimes reach climax simply from passionate necking and breast stimulation. Is this okay within the context of vaginal intercourse within marriage? Especially if this helps the woman achieve climax during intercourse?

 

[FrenzyJen]

Yep.

 

[Allegra]

Go for it!

 

[mommamaree]

Yes. In fact, female orgasm during foreplay can provide the couple with greater lubrication to allow for comfortable penetration. And it can also help her to maintain a heightened arousal that allows for climax during intercourse, which is very difficult for some women to achieve.

 

[phil_at_dayboro]

Um,um, why not,

 

[twf]

I’ve only been married for a week, but so far each time we have had relations my wife has climaxed well before penetration. If this was sinful, we would have to stop having sex completely. The man must do his best to climax inside his wife, but female orgasms are a different matter. I believe it is also OK for the man to help his wife climax immediately after intercourse if she wasn’t able to before he finished.

 

[TK421]

The female can climax at any time during the episode of intimacy, but if she is being deliberately climaxed without the intention of the husband eventually climaxing in her during their coupling, then the sacramental nature of the conjugal union is being mocked. The man’s seed is rendered powerless and he is debased to being a uxurious, impotent toy. She becomes less a wife and moreso a black widow, because she refuses, in her pride and disobedience, to fulfill her obligation in the conjugal bed to surrender herself in total submission to him by allowing him entrance to her. Through this submission to her groom, the greatest possible romantic & sexual intimacy is achieved, and the sacred union appropriately lives up to its sign & symbol as the union between Christ & Church.

Vice versa, the man cannot deliberately climax except in his wife, as he has sworn himself under God exclusively to her as his beloved. When sex is experienced in some other fashion, he mocks her not as his beloved but as an object for his pleasure. The man must prefer death than to give himself to another or to give himself to her in some deceptive fashion that nefariously violates the spousal union.

 

[GoldenArrow]

I … envy you. I don’t even see how that’s possible. I don’t know what else to say except kudos to you, sister!!! Go for it because it’s a hard enough thing to achieve for the rest of us. I mean – it takes a great deal of concentration. That’s awesome!!!

 

[GoldenArrow]

The female can climax at any time during the episode of intimacy, but if she is being deliberately climaxed without the intention of the husband eventually climaxing in her during their coupling, then the sacramental nature of the conjugal union is being mocked. The man’s seed is rendered powerless and he is debased to being a uxurious, impotent toy. She becomes less a wife and moreso a black widow, because she refuses, in her pride and disobedience, to fulfill her obligation in the conjugal bed to surrender herself in total submission to him by allowing him entrance to her. Through this submission to her groom, the greatest possible romantic & sexual intimacy is achieved, and the sacred union appropriately lives up to its sign & symbol as the union between Christ & Church.

Vice versa, the man cannot deliberately climax except in his wife, as he has sworn himself under God exclusively to her as his beloved. When sex is experienced in some other fashion, he mocks her not as his beloved but as an object for his pleasure. The man must prefer death than to give himself to another or to give himself to her in some deceptive fashion that nefariously violates the spousal union.

What if the intent for a sacred union is present but IT occurs by accident? An accident isn’t a sin, is it? I’m speaking mostly of HIM because for a woman IT is hard … except for the original poster.

 

[Vico]

… then the sacramental nature of the conjugal union is being mocked. …

I think it is odd to call conjugal relations sacramental since some valid marriages are either natural marriages or sacramental, and what makes Matrimony a sacrament is the ability to receive grace through the covenant when both are baptized, consummated or not.

 

[TK421]

Sex isn’t a Sacrament but it is a sacramental that points a person towards them, analogous to a restating of one’s baptismal vows. Of course, in the real world, with all its misinformation and madness, only a minority are privileged to see it that way, but in its intended nature that is what it is. In, for example, a moment of mutual orgasm, the husband and wife can more readily - than any other time - thank God for the gift of union, because in sex, it has an immensely powerful natural pleasure that serves as a sign & symbol of the spiritual reality of Christ & Church. It isn’t coincidental that the sacred author in scripture chooses man & wife as this symbol rather than using, say, friendship, such as between David & Jonathan. That wouldn’t be a fully accurate sign of Christ & Church.

I’m not sure how well that could be applied to a couple in a natural marriage, but sex as a sacramental among Catholics and some other Christians is entirely appropriate. (I suppose the important part here is: yes, contraceptive forms of sex are still repugnant for non-Christians.)

I’m basing this on Paul M. Quay’s essay “Contraception and Conjugal Love” which was published years prior to Humanae Vitae but does a good job of explaining how some Catholic theologians in the past, who argued on the evil of contraception strictly on the grounds that sex in marriage is only for procreation (which it isn’t) were selling themselves short.

 

[Vico]

Sex isn’t a Sacrament but it is a sacramental that points a person towards them, analogous to a restating of one’s baptismal vows. Of course, in the real world, with all its misinformation and madness, only a minority are privileged to see it that way, but in its intended nature that is what it is. In, for example, a moment of mutual orgasm, the husband and wife can more readily - than any other time - thank God for the gift of union, because in sex, it has an immensely powerful natural pleasure that serves as a sign & symbol of the spiritual reality of Christ & Church. It isn’t coincidental that the sacred author in scripture chooses man & wife as this symbol rather than using, say, friendship, such as between David & Jonathan. That wouldn’t be a fully accurate sign of Christ & Church.

I’m not sure how well that could be applied to a couple in a natural marriage, but sex as a sacramental among Catholics and some other Christians is entirely appropriate. (I suppose the important part here is: yes, contraceptive forms of sex are still repugnant for non-Christians.)

I’m basing this on Paul M. Quay’s essay “Contraception and Conjugal Love” which was published years prior to Humanae Vitae but does a good job of explaining how some Catholic theologians in the past, who argued on the evil of contraception strictly on the grounds that sex in marriage is only for procreation (which it isn’t) were selling themselves short.

I think conjugal relations do not rely upon the merits and prayers of the whole Mystical Body of Christ. Especially considering the long tradition of abstaining from conjugal relations during penitential periods and periods of preparation for reception of the Holy Eucharist. Per Modern Catholic Dictionary on *sacramentals:
*“The variety of sacramentals spans the whole range of times and places, words and actions, objects and gestures that, on the Church’s authority, draw not only on the personal dispositions of the individuals but on the merits and prayers of the whole Mystical Body of Christ.”

 

[Gordon_Sims]

What if the intent for a sacred union is present but IT occurs by accident? An accident isn’t a sin, is it? I’m speaking mostly of HIM because for a woman IT is hard … except for the original poster.

Accidents aren’t a sin. It’s also not a sin if the wife orgasms during foreplay and then something interrupts the couple and you never have a chance to reach the desired ends. Whether it’s sinful to yell at or punish your kids in those situations, I’ll leave for others to figure out.

 

[TK421]

I think conjugal relations do not rely upon the merits and prayers of the whole Mystical Body of Christ. Especially considering the long tradition of abstaining from conjugal relations during penitential periods and periods of preparation for reception of the Holy Eucharist. Per Modern Catholic Dictionary on *sacramentals:
*“The variety of sacramentals spans the whole range of times and places, words and actions, objects and gestures that, on the Church’s authority, draw not only on the personal dispositions of the individuals but on the merits and prayers of the whole Mystical Body of Christ.”

@ Vico:

I’m assuming you’re right. I still don’t entirely know what a ‘sacramental’ is.

But if it’s not a sacramental, conjugal relations should be viewed as something that are a positive good for the couple, and since they are a positive good for the couple, it means they are a positive good for everybody.

People sometimes abstain from sexual intercourse periodically for spiritual edification reasons, but this is not a reflection that conjugal relations are unclean anymore than it would mean that fasting from food means that food is unclean. Mortification from positive goods are in order to better appreciate our dependency on God’s graces.

 

[manualman]

There you go ladies! The list of advantages on your side of the divide is now TWO items long.

1. Feeling baby move inside.
2. Multiple O-pportunities leading up to the big finish with no guilt.

But we still don’t have to wear makeup, shave pits and legs or mess with long hair. And we get cheap clothes and look DISTINGUISHED when we get old. So there.

 

[Vico]

@ Vico:

I’m assuming you’re right. I still don’t entirely know what a ‘sacramental’ is.

But if it’s not a sacramental, conjugal relations should be viewed as something that are a positive good for the couple, and since they are a positive good for the couple, it means they are a positive good for everybody.

People sometimes abstain from sexual intercourse periodically for spiritual edification reasons, but this is not a reflection that conjugal relations are unclean anymore than it would mean that fasting from food means that food is unclean. Mortification from positive goods are in order to better appreciate our dependency on God’s graces.

From the Catechism:

1677 Sacramentals are sacred signs instituted by the Church. They prepare men to receive the fruit of the sacraments and sanctify different circumstances of life.

1678 Among the sacramentals blessings occupy an important place. They include both praise of God for his works and gifts, and the Church’s intercession for men that they may be able to use God’s gifts according to the spirit of the Gospel.

The purpose of fasting is to become an icon of Christ, to focus on what is spiritual, to control the passions, and to perform penance. There is a greater good so the lesser good is given up.