Is female masturbation intrinsically disordered?

  • Thread starter Thread starter nfinke
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

nfinke

Guest
This thought occured to me the other day and I’ve been turning it over in my head. (Hopefully this won’t be too vulgar for this site)

It’s entirely clear why male masturbation is contrary to the natural law. You are committing an act which, if simply done in the intended location, would most likely result in reproduction, and is the only act that can result in that, and is therefore naturally ordered for that purpose. Committing that act in such a way that it’s intended purpose is impossible is obviously contrary to natural law.

However, female masturbation is different. A woman is not doing anything that would result in reproduction if just done slightly differently. This is due to a woman’s nature as the “receiver” of the reproductive act. Often women will stimulate parts of the body that aren’t stimulated at all in the reproductive act, and unlike men, female orgasm isnt linked to what she needs to do for reproduction at all.

So, unlike a man, I don’t see a masturbating woman as committing an act that is intrinsically ordered towards reproduction, and then robbing it of it’s purpose. I guess it might still be seen as vulgar and indecent, but those are much much weaker arguments for it’s sinfulness than a violation of natural moral law. It really does seem like it has the natural moral value of scratching an itch, with added enjoyment.

So does female masturbation violation violate natural law? And if not is it sinful (according to the RCC) for some other reason?
 
Last edited:
nfinke said:
And if not is it sinful (according to the RCC) for some other reason?
Click to expand...
If I’m not wrong, it’s sinful not because it doesn’t go against procreation, but it’s because it’s sexual pleasure separated from the unitive and procreative aspects of sex. (seeking sexual pleasure outside the context of sex)

Just like how lusting after a woman sitting beside you is sinful.
 
nfinke said:
It really does seem like it has the natural moral value of scratching an itch, with added enjoyment.
Click to expand...
Human sexuality is supposed to be on a higher plane than just scratching an itch.

Sex has a unitive purpose as well as a procreative purpose. Somebody who is self-pleasuring is not fulfilling the unitive purpose.
 
Well lusting for a woman beside you isn’t sinful because it goes against natural law. It’s sinful because Jesus explicitly said it was sinful.
 
The Catechism has this:
1643 “Conjugal love involves a totality, in which all the elements of the person enter - appeal of the body and instinct, power of feeling and affectivity, aspiration of the spirit and of will. It aims at a deeply personal unity, a unity that, beyond union in one flesh, leads to forming one heart and soul; it demands indissolubility and faithfulness in definitive mutual giving; and it is open to fertility. In a word it is a question of the normal characteristics of all natural conjugal love, but with a new significance which not only purifies and strengthens them, but raises them to the extent of making them the expression of specifically Christian values.”<FC 13>
Click to expand...
Note the parts in bold: A married couple is the only proper context for sexual union - the becoming of “one flesh”. The solitary person and his/her own imagination is not the intended context for sexual expression. Indeed, masturbation militates against the definitive self-gift to another one specific and committed person, the spouse.
 
Anything separated from the unitive or procreative aspect is sinful. An orgasm outside of the episode of intimacy with her husband would therefore be disordered.
 
Last edited:
I’m pretty sure women do not masturbate while thinking about baseball. They probably are thinking lustful thoughts at the same time. That is another reason it is wrong other then just the textbook answer from the catechism.
 
Last edited:
The Church has been pretty clear on the matter. Masturbation, male or female, is a sin.
 
Cruciferi said:
The Church has been pretty clear on the matter. Masturbation, male or female, is a sin.
Click to expand...
I thought the same thing the OP did in the past. The differences between the two made it confusing as no seed is spilled, it is just an orgasm. But Male or female, sexual pleasure outside of marriage and outside of the unitive, procreative purposes is immoral.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, that’s where a lot of people get off track. You’d think the Monty Python song would make people realize the idea was ridiculous and look into what is actually going on. Instead, it is treated as legitimate criticism by a lot of people (and in case it sounds like I’m looking down on them, I used to be one of them so…).
 
By that token hunger and competition are totally natural human biological drives common to everyone and there is absolutely nothing disordered about killing your neighbor and taking his food.
 
You didn’t specify there was a natural limit at which we stop listening to our drives. I would also contest your claim that it harms no one.
 
Last edited:
Coveting also harms no one. External harm isn’t the prerequisite for immorality
 
All acts, to be Human (correctly), are Human Acts because of a KNOWING about the material act.
The site https://softvocation.org/2018/05/24/knowing/ details this concerning sexual acts, how the Knowing makes an ordered act or disordered.
Pleasure as felt in the satisfaction of appetites is a trigger for Knowing, it is not for “feeling good” as any kind of a goal. What can be known when a husband and wife experience the pleasures they feel in intimacy, compared to what can be known in other shortcuts to getting pleasure alone?

Think on what you are now Knowing in conclusion of everything you are doing…
 
Coveting another’s spouse or property is just short of acting and is therefore frowned upon. Masturbation does not threaten another’s belongings.
 
meltzerboy2 said:
Masturbation is a totally natural human biological drive and common to both sexes. There is absolutely nothing intrinsically disordered about it except according to certain religious beliefs.
Click to expand...
If we followed every “natural human biological drive,” where would that lead us? It is not an arbitrary value, it is a moral value - formed and applied - after using observation and reason to conclude that sexual activity is meant for procreation. Removing the procreative element leads to an overemphasis on the unitive, and that has led to even the unitive element being discarded across our whole society and sexual pleasure is used for just selfish reasons.
 
Last edited:
There is the limit of natural propriety based on a proper time and place for everything. Anything, even religious activity, can become an obsession and a compulsion if one does not exercise some control.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top