Marital foreplay in the context of conjugal act??

  • Thread starter Thread starter fpt
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
In abstracto, a wife who refuses the body of her husband is not a true wife. She needs some advices and has to to try to change her thought on this topic.

Because a husband who, in the context of marital act, cannot do nothing on her or cannot receive something from her wife, because according to her it is only body junction!!! It is so sad, not very natural. That is against the marriage.

Marital act is not a animalistic coitus. Sorry; it is different.
 
Sometimes, the marital preparation for a very devout fiancée, future wife, is not very well. Devout girls are not ready to understand the state of marriage. Marital act means sexual cooperation with natural and normal stimulations like foreplay in the context of marital act.

Per se, a bride cannot exclude the manual stimulation and the oral foreplay as foreplay in the context of marital act. It is non sense to exclude. I say , per se.

The reasonning is the same for the husband
 
In the catholic marriage, in the context of marital act:

A husband has the right to receive pleasure from his wife by the natural means;

A wife has the right to receive pleasure from her husband by the natural means;

A wife has the moral obligation to give pleasure to her husband by the natural means ;

A husband has the moral obligation to give pleasure to his wife by the natural means.

It is not an obligation of results, of course, but it is an obligation of means. Trying is the rule in the respect of natural law.
 
Corki said:
Translation is weak but, if I understand you correctly…

The person who is wrong in this example is the monk. If she does not want to do those things, she does NOT need to be “okay” with that. He can explain that it is not against Church teaching to do some of those things (some are questionable, at best) but he is wrong to tell her that she must or even should comply. Any act that make a woman feel “as if she were acting like a harlot” is fine for a woman to decline.

And it is not the “state of marriage” for normal sexual relations to have an oral sex component. It is not immoral **if both agree **to a limited extent but it is not part of the “regular” sequence of events of the marital act.

BTW, I can’t imagine a young bride having such a discussion with a monk. 😃
Click to expand...
For instance:

If bride is against natural and normal foreplay, because according to her philosophical approach, it is sinful, bad, wrong and against the natural law, her point of view made that she is not ready for marriage.

Honestly, if the day of wedding, your bride, before the sacrament, says to you " I am against the normal and natural foreplay because the catholic faith is against. it is sinful, it is wrong. I do not want to do that on you and i do not want that you do that on me on."

What is the reaction of prudent groom?
 
I hope I am not speaking out of turn, I have only scanned the posts, but I would like to comment.

Moral speaking, a wife or husband, can deny certain actions that make them uncomfortable. This wife (true or hypothetical) has not done anything wrong.

If I were the husband in this scenario, I would look at my wife, lovely and respectfully, and I would ask why she is uncomfortable with it. And then she and I together would work through those things. If it is Church teaching, then we would study Church teaching, if it makes her feel “dirty” but doesn’t know why, that is a perfectly acceptable answer.

A woman can be fully ready to embark into the married life without being fully comfortable with all things sexually.

Sex takes time and love. It is not automatic. Couples need to be respectful of each other while they grow in intimacy. Forcing her to feel badly about herself or her comfort level will only make it worse. Good sex is learned, and the husband absolutely needs to allow her that time.
 
That is why porn is so bad for marriages. It gives the wrong impression on what love and sex is. It makes people think that, “hey, that’s what a great orgasm should look like…I want that”

And, inevitable, when the wife cannot make it “look like that”, the husband blames her for it and their marriage is harmed.
 
I have a true story:

a wife with two children of her husband got nullification of catholic marriage because he was impotent because he could not penetrate vaginally his wife, but he had put down his sperm just outside of vagina (at the gate), and her wife was pregnant, twice.

There were nullification because wife could not be penetrated by her husband.

Thus, wife has right to the penetration for complete pleasure (vaginal orgasm, cervix orgasm) even if in the rule of the catholic court, it is not so clear. It is a logical interpretation.

By that, I want to say that the sexual pleasure is one part of of marital act. State of marriage means foreplay, then union of bodies with the potential vaginal and cervix orgasm. An obligation of means with the human manners in link with natural law.
 
Part of the wedding vows is “in sickness and in health”

If the man is having trouble keeping an erection, wouldn’t that be a health issue?
 
NFP1Kate said:
Part of the wedding vows is “in sickness and in health”

If the man is having trouble keeping an erection, wouldn’t that be a health issue?
Click to expand...
Are you against the wise judgment of catholic church?
 
NFP1Kate said:
That is why porn is so bad for marriages. It gives the wrong impression on what love and sex is. It makes people think that, “hey, that’s what a great orgasm should look like…I want that”

And, inevitable, when the wife cannot make it “look like that”, the husband blames her for it and their marriage is harmed.
Click to expand...
That is why porn is so bad for marriages. It gives the wrong impression on what love and sex is. It makes people think that, “hey, that’s what a great orgasm should look like…I want that”

And, inevitable, when the wife cannot make it “look like that”, the husband blames her for it and their marriage is harmed.

Before the porn, there are the natural and the divine law. From the Song of Songs, the foreplay are holy. If you want to look without prude thought the anatomy of wife there are some organs that are here in order to be stimulated by the husband before penetration in the natural manner (manual, oral and with the penis).
 
I am sorry, but if a young bride say to her husband, i am okay for marital act, but I do not want to be touched by your hands and fingers or your lips on my exterior genitals before vaginal penetration and I refuse to stimulate your penis with my fingers before penetrating me, because it is against the natural law and the catholic faith.

How to you do? Who is wrong? Of course, husband cannot force her, he does not have to force her. What to do?

In my opinion this wife is wrong. Her thought on catholic faith is not truly catholic. She is okay for sex but without touch. It is a crazy situation.
 
fpt said:
It is true story.

A young wife, who thinks that it is, per se, sinful of stimulate the penis of her husband with her hands, as foreplay, in the context of marital act, is so weird. She is not ready for the state of marriage.
Click to expand...
That is not weird, nor is it any indication of her rediness for marriage. Even though it is not, per se, sinful to do so, it isn’t required and she has every right to exercise her preferences.
 
fpt said:
Sometimes, the marital preparation for a very devout fiancée, future wife, is not very well. Devout girls are not ready to understand the state of marriage. Marital act means sexual cooperation with natural and normal stimulations like foreplay in the context of marital act.

Per se, a bride cannot exclude the manual stimulation and the oral foreplay as foreplay in the context of marital act. It is non sense to exclude. I say , per se.

The reasonning is the same for the husband
Click to expand...
Stop right there.

Foreplay does not have to include oral sex. Nor does it have to include manually “stimulating” each others genitals. In fact, in some cases, this is a very bad idea.

The whole idea of foreplay is to increase arousal and to make the actual sexual experience **more **enjoyable for both spouses. If a husband insists on his wife participating in activities that make her uncomfortable, then he is going to make the sexual experience less enjoyable. That’s not only immoral on the part of the husband, it’s kind of dumb since it will likely result in infrequent sexual relations.
 
Corki said:
That is not weird, nor is it any indication of her rediness for marriage. Even though it is not, per se, sinful to do so, it isn’t required and she has every right to exercise her preferences.
Click to expand...
In the real life, how to receive pleasure from his wife? How to do? She stays passive!!! It is a problem!!! She is not a lover for her husband,

For me, this type of intellectual approach is wrong. Her thought is sinful.
 
NFP1Kate said:
That is why porn is so bad for marriages. It gives the wrong impression on what love and sex is. It makes people think that, “hey, that’s what a great orgasm should look like…I want that”

And, inevitable, when the wife cannot make it “look like that”, the husband blames her for it and their marriage is harmed.
Click to expand...
Amen. As I said before, the OP seems to have developed his expertise on women’s sexual reactions from the pages of Playboy. I hope this is not representational of all French men.
 
I have to say…in complete and utter honesty

A young virginal wife…think about it and follow.
She is probably scared, she is probably worried it will hurt…being conformable with all these things is scary, especially is no one has ever seen you naked.

The husband must be a mature man in this. His loving little wife will take time. And time and time. I have a very interesting fact that most men do not know. It takes nearly a year an half from the time a woman begins being sexual until she is able to fully enjoy it with orgasm.

Not joking.
 
fpt said:
I have a true story:

a wife with two children of her husband got nullification of catholic marriage because he was impotent because he could not penetrate vaginally his wife, but he had put down his sperm just outside of vagina (at the gate), and her wife was pregnant, twice.

There were nullification because wife could not be penetrated by her husband.

Thus, wife has right to the penetration for complete pleasure (vaginal orgasm, cervix orgasm) even if in the rule of the catholic court, it is not so clear. It is a logical interpretation.

By that, I want to say that the sexual pleasure is one part of of marital act. State of marriage means foreplay, then union of bodies with the potential vaginal and cervix orgasm. An obligation of means with the human manners in link with natural law.
Click to expand...
Possibly a true story but not entirely accurate. In a case like you describe, the marriage was likely disolved (a little different than a nullification) because it was never consumated.

Neither party has a “right” in marriage to “complete pleasure” or orgasm. :mad:

BTW, there is no such thing as “cervix orgasm”. :eek:
 
Husbands must be tender. I don’t know if it is scientifically proven, but I can assert that every female friend and family member I know will attest this.
 
NFP1Kate said:
I have to say…in complete and utter honesty

A young virginal wife…think about it and follow.
She is probably scared, she is probably worried it will hurt…being conformable with all these things is scary, especially is no one has ever seen you naked.

The husband must be a mature man in this. His loving little wife will take time. And time and time. I have a very interesting fact that most men do not know. It takes nearly a year an half from the time a woman begins being sexual until she is able to fully enjoy it with orgasm.

Not joking.
Click to expand...
And sometimes even longer.

But it’s not fair to put this all on the woman. If the man has also lived a chaste life, he is likely to be inexpert at knowing what brings his wife pleasure, what is arrousing and what is annoying. Hopefully, they learn together instead of relying on someone else’s checklist of what should be included in their sex life.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top