Sexually explicit discussion on a Catholic forum

[Chancellare]

Teaching the laity through Internet message boards on such a delicate topic is not an acceptable method of education, in my opinion.

~Liza

Although I agree with your concern, we cannot limit the efficacy of the teaching power of the Church by deciding to take it out of the internet.

Saint Jose Maria Escriva once said that God meets you at the level where He sees it opportune. We cannot just conclude that God will not meet us here. The God of the Universe is also the God of the Internet.

 

[Eliza10]

LovedForever:… These accusations are all completely unflounded… .

Whoops! That would be “unfounded!”

 

[Eliza10]

…FWIW I didn’t read those descriptions as “accusations” or “leaps” but likely points of view of some members…

Trouble is, those views about members were not kind, and while I don’t know what has been revealed about the character of people on other threads, on this thread the judgements were unsubstantiated.

…There are people on this forum who do suffer from scrupulosity .

But no one on this thread demonstrated scrupulousity.

…And I didn’t read those comments as unkind but then I tend to agree with LovedForever here…

They certainly weren’t meant to be complimentary! They are discounting. And thats unkind.

…and some have admitted they are prudes. .

Yes, Lizanne did say that, but I wonder if she really meant that, since she certainly didn’t reveal herself to be a “prude” in her post. It looked to me that she was being self-effacing in order to soften her suggestion that the explicit discussions on this forum may be inappropriate.

 

[Eliza10]

I didn’t count but I did do a search. I think the number of masturbation threads might be tied with oral sex threads. Then again I didn’t do a search with the word masterbation too.

I just don’t understand why mods dont’ shut these multiple topic threads down and refer interested parties to already exhausted threads on these two topics. Actually these thread topic should be ‘closed’…hammered shut!!

There’s an excellent suggestion!

 

[lizaanne]

Yes, Lizanne did say that, but I wonder if she really meant that, since she certainly didn’t reveal herself to be a “prude” in her post. It looked to me that she was being self-effacing in order to soften her suggestion that the explicit discussions on this forum may be inappropriate.

I can tend to be a bit of a prude at times, certainly when compared to your average 42 year old woman on the street. But in reality I think I’m more normal and healthy, in that normal is not the common norm of current society, but what normal should be. And I believe that to include a desire to keep the sanctity and privacy of the marital bed exactly that - sacred and private.

I do also agree that people need to talk about certain things, that’s why I’m admitting that I don’t have the answers. But I do know for sure that having these types of discussions out in the open where clearly (based on the comments here) there are those who are uncomfortable with them, is not the answer.

And telling me to “just don’t look at them” is not a proper response.

~Liza

 

[Jay2]

What language? Most boards have extensive filtering of all the common “bad words”… , but banning or locking down sexually related questions is a “knee jerk” reaction. Every single living thing on this rock reproduces.

We as mammals reproduce by a physical connection between the male & female of the species. The engorged male penis is inserted into the female’s vaginal canal. Due to stimulation the male then expels seminal fluid into the vaginal canal. By flagellating action (tail thrashing) the sperm travels upwards towards the …

Was that an offensive description of sex?? If you can’t handle that, then I wouldn’t want to be around you with a lay-term description…

This area (or a to be created specific forum) is needed. Frankly, just by reading some of the posts & questions I’m astounded that some of these people can have intercourse, let alone reproduce at all…

“Is it OK if we…”
“Will I go to Hell if I…”
“Can I touch my wife/husband’s…”
“What if I… and didn’t… and we…”
“Am I committing a sin by…”
The lists go on & on.

They are so intimidated or frightened by the Catholic “rules of engorgement” that having sex with their spouse becomes a moral, theological & physical checklist.

Sex with your spouse is MUCH more than the previous “technical assessment”. It’s the actions that lead up to the technical act where there is so much confusion.

Having an area to post delicate questions anonymously, within a group like-minded people, and getting solid reference material direction or answers is a much needed service. The OP can then dissect the replies to relate to his/her own situation or comfort level, and proceed with their own lives.

But in reality I think I’m more normal and healthy, in that normal is not the common norm of current society, but what normal should be. And I believe that to include a desire to keep the sanctity and privacy of the marital bed exactly that - sacred and private.

You have just stated of what your comfort level is, or your choices are. That is your privilege. I’ll state this:
I don’t think you are more healthy or normal than me. That is my privilege. Our views are different.

And it may not be the same as others… hence the conundrum… and the reply “Just don’t look/open” the sexually related posts.

“If you don’t like the program, change the channel”.

 

[shirleytowers]

I haven’t ever read anything on here that seemed too graphic or explicit, but I also don’t click on any threads whose titles suggests they MIGHT be like that. Some of the titles do seem like they are pretty personal. I think if you used enough euphemysms, you might avoid offense.

It is not the topic of sex that is offensive, but the personal details provided that might evoke unwanted images of other people’s personal lives that I don’t want in my brain.

 

[Penny_Plain]

Instead of groping in the darkness…

Is THAT licit? What does the CCC say about it?

Does it make a difference if you’re wearing a gorilla suit?:getholy:

 

[LovedForever]

Maybe this is the heart of the issue. While I have seen one post that I considered explicit (the language was crude) and reported it (even though the main thrust of the post was not a real problem) I have not been scandalized by the content of these posts; I know people are sorting things out. It may be helpful if mods gave some parameters. What is explicit to one person is descriptive to another.

I say “may” because I haven’t had a problem with posts that have not been removed so it’s hard for me to know what others are having a problem with.

There are not that many venues for people to anonymously ask questions about a subject many people are (obviously) uncomfortable with and be given, or directed to, orthodox answers.

FWIW I didn’t read those descriptions as “accusations” or “leaps” but likely points of view of some members. There are people on this forum who do suffer from scrupulosity and some have admitted they are prudes. And I didn’t read those comments as unkind but then I tend to agree with LovedForever here.

Thank you so much BruisedReed for your support and kind comments. I was pretty shocked when I read the poster’s accusation about my post - especially the accusation of my “not being Catholic.” What an accusation!

I was merely making an observation - (which by the way is simply a fact as you pointed out. There ARE posters here who are too scrupulous for instance - by their own admission.) And some DO have a pretty narrow comfort zone when the topic of sex comes up.

It is not being “unkind” to state the obvious. It is pertinent to the discussion here of whether or not it is necessary and prudent to move all topics of sex into the closet, I mean less accessible forum.
My point was that there will always be some who are for that because of their own personal perspective - but that does not mean it is widely agreed upon or is necessary.

That is up to the very efficient and respected Moderators.

 

[Sandi]

Sex is a gift from God and it’s as much a part of life as anything else. There’s nothing wrong with a dignified discussion of it, and the moderators are here to make sure it stays that way. If it really bothers you that much, don’t read about it.

I’ve always thought that the euphemisms that are used are what’s silly and undignfied. And by your own admission, you’re a prude. It would probably be best for you to avoid these threads altogether.

 

[lizaanne]

I think the fact that others have agreed with me here makes this a very relevant and valid discussion.

If you don’t like the look of the aborted bodies, just don’t look at them.

Or, you could speak up and try to change things.

I prefer the latter, in most cases.

~Liza

 

[WenckebachCath]

Good point Liza. I think you brought up a subject worth discussing. I’m almost 50 and I remember the days when you didn’t hear about the presidents escapades on the nightly news in lurid detail. I remember when women’s magazines didn’t have the word ‘sex’ included in every one of their headliners, and I remember a time when you wouldn’t have seen ‘oral sex’ mentioned in a Catholic magazine.(We didn’t have the internet in those days).

My point being, our society has a tasteless preoccupation with sex and has been desensitized to the point where uncouth subject matter is even acceptable on a religious forum. It seems as if nothing is sacred or private anymore. I wouldn’t mind the pendulum swinging back to a little more decoum.

 

[LovedForever]

Good point Liza. I think you brought up a subject worth discussing. I’m almost 50 and I remember the days when you didn’t hear about the presidents escapades on the nightly news in lurid detail. I remember when women’s magazines didn’t have the word ‘sex’ included in every one of their headliners, and I remember a time when you wouldn’t have seen ‘oral sex’ mentioned in a Catholic magazine.(We didn’t have the internet in those days).

My point being, our society has a tasteless preoccupation with sex and has been desensitized to the point where uncouth subject matter is even acceptable on a religious forum. It seems as if nothing is sacred or private anymore. I wouldn’t mind the pendulum swinging back to a little more decoum.

I think the points you make above are a perfect example of why we DO need to openly discuss matters and theology and the truth, beauty and sacredness of sex on this forum. To help educate the woefully misguided public. Society is obsessed with sex - not the Church. The Church (including we lay people) have an obligation to respond to that obsession and distortions.
This is what “Theology of the Body” is all about.
A timely response to the world’s perverted and distorted view of sex.
That’s how God works - through His church this way!
Amen!!

 

[Eliza10]

… I was pretty shocked when I read the poster’s accusation about my post - especially the accusation of my “not being Catholic.” What an accusation!

I was merely making an observation - (which by the way is simply a fact as you pointed out. There ARE posters here who are too scrupulous for instance - by their own admission.) And some DO have a pretty narrow comfort zone when the topic of sex comes up.

It is not being “unkind” to state the obvious. …

I was the poster, and I *did not accuse you of not being Catholic! *So if this has offended you, you need not be offended, since this offense was not made.

I said the comments you made were uncharitiable. And I quoted your comments, and about those comments, I wrote: “All of this is uncharitable, and therefore not Catholic.”

I feel I was just in my judgement of your comments. I said those things not to insult you, but because it was possible you would might want to know that what you communicated lacked charity.

 

[Bruised_Reed]

I think the fact that others have agreed with me here makes this a very relevant and valid discussion.

If you don’t like the look of the aborted bodies, just don’t look at them.

Or, you could speak up and try to change things.

I prefer the latter, in most cases.

~Liza

I think the fact that some agree with you and others disagree makes this a relevant and valid dicussion.

 

[Bruised_Reed]

I was the poster, and I *did not accuse you of not being Catholic! *So if this has offended you, you need not be offended, since this offense was not made.

I said the comments you made were uncharitiable. And I quoted your comments, and about those comments, I wrote: “All of this is uncharitable, and therefore not Catholic.”

I feel I was just in my judgement of your comments. I said those things not to insult you, but because it was possible you would might want to know that what you communicated lacked charity.

I still do not see the lack of charity unless you are taking comments made about posters generally, personally. The comments aren’t judgements, they are observations of what I have seen all over this forum. Consider that some people who are in agreement with the OP, for example, don’t even fit the descriptions of prude, scrupulous, or narrow. But others do. And it’s okay.

Simple disagreement is not uncharitable. LovedForever did not insult the intelligence or question the sanity of anyone.

 

[Eliza10]

I still do not see the lack of charity unless you are taking comments made about posters generally, personally. …

Nooo - that’s not the problem either. I will be glad to further clarify the problem I was referring to in post #32 of this thread.

The comments aren’t judgements, …
…Simple disagreement is not uncharitable…

The lack of charity refers to the comments I quoted in that post - and I think they are self-explanatory. And they are judgements, and not kind ones - not just simple diasagreemnts. I don’t think any one has a problem with simple disagreemnts.

…[the comments] are observations of what I have seen all over this forum. …

Perhaps Lovedforever, as well, found these character flaws manifest elsewhere on this forum. But I think it is appropriate to point out that complaining about that here implies she sees the problem here. If thats not what she meant then she’ll be glad to be informed that her message is misleading.

… LovedForever did not insult the intelligence or question the sanity of anyone.

I agree.

 

[kellie]

I can’t believe this thread.

The very fact that most of you don’t approve of sexually explicit threads is the reason why Catholics aren’t sure what they are allowed to do in the bedroom.

We all know the actual position that results in fertilization, but it all the lead up to that position that makes people come here to ask for the CC approval.

That is because a lot of what leads up to the actual act can be considered kinky as most of you have just proved.

But kinky does not mean sacred semen is spilt, or the sacredness of the body has been tarnished.

Kinkiness can be fun, and there is only one way to ask about it on a forum, and that is detail.

You cannot see people’s faces or gesticulations to see the detail they are trying to get through.

They can only use words.

And as there are so many ways to lead up to the sacred action of reproduction, many details will be typed into these forums.

They may seem personal, but believe me, no one here knows who each other is.

No one will ever bump into someone and find out “oh you are the poster on CAF that said this…”.

IT is not feasible that this would happen, therefore these posts are not initimate, or personal, they ar just detailed, and details are needed to set people right with what they are allowed to do.

Sex is still such a taboo topic as has been seen by this thread, its no wonder many people aren’t sure what is allowed.

 

[LovedForever]

I was the poster, and I *did not accuse you of not being Catholic! *So if this has offended you, you need not be offended, since this offense was not made.

I said the comments you made were uncharitiable. And I quoted your comments, and about those comments, I wrote: “All of this is uncharitable, and therefore not Catholic.”

I feel I was just in my judgement of your comments. I said those things not to insult you, but because it was possible you would might want to know that what you communicated lacked charity.

What I communicated did not “lack charity” - I was merely making a general observation that was based in truth. In fact, the OP called herself a “prude” in her first post.

I wasn’t even referring to a “particular person” or poster in my post. I was speaking in general of the range of Catholics (and some non-Catholics) that post here.

It is and was pertinent to the topic of the thread. Had nothing to do with “charity” or lack of.

Thank you again to the other posters who have backed me up. How charitable of you!

 

[lizaanne]

I think the fact that some agree with you and others disagree makes this a relevant and valid dicussion.

Fair point - just so everyone understands that just because there are many who think this is silly realize that all opinions are valid and worthy of discussion.

~Liza