Strong arguments against Christopher West's marriage/sexuality books

[Xantippe]

I’d personally suggest something like this sort of check list for more exotic sexual activities:

1. Is the act as a whole procreative?
2. Is it reasonably safe?
3. Is it painful for either spouse in a way that is out of proportion to their enjoyment?
4. Does either spouse find it degrading?

#1 is where we go to our moral theology textbooks (like the 1929 one).
For #2 we might consult our doctor or common sense.
For #3 and #4 we would consult ourselves and our spouse as to personal tastes.
If an activity doesn’t pass every single test (procreative, safe, not unreasonably painful, not degrading), it’s a no. If it is procreative, safe, not unreasonably painful and not degrading, it’s an option.

This isn’t relativism, it’s just that the question of what is and isn’t painful or degrading is genuinely going to vary considerably from person to person.

 

[LokisMom]

In my experience it has been.

And you are perfectly free to use your personal experiences to form the opinion that it is a sinful act. I will not argue with you on that, because you are free to that opinion. I will only argue the assertion that the Church teaches against it.

Have you ever heard Matt Fradd Address the issue?

Have never heard of him.

 

[LokisMom]

I’d personally suggest something like this sort of check list for more exotic sexual activities:

1. Is the act as a whole procreative?
2. Is it reasonably safe?
3. Is it painful for either spouse in a way that is out of proportion to their enjoyment?
4. Does either spouse find it degrading?

#1 is where we go to our moral theology textbooks (like the 1929 one).
For #2 we might consult our doctor or common sense.
For #3 and #4 we would consult ourselves and our spouse as to personal tastes.
If an activity doesn’t pass every single test (procreative, safe, not unreasonably painful, not degrading), it’s a no. If it is procreative, safe, not unreasonably painful and not degrading, it’s an option.

This isn’t relativism, it’s just that the question of what is and isn’t painful or degrading is genuinely going to vary considerably from person to person.

This could be a good tool the help an individual determine their opinion on the matter. Thanks for posting.

 

[LongingSoul]

This isn’t relativism, it’s just that the question of what is and isn’t painful or degrading is genuinely going to vary considerably from person to person.

What about the medical realities? The statistics showing up to 40% more likelihood of developing anal cancer from the practice. Increased risks of incontinence. In marriage… these are all the consequences for the wife. Is that risk assessment really a matter of person to person variances?

 

[LokisMom]

What about the medical realities? The statistics showing up to 40% more likelihood of developing anal cancer from the practice. Increased risks of incontinence. In marriage… these are all the consequences for the wife. Is that risk assessment really a matter of person to person variances?

These are all things for individuals to consider when assessing their opinion on this act. But the issue at hand here is whether or not this act is explicitly against Church teaching. The answer is no.

 

[averagejoe11]

If you have the time, check out Janet Smith’s critique of the Alice von Hildebrand’s 2010 article currently being discussed.

catholiceducation.org/articles/sexuality/se0211.htm

 

[Xantippe]

What about the medical realities? The statistics showing up to 40% more likelihood of developing anal cancer from the practice. Increased risks of incontinence. In marriage… these are all the consequences for the wife. Is that risk assessment really a matter of person to person variances?

My proposed checklist is for all possible marital sex acts, not just anal foreplay.

 

[mommamaree]

What about the medical realities? The statistics showing up to 40% more likelihood of developing anal cancer from the practice. Increased risks of incontinence. In marriage… these are all the consequences for the wife. Is that risk assessment really a matter of person to person variances?

Not to mention rectal tearing.

Honestly, the medical realities, as objective facts, is enough in my opinion to determine the value of the practice. There are many other reasons to object to it, but the medical reasons are serious, and the woman would bear the lifelong burden of any damage.

I usually do not participate in discussions on this topic, as I find it embarrassing and gross to discuss, but I have seen so many questions about this lately, including by an engaged man who intends to participate in this with his bride. I have become horrified by how many men desire this act, with little to no regard for the health and well-being of their beloved. It is a practice which could cause no damage for many encounters, until one time it causes catastrophic consequences. What then? When a man has destroyed his wife’s rectum, how does a woman and a marriage recover from this? How can we, as people of God, charged with promoting a Culture of Life, not vociferously object to this practice? Sinful or not, this practice is DANGEROUS.

I realize this thread has gotten far off course, as they always do whenever anal sex is mentioned or even hinted at (sigh…). I am sorry to have contributed to that. But I am becoming increasingly disturbed by the laissez-faire attitude towards a practice that has such great potential for damage to the woman, no consequences at all for the man, and is apparently greatly desired by some men because their experience of vaginal intercourse with their wives is not sufficiently pleasurable enough, in their entitled opinion. I worry about new brides. I know a woman who was penetrated anally, without her permission, by her husband ON THEIR WEDDING NIGHT, and the pain was so intense that she lost consciousness. Her husband finished his enjoyment of her while she was unconscious and she later came to and looked at him, horrified. His response to her was “What?” as if nothing abnormal or distressing had occurred.

 

[LokisMom]

If you have the time, check out Janet Smith’s critique of the Alice von Hildebrand’s 2010 article currently being discussed.

catholiceducation.org/articles/sexuality/se0211.htm

This was wonderful, thank you so much!! :clapping::clapping::clapping:

 

[Xantippe]

Not to mention rectal tearing.

Honestly, the medical realities, as objective facts, is enough in my opinion to determine the value of the practice. There are many other reasons to object to it, but the medical reasons are serious, and the woman would bear the lifelong burden of any damage.

I usually do not participate in discussions on this topic, as I find it embarrassing and gross to discuss, but I have seen so many questions about this lately, including by an engaged man who intends to participate in this with his bride. I have become horrified by how many men desire this act, with little to no regard for the health and well-being of their beloved. It is a practice which could cause no damage for many encounters, until one time it causes catastrophic consequences. What then? When a man has destroyed his wife’s rectum, how does a woman and a marriage recover from this? How can we, as people of God, charged with promoting a Culture of Life, not vociferously object to this practice? Sinful or not, this practice is DANGEROUS.

I realize this thread has gotten far off course, as they always do whenever anal sex is mentioned or even hinted at (sigh…). I am sorry to have contributed to that. But I am becoming increasingly disturbed by the laissez-faire attitude towards a practice that has such great potential for damage to the woman, no consequences at all for the man, and is apparently greatly desired by some men because their experience of vaginal intercourse with their wives is not sufficiently pleasurable enough, in their entitled opinion. I worry about new brides. I know a woman who was penetrated anally, without her permission, by her husband ON THEIR WEDDING NIGHT, and the pain was so intense that she lost consciousness. Her husband finished his enjoyment of her while she was unconscious and she later came to and looked at him, horrified. His response to her was “What?” as if nothing abnormal or distressing had occurred.

Not to be gross, but there are some options that would involve doing stuff to the man.

(I used to read Dan Savage in my younger days.)

 

[thewanderer]

Not to mention rectal tearing.

Honestly, the medical realities, as objective facts, is enough in my opinion to determine the value of the practice. There are many other reasons to object to it, but the medical reasons are serious, and the woman would bear the lifelong burden of any damage.

I usually do not participate in discussions on this topic, as I find it embarrassing and gross to discuss, but I have seen so many questions about this lately, including by an engaged man who intends to participate in this with his bride. I have become horrified by how many men desire this act, with little to no regard for the health and well-being of their beloved. It is a practice which could cause no damage for many encounters, until one time it causes catastrophic consequences. What then? When a man has destroyed his wife’s rectum, how does a woman and a marriage recover from this? How can we, as people of God, charged with promoting a Culture of Life, not vociferously object to this practice? Sinful or not, this practice is DANGEROUS.

I realize this thread has gotten far off course, as they always do whenever anal sex is mentioned or even hinted at (sigh…). I am sorry to have contributed to that. But I am becoming increasingly disturbed by the laissez-faire attitude towards a practice that has such great potential for damage to the woman, no consequences at all for the man, and is apparently greatly desired by some men because their experience of vaginal intercourse with their wives is not sufficiently pleasurable enough, in their entitled opinion. I worry about new brides. I know a woman who was penetrated anally, without her permission, by her husband ON THEIR WEDDING NIGHT, and the pain was so intense that she lost consciousness. Her husband finished his enjoyment of her while she was unconscious and she later came to and looked at him, horrified. His response to her was “What?” as if nothing abnormal or distressing had occurred.

Stop right there. How can you think that anybody on this thread is even coming anywhere close to approving of what this man did? Even if it is true that anal foreplay is not in itself always and everywhere objectively immoral it is absolutely certain that what this man did is horrendously immoral. Really, what he did is rape his spouse who he only just married. Honestly, thinking about it makes me want to vomit. Please do not try to insinuate that anybody on this thread would in any way even slightly approve of what this man did as it is just not true.

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

And this is what I have done. Sodomy as it is known in not only Christian circles but also legal circles and among the general population, involves a particular act. Other than some Catholics, people normally don’t dissect the sexual act to draw the line between the greater majority of the act and the final act of ejaculation.

Many people simply have no reason to split the two because their faiths don’t have bans on birth control, oral sex, manual sex, roleplay, sex toys and various other things.

For a Catholic it may be necessary, unless you think it actually makes sense to go straight from 0 to 60 without being able to touch your spouse’s genitals in any way.

 

[LokisMom]

Stop right there. How can you think that anybody on this thread is even coming anywhere close to approving of what this man did? Even if it is true that anal foreplay is not in itself always and everywhere objectively immoral it is absolutely certain that what this man did is horrendously immoral. Really, what he did is rape his spouse who he only just married. Honestly, thinking about it makes me want to vomit. Please do not try to insinuate that anybody on this thread would in any way even slightly approve of what this man did as it is just not true.

Exactly. IF this act is moral, then it is moral only in a consensual, mutually enjoyable, mutually self giving scenario… where great care and precaution is taken for each others’ well being. (just as any other sex act)

 

[LongingSoul]

Stop right there. How can you think that anybody on this thread is even coming anywhere close to approving of what this man did? Even if it is true that anal foreplay is not in itself always and everywhere objectively immoral it is absolutely certain that what this man did is horrendously immoral. Really, what he did is rape his spouse who he only just married. Honestly, thinking about it makes me want to vomit. Please do not try to insinuate that anybody on this thread would in any way even slightly approve of what this man did as it is just not true.

For many years I was in a position of hearing about the intimate things of womens married life. I very quickly had to learn the art of poker face in my role as a companion, despite the desire to go . (Catholic marriage and family counselling/course org.)

Women by nature will err towards an unhealthy submissiveness in the sexual environment of relationships. I know there will be hoots and raspberries at this point… but facts is facts. Women need to support other women and mothers need to thoroughly teach and guide their daughters with that in mind. My own daughter who is 20, and I have a very honest, open relationship (please God it stays that way). I find the same reaction when she is talking about the things that her friends are doing. These young women think they are so modern and worldly and yet they have made themselves into willing and submissive sexual objects.

 

[LongingSoul]

There is a post regarding a marriage, still visible on the bottom of this first ‘Family Life’ forum, that demonstrates the types of situations that occur in marriage that aren’t officially addressed by Church teaching. I didn’t reply to that thread as others had done it well. It breaks my heart knowing what some women endure.

 

[mommamaree]

Stop right there. How can you think that anybody on this thread is even coming anywhere close to approving of what this man did? Even if it is true that anal foreplay is not in itself always and everywhere objectively immoral it is absolutely certain that what this man did is horrendously immoral. Really, what he did is rape his spouse who he only just married. Honestly, thinking about it makes me want to vomit. Please do not try to insinuate that anybody on this thread would in any way even slightly approve of what this man did as it is just not true.

Thewanderer,

I would never intentionally accuse you or anyone else here of condoning what I described. If what I said came across as an accusation, then I sincerely apologize. I was connecting two things in my mind: the conversation happening here, and my memory of what had been confided to me. The laissez-faire attitude I spoke of is the attitude that I have witnessed growing in Western culture, and it is due to the prevalence of pornography. I am so sorry that my sharing a terrible story sounded like an accusation. I really feel horrible about that. Please forgive me for not being more careful and clear in my post. I will be more circumspect in the future about how I participate in such a delicate conversation. My point was more of a cultural “mea culpa”, in that, our culture at large is placing pleasure above every other consideration, including ignoring or dismissing dangerous consequences. Does that make more sense?

Again, I am sorry. I respect your perspective and appreciate what you have said thus far in the thread.

 

[pepipop]

Thewanderer,

I would never intentionally accuse you or anyone else here of condoning what I described. If what I said came across as an accusation, then I sincerely apologize. I was connecting two things in my mind: the conversation happening here, and my memory of what had been confided to me. The laissez-faire attitude I spoke of is the attitude that I have witnessed growing in Western culture, and it is due to the prevalence of pornography. I am so sorry that my sharing a terrible story sounded like an accusation. I really feel horrible about that. Please forgive me for not being more careful and clear in my post. I will be more circumspect in the future about how I participate in such a delicate conversation. My point was more of a cultural “mea culpa”, in that, our culture at large is placing pleasure above every other consideration, including ignoring or dismissing dangerous consequences. Does that make more sense?

Again, I am sorry. I respect your perspective and appreciate what you have said thus far in the thread.

A work colleague, in her early 20s, told me a similar story, in the '90’s in great distress. She married in a registry office and on the honeymoon the husband had requested the act. She did not like it and on their return home he made her sleep in a separate room, as it was his flat.

They had been living together for 6 months prior to the wedding, with no mention of the act before the honeymoon - obviously an imagined ‘perk’ of being married by the husband. Needless to say, they got divorced shortly afterwards.

It does indicate though that even non-religious persons (I believe he was an atheist) recognise the illicitness/abhorrence/immorality of the act through his not requesting the act before marriage.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

I can say this however. The idea of anal sex as enjoyed by women is a lie of the porn industry.

I don’t think that’s the case at all. The idea that women enjoy anal as it is usually carried out in porn is a lie, but that goes for most acts depicted in porn. Many aren’t even that fun for the male performers either, as everything is done for the benefit of the camera.

But in a trusting, loving marriage where both partners can relax, communicate, use lots of lube, and go slowly and stop at any time? A lot of women legitimately like that. There are a lot of nerve endings in the area, it’s not just men who think that the taboo is erotic, and that kind of exercise in trust can be rewarding both physically and emotionally.

What I can’t get my head around is that there is an official church document that says specifically that it isn’t sinful. I’m not sure why anyone would think it is. Its definitely not everyone’s thing, but sinful? Now demanding, pressuring, not respecting boundaries, refusing to stop, etc would all qualify, I’m sure.

And as to your point about it not being procreative and such, neither is oral or manual foreplay, but that is left up to each couple. I just can’t imagine that there is an inherently sinful body part.

 

[LokisMom]

For many years I was in a position of hearing about the intimate things of womens married life. I very quickly had to learn the art of poker face in my role as a companion, despite the desire to go . (Catholic marriage and family counselling/course org.)

Women by nature will err towards an unhealthy submissiveness in the sexual environment of relationships. I know there will be hoots and raspberries at this point… but facts is facts. Women need to support other women and mothers need to thoroughly teach and guide their daughters with that in mind. My own daughter who is 20, and I have a very honest, open relationship (please God it stays that way). I find the same reaction when she is talking about the things that her friends are doing. These young women think they are so modern and worldly and yet they have made themselves into willing and submissive sexual objects.

This is all very true.

 

[Allegra]

I don’t think that’s the case at all. The idea that women enjoy anal as it is usually carried out in porn is a lie, but that goes for most acts depicted in porn. Many aren’t even that fun for the male performers either, as everything is done for the benefit of the camera.

But in a trusting, loving marriage where both partners can relax, communicate, use lots of lube, and go slowly and stop at any time? A lot of women legitimately like that. There are a lot of nerve endings in the area, it’s not just men who think that the taboo is erotic, and that kind of exercise in trust can be rewarding both physically and emotionally.

What I can’t get my head around is that there is an official church document that says specifically that it isn’t sinful. I’m not sure why anyone would think it is. Its definitely not everyone’s thing, but sinful? Now demanding, pressuring, not respecting boundaries, refusing to stop, etc would all qualify, I’m sure.

And as to your point about it not being procreative and such, neither is oral or manual foreplay, but that is left up to each couple. I just can’t imagine that there is an inherently sinful body part.

I think there is legitimate reason to consider it sinful. There is medical evidence that verifies that it can damage the woman’s rectum, and since Catholics believe that all sexual acts must be unitive and procreative, this sort of foreplay can result in poop getting in the woman’s vagina and urethra, which causes infection. Some women may claim they get off on anal stimulation, but I don’t think any will claim that nothing makes them feel closer and more loving to their spouse than a good bladder or cervical infection. As with most forms of sexual sin, the woman gets to bear the all the consequences of this action, all for the pleasure of the man. It doesn’t take a very large stretch to say this is not self-sacrificing love on the part of the man, and is a form of objectification.

It’s also nasty.

Just sayin.