What's the difference between sexual lust & sexual fetishism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter timwatt
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

timwatt

Guest
Or in other words, is sexual fetishism a form of sexual lust? Here are the definitions:

Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes.
  • Catechism of the Catholic Church
Sexual fetishism***, sexual attraction to objects, body parts, or situations not conventionally viewed as being sexual in nature.***

Below is a drawing by Martin van Maele depicting a woman who has a foot fetish (called La Comtesse au fouet). Is this woman guilty of the mortal sin of sexual lust by indulging in her foot fetish desires? Does the desire of “sexual pleasure” only apply to the desire of the act of sexual intercourse, or does it equally apply to this kind of body part fetishism? We all have some sort of sexual fetishism. Is sexual fetishism an offense against chastity, as is lust?

 
Well, since it’s between two women, yes it is on the disordered side, and immoral.

That aspectt aside, however, so long as the fetish doesn’t impede your ability to engage in well-ordered (moral) sexual practices, then I don’t think the church has a problem with it.

Take, for instance, a BDSM fetish. I once asked the bishop at my parish about if that sort of activity was taboo. He basically told me that so long as it was engaged in willingly by both people, and still ordered itself towards the procreative act, there was nothing wrong with it since both couples gained enjoyment from it.

So yeah, my response would be that there’s nothing wrong with it, so long as you still wind up engaging in a true sexual act.
 
Ok. I believe that sexual fetishes are normal and healthy. I see nothing wrong with entertaining them or feeding them in moderation as long as it doesn’t run your life.
As with lust and masturbation, etc, Lust is part of our animal nature. Our lust is their so that we have sex and reproduce. That’s why mother nature made sex enjoyable. And masterpation is healthy in moderation because it can prevent colon cancer and help us flush our our system and relieve sexual tension. It’s the same thing as taking a ****. YOU NEED TO RELIEVE YOURSELF. It is biology that sperm needs to be occasionally emptied out. If you don’t master-pate it will just come out in your sleep. So I honestly think the only reason the Catechism condemns it is because the Church is to close minded and they need to keep up with the times. And the main reason I believe the priests keep condemning it is because there hands are tied by all of the sex scandals that have occurred in the church. God forbid a priest told a teenage boy it was OK to masterpate. It definitely would look weird to alot of people. People would suspect that he might be a pedophile.
 
AlbertAhlf said:
Ok. I believe that sexual fetishes are normal and healthy. I see nothing wrong with entertaining them or feeding them in moderation as long as it doesn’t run your life.
As with lust and masturbation, etc, Lust is part of our animal nature. Our lust is their so that we have sex and reproduce. That’s why mother nature made sex enjoyable. And masterpation is healthy in moderation because it can prevent colon cancer and help us flush our our system and relieve sexual tension. It’s the same thing as taking a ****. YOU NEED TO RELIEVE YOURSELF. It is biology that sperm needs to be occasionally emptied out. If you don’t master-pate it will just come out in your sleep. So I honestly think the only reason the Catechism condemns it is because the Church is to close minded and they need to keep up with the times. And the main reason I believe the priests keep condemning it is because there hands are tied by all of the sex scandals that have occurred in the church. God forbid a priest told a teenage boy it was OK to masterpate. It definitely would look weird to alot of people. People would suspect that he might be a pedophile.
Click to expand...
The condemnation has nothing to do with any of the scandals, or with any sort of close-minded rejection of sexuality. If you’d study, you’d find that Catholics are some of the healthiest and engaging people when it comes our sexuality, we love sex, a lot (hence all the kids :p). The difference between us and society is that we know there is an ordered design behind sexuality, and know that we are meant to follow that design.

Masturbation is wrong because it is a selfish act that violates the purpose of human sexuality. the difference between masturbation and night emissions is that one is an artificial activity that violates the natural course of things, while the other is nature’s way of taking care of the problem. It is also condemned because of the unhealthy effects is can have on emotional development / healthy sexual interest; as well as its addictive nature (as someone who has been struggling with it for about thirteen years, I assure you, it is a highly addictive activity.)

Your assumptions do nothing but show bias and a lack of understanding. Perhaps you should take time to understand why we teach what we do before you condemn it.

The men who performed those despicable acts were one who made a choice to reject God, do not make baseless conjectures about causality. The church’s teachings had NOTHING to do with what they did; their own greed, lust and weakness is to be blamed. They are sinners, as we all are, and they, like us, must work hard to redeem themselves.

A last note. The Church does not need to “get with the times.” Our times are devoid of most of the basic morals which comprise our belief structure, and in fact seeks to undermine and harm them and those that follow them. To get with the times would be to deny everything that we are and ever have been. It would be a complete reject of the Truth. So, no thanks, we’re happy where we are, back here, trying to be with God.
 
ProdglArchitect said:
So yeah, my response would be that there’s nothing wrong with it, so long as you still wind up engaging in a true sexual act.
Click to expand...
I will add that also as long as the particular fetish doesn’t involve something immoral as well. And I agree with Albert such that if the particular fetish (like a foot fetish just as an example) is not immoral, then engaging the fetish can be helpful to the bonding part of marital relations, but like Architect said, it cannot hinder the potential for procreation.
 
bzkoss236 said:
I will add that also as long as the particular fetish doesn’t involve something immoral as well. And I agree with Albert such that if the particular fetish (like a foot fetish just as an example) is not immoral, then engaging the fetish can be helpful to the bonding part of marital relations, but like Architect said, it cannot hinder the potential for procreation.
Click to expand...
But what I want to know is if sexual fetishism is a violation of chastity, just as sexual lust is a violation of chastity. For example, passing by a woman on the street and imagining sexual fantasies with her is clearly lust and an offense against chastity. But passing by a woman and looking at a part of her body that you have a fetish for and getting aroused by it is a different story. It’s quite obvious that indulging in sexual fetishes is fine if done within a marriage context.
 
In that case it would fall under the same header as lustful fantasizing, so yes, that particular act would be immoral.
 
timwatt said:
But what I want to know is if sexual fetishism is a violation of chastity, just as sexual lust is a violation of chastity. For example, passing by a woman on the street and imagining sexual fantasies with her is clearly lust and an offense against chastity. But passing by a woman and looking at a part of her body that you have a fetish for and getting aroused by it is a different story. It’s quite obvious that indulging in sexual fetishes is fine if done within a marriage context.
Click to expand...
Just apply the same principles…

It’s OK to find someone sexually attractive, but it is wrong to deliberately entertain sexual thoughts about that person (if they are not your spouse).

It’s OK to find particular body parts sexually attractive (eg a foot), but it is wrong to deliberately entertain sexual thoughts about that body part or that person (if they are not your spouse).

Arousal itself is not the marker of sin. It is deliberately consenting to the thoughts/arousal that is sinful. To be aroused by someone or something may be an involuntary and natural reaction, but it becomes sinful if we consent to or indulge in our thoughts and imaginations…whether they be fetishes or more traditional attractions.
 
AlbertAhlf said:
Ok. I believe that sexual fetishes are normal and healthy. I see nothing wrong with entertaining them or feeding them in moderation as long as it doesn’t run your life.
As with lust and masturbation, etc, Lust is part of our animal nature. Our lust is their so that we have sex and reproduce. That’s why mother nature made sex enjoyable. And masterpation is healthy in moderation because it can prevent colon cancer and help us flush our our system and relieve sexual tension. It’s the same thing as taking a ****. YOU NEED TO RELIEVE YOURSELF. It is biology that sperm needs to be occasionally emptied out. If you don’t master-pate it will just come out in your sleep. So I honestly think the only reason the Catechism condemns it is because the Church is to close minded and they need to keep up with the times. And the main reason I believe the priests keep condemning it is because there hands are tied by all of the sex scandals that have occurred in the church. God forbid a priest told a teenage boy it was OK to masterpate. It definitely would look weird to alot of people. People would suspect that he might be a pedophile.
Click to expand...
This has to be a joke. Really.
Did you ever study biology? The male body can just care of itself just fine. Google “nocturnal emission.” Sheesh.
 
AlbertAhlf said:
As with lust and masturbation, etc, Lust is part of our animal nature. Our lust is their so that we have sex and reproduce. That’s why mother nature made sex enjoyable. And masterpation is healthy in moderation because it can prevent colon cancer and help us flush our our system and relieve sexual tension. It’s the same thing as taking a ****. YOU NEED TO RELIEVE YOURSELF.
Click to expand...
Yeah??? :eek:
It is biology that sperm needs to be occasionally emptied out. If you don’t master-pate it will just come out in your sleep.
Click to expand...
BALONEY! It hasnt happened to me, voluntarily or involuntarily, since the late 1990s. And theyre there, all right!
So I honestly think the only reason the Catechism condemns it is because the Church is to close minded and they need to keep up with the times. [The Church`s teachings on Faith and Morals are timeless. They have nothing to do with fashion, whether past, present or future.] And the main reason I believe the priests keep condemning it is because there hands are tied by all of the sex scandals that have occurred in the church. God forbid a priest told a teenage boy it was OK to masterpate. It definitely would look weird to alot of people. People would suspect that he might be a pedophile.
Click to expand...
BALONEY AGAIN!

“Agnostic”: That explains it, perhaps?
 
underacloud said:
Just apply the same principles…

It’s OK to find someone sexually attractive, but it is wrong to deliberately entertain sexual thoughts about that person (if they are not your spouse).

It’s OK to find particular body parts sexually attractive (eg a foot), but it is wrong to deliberately entertain sexual thoughts about that body part or that person (if they are not your spouse).

Arousal itself is not the marker of sin. It is deliberately consenting to the thoughts/arousal that is sinful. To be aroused by someone or something may be an involuntary and natural reaction, but it becomes sinful if we consent to or indulge in our thoughts and imaginations…whether they be fetishes or more traditional attractions.
Click to expand...
Ive read that even fantasizing about your spouse is wrong too though, since it objectifies them and turns them into a source of pleasure, than than a source of love which one protects and treats respectfully.
 
CrimsonThorn said:
Ive read that even fantasizing about your spouse is wrong too though, since it objectifies them and turns them into a source of pleasure, than than a source of love which one protects and treats respectfully.
Click to expand...
Sex with your spouse is a source of pleasure and there’s nothing wrong with that.

Is fantasising about them wrong or OK? I guess here it depends…if we imagine them only as an object and think only of what I get out of them, then you’ve removed their human dignity and it is wrong. But for a husband or wife to imagine or replay sexual encourters with their spouse, in which they are loving towards each other and treat each other with respect…I don’t see anything wrong. If you read the Song of Songs, there’s much fantasising about such things in anticipation of being united with their beloved.

*(from the Catechism: 2362 "The acts in marriage by which the intimate and chaste union of the spouses takes place are noble and honorable; the truly human performance of these acts fosters the self-giving they signify and enriches the spouses in joy and gratitude."145 Sexuality is a source of joy and pleasure:

The Creator himself . . . established that in the [generative] function, spouses should experience pleasure and enjoyment of body and spirit. Therefore, the spouses do nothing evil in seeking this pleasure and enjoyment. They accept what the Creator has intended for them. At the same time, spouses should know how to keep themselves within the limits of just moderation.)*
 
I agree with Underacloud. Remember that spouses are morally permitted to see each other naked and enjoy it, and then act upon it. There is nothing wrong with thinking about your spouse naked, but such a fantasy shouldn’t become an object unto itself, nor should it result in any physical actions without the spouse present.

FYI, before we get too far afield – there have been several threads that cover this topic about fantasizing or lusting about one’s spouse. Here is one that has many posts:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=265851
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top