or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Talk Amongst Ourselves › Spirituality › Religious Studies › If you religiously oppose masterbation...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

If you religiously oppose masterbation... - Page 7

post #121 of 472
That's true, I would probably not remain married to DH if he turned emotionally cold on me. Stopped talking to me, stopped having idle conversations, stopped hugging me. Even if he still paid the bills and played with the kids, there wouldn't be any point to the marriage anymore.

I wouldn't die from the emotional deprivation, but I wouldn't wait around forever for him to get with the program, either. Unless he were in a coma or something.

And if I stayed married on paper, you can bet I'd turn somewhere else for emotional support and affection and conversation.
post #122 of 472
Ok, I've read the thread and its tangents and I still don't understand WHY it is wrong for a person of any age, race, or gender to masturbate.

Sorry, I don't see any compelling arguement against it yet. But, I remain open-minded.


:
post #123 of 472
Yes, I realize that discussion/disagreement is certainly allowed here, so let's just get that out of the way.

Sadly, between all the converation happening here, mostly what I'm seeing is a disappointing lack of respect for what is probably considered a fundamental (Christian) viewpoint.

I can say with overwhelming certainty that should a person of another faith, especially one that is a minority in the US, walk in here and talk about his/her religious beliefs and their belief that masturbation is unhealthy, there would most certainly be no dust raised.

And yes. I have read the "Christian privilege" link. And no, I don't think Christians are persecuted in the US in general. But yes, I believe, because I see example after example of any conservative Christian vew being attacked., that any fundamental Christian belief is seen as harmful to children and other people, and Conservative Christians are constantly referred to in a derisive manner such as, "the fundies". It's hypocritical. Period.

Now, get all on your high horses all you want and talk about how Christians, as a majority, will never be subjected to discrimination, but it is quite obvious that there is an overwhelming sense of disdain and distate for the "fundies", and I think that it is a sad, sad thing when your negative opinion colors any discussion that even hints at a conservative Christian viewpoint, all the while touting tolerance and open discussion - unless it's about W or Christianity or the Iraq war.

Carry on.
post #124 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Altair View Post
I disagree. It happens very often when the person's needs ARE being met. I was in a relationship where we were DTD 6 days a week. Guess what I found out he'd been doing on the 7th day every week? :
This is why I was very careful to say that it's ALMOST always. And not ALWAYS.

Because some people are just jerks.
post #125 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by daniedb View Post
I can say with overwhelming certainty that should a person of another faith, especially one that is a minority in the US, walk in here and talk about his/her religious beliefs and their belief that masturbation is unhealthy, there would most certainly be no dust raised.
On the contrary, I will openly disagree with this belief no matter the religion of the person holding it.
post #126 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by daniedb View Post
Sadly, between all the converation happening here, mostly what I'm seeing is a disappointing lack of respect for what is probably considered a fundamental (Christian) viewpoint.
Well, AFAIK, it's actually not a majority opinion among Christians in general. Even freakin' James Dobson doesn't think masturbation is sinful or harmful, and I am hard-pressed to think of anyone more iconic of the conservative Christian movement in the United States.

Interestingly, my mom gave me his book on sexuality when I got my first period, and I still feel that its discussion of masturbation was a healthy and balanced one.

Go figure. I don't hate Christians. Even Dobson has his moments.

(I was going to insert a joke about beating his dauschaund, but considering the context....)
post #127 of 472
He's freaking nuts. I can't believe I'm going to live in the same city. The weiner lover that I am, I can't tolerate weiner beaters.




I mean Dachshunds btw.
post #128 of 472
:



i just came back and read through the 5-odd pages i had missed while away and....... good LAWD ladies.


only MEN bond through sex?
MEN need sex more than women??!
MEN need to "have their needs met by their wives"?

who taught you these ridiculous concepts????




and, the idea that you can teach a child that masturbation is ugly in the eyes of g-d and that g-d will punish them for it, and there will be spiritual ramifications for it, sounds pretty shaming to me but maybe we define "shame" differently.



now, pardon me, i need to go... uh...... make some apple juice.

yeah.

post #129 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aura_Kitten View Post
:



i just came back and read through the 5-odd pages i had missed while away and....... good LAWD ladies.


only MEN bond through sex?
MEN need sex more than women??!
MEN need to "have their needs met by their wives"?

who taught you these ridiculous concepts????

Um, yes, sorry. Men do need sex more than women do.

This is psychology, and it's unmistakeable. Men and women really are different. I know it's an unpleasant concept, but it's true. Men and women's hormone levels differ, and those hormones have different effects. If we really want male/female equality in our society, it's time to embrace and honor these differences and stop claiming sameness is equality. It's not. They're not synonymous.

I don't believe I ever said anywhere, however, that women don't need sex, or that they don't also increase their bond by having sex.

However, they don't LOSE the bond by not having sex, where men often do.

The nonsense that men and women are exactly alike is just that. Nonsense.

Just because they're not alike doesn't mean they're not equal. But I am really tired of the concept that men and women are the same. They're not, and it goes well beyond dangly bits.

People who wish to try to pass on to yet another generation that men and women are THE SAME need to take some psychology courses. Badly.

Right back atcha.

Quote:
and, the idea that you can teach a child that masturbation is ugly in the eyes of g-d and that g-d will punish them for it, and there will be spiritual ramifications for it, sounds pretty shaming to me but maybe we define "shame" differently.



now, pardon me, i need to go... uh...... make some apple juice.

yeah.

Is that what they're calling it these days?
post #130 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amris View Post
Um, yes, sorry. Men do need sex more than women do.

...
I don't believe I ever said anywhere, however, that women don't need sex, or that they don't also increase their bond by having sex.

However, they don't LOSE the bond by not having sex, where men often do.
I'm sorry, Amris... but I have to disagree with you there. What are you basing this on?? People differ in their sex drives. One cannot say that either men or women "need" more sex. Women tend to be more prudent in their choices due to our fertility... whereas, men do not have to take that into account. BUT, I don't think one can generalize and say that men or women need more sex. I will say that men, in general, are told that sex is one of the few socially acceptable ways for them to get intimacy... whereas, in general, women do not face that. But in terms of need or sex drive... it differs based on the person.

As for bonding, I would disagree with you there as well. Women tend to bond more through sex which is why we tend to go for relationships... whereas men, in general, do not need to be in a relationship to have sex.
post #131 of 472
I disagree with your post too amris.
post #132 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by umsami View Post
I'm sorry, Amris... but I have to disagree with you there. What are you basing this on??
Psychology and physiological responses.

During sex, oxytocin is produced. This is the same chemical produced during breastfeeding. It is the bonding chemical. The highest amount of it is produced during sex and breastfeeding.

However, women will produce small amounts of it when they are touched. It's part of the physiological response of child-mother bonding. However, it does not have to be a child touching her.

Men do not produce oxytocin when touched. They produce it when aroused. The release of this bonding chemical is why it is so important to have sexual contact on a regular basis.

Sex is, for both genders, a very literal chemical addiction. However, women are able to meet this addiction in other ways- through simple touch, through mother-child bonding, etc.

Men are not.

It really is that simple. It is chemical fact.

Quote:
People differ in their sex drives. One cannot say that either men or women "need" more sex. Women tend to be more prudent in their choices due to our fertility... whereas, men do not have to take that into account. BUT, I don't think one can generalize and say that men or women need more sex. I will say that men, in general, are told that sex is one of the few socially acceptable ways for them to get intimacy... whereas, in general, women do not face that. But in terms of need or sex drive... it differs based on the person.

As for bonding, I would disagree with you there as well. Women tend to bond more through sex which is why we tend to go for relationships... whereas men, in general, do not need to be in a relationship to have sex.
Whether you disagree or not, and I say this with all respect, doesn't change the chemical facts of the matter. The bonding chemicals are produced in different ways in the genders.

Just as one has more testosterone, the other more progesterone/estrogen, so is the movement of bonding chemicals different.

The semantics of sex drive really don't matter. At the end of the day, men's bodies work differently than women's bodies do. Just because a man doesn't have much of a sex drive doesn't mean he suddenly begins producing oxytocin at different times. It doesn't work like that.

Now, that's all without going into the dynamics of dopamine, which is also a chemical to which humans are, by nature, addicted (and which they naturally produce). It is a chemical which mimics oxytocin, and can be produced in different ways. However, it is much harder to produce with consistency, and is typically the reason why people 'stray.'

It's what causes the extreme euphoria during infatuation. Once the dopamine high goes away, the couple relies upon oxytocin to help maintain the physical addiction to their partner.

Most sexless marriages are so because once the sex dies out, the addiction to oxytocin begins to wane. As this happens, the emotional reaction that comes with it begins to wane. And then you have what amounts to a brother and sister living together.

A situation which is a set-up for one or the other to stray if someone else finds a way to introduce either dopamine or oxytocin into the equation. It is most prudent, if you do not wish someone else to do it for you, that you keep your own partner's bonding chemical levels high.
post #133 of 472
Quote:
He's freaking nuts. I can't believe I'm going to live in the same city. The weiner lover that I am, I can't tolerate weiner beaters
.

: : :

What an amazing coincidence, given this thread.
post #134 of 472
List studies Amris.... because everything I've read on sexuality and health says that you are wrong.
post #135 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by umsami View Post
List studies Amris.... because everything I've read on sexuality and health says that you are wrong.
No offense, but I'm not really interested in derailing this thread, number one, and number two, I'm not going to go searching on the internet. I don't have the time, or the interest.

I'm also not going to go waste the time scanning my coursebooks, page by page. In fact, they are still packed from the move, I don't know that I'd know where to find them, if I DID care enough about convincing anyone to bother to try.

I personally am not all that interested in turning this thread into a "prove it" about something only minorly related to the OP. Nor do I have an interest in trying to prove something to people who are untrained and are getting their information from the internet.

I've spent 10 years of my life training, and working with couples. I've seen these facts borne out repeatedly. I have my own clinical experience as well as that of my training.

I have absolutely no doubt that if I had time and inclination, I could find supporting studies on the internet.

I have absolutely no doubt that if you have time and inclination, you can find supporting studies on the internet to support ANYTHING.

What the internet cannot copy for me, is my own experiences with guiding couples. That experience tells me that men in sexless marriages suffer far more than do women in sexless marriages.

Which is not to be interpreted as women DO NOT suffer in sexless marriages. This is not only not true, but it's also NOT WHAT I HAVE SAID AT ANY POINT. ANY.

Many women do suffer serious trauma in sexless marriages. So you link away your studies that prove that women suffer from sexless marriages. Because I never said they don't. Not once.



If I said men on average grow taller than women, I swear 80 people would come out of the woodwork to say that I said women never get tall.

So annoying.
post #136 of 472
I'm about 3 pages behind on replies, but I'll try to get to them eventually. . .
post #137 of 472
Actually, that's really interesting. Thank you for bringing it up. I would like to learn more about it.
post #138 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amris View Post
No offense, but I'm not really interested in derailing this thread
If you change your mind, derail away! This thread is already derailed 180-degrees from what the OP asked for! So no worries
post #139 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by klg47 View Post
If you change your mind, derail away! This thread is already derailed 180-degrees from what the OP asked for! So no worries
No, really, I'm really not.

I've gone this route before, and seen it, as well. Someone links a bunch of studies. Someone else links a bunch of opposing studies. The first person refutes the new links. The second person refutes the previous links. Everyone ends up more confused than they were before.

And the end result? A lot of wasted effort, over something that no one's going to change their mind about, anyway. For some reason, women (on average) simply refuse to accept the idea that sex is the way that men bond. It just infuriates them. And no amount of studies, no matter how genuine or from what reputable source, can convince them that this horrible concept could be reality.

The strange thing is, it's usually the ones who are the most stringently convinced that people shouldn't be ashamed of their sexuality who are most offended by the concept of men bonding with their mate through sex.


Anyway, I've been through the whole "I link, you link, we all stink" routine before.

The worst one was caffiene, believe it or not. People seriously cannot fathom the idea that something so widespread could possibly be bad for us. Surely, the all-loving, all-benevolent, truly socio-interested FDA would ban it if it were bad for us!



People will believe what they want to believe, there really is no convincing them. If someone absolutely does NOT want to accept the possibility that their male partner bonds with them through sex, they will not.

And I'm really not interested enough in discussing the subject as just a conversation piece, especially when doing so requires me to look all over the internet, or break into boxes and use my scanner.

The conversation really would serve no purpose nearly as great as the effort involved.

I'm perfectly content to have people think I'm wrong without me wasting the effort. If they want to believe that, they will whether I waste the effort or not.
post #140 of 472
That's interesting as Macleans recently interviewed some marriage counsellors who had the opposite experience.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Religious Studies
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Talk Amongst Ourselves › Spirituality › Religious Studies › If you religiously oppose masterbation...