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 4

post #61 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aura_Kitten View Post
can we all please get over our bodily hangups and realize that pleasurable things aren't evil? or at least, stop teaching children to feel ashamed and Bad and Wrong and Evil about it--? the fact that * I * was taught those things was a huge contributing factor to MAJOR psychological and emotional issues while i was growing up and it took YEARS for me to become comfortable with sexual partners, and even with MYSELF, along with a lengthy bit of counseling as well.
I'm not sure why you think that those of us against masturbation would teach our children to feel ashamed/bad/wrong/evil. That just isn't how most of us work. Many people think that this is how organized religions operate, but if you look at the actual doctrine, it simply isn't so. Yes there are many misguided teachers or leaders who will teach things in this manner, but they're almost never following the actual doctrine.

I am LDS - a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. We're probably one of the most strict religions where chastity is concerned. I was always taught that the proper place for expression of sexual desires was within marriage. Any other expression of sexual desires (masturbation, viewing pornography, making out, groping, french kissing before marriage, fornication, etc.) was simply not OK. So it seems that based on what you said, I would be a prime candidate for sexual problems. Not so. When I got married, I jumped in with both feet and haven't had any problems at all. My dh had to convince me to slow down a little our first night
post #62 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aura_Kitten View Post
:Puke
this is indeed the original reason that circumcision was made routine in the United States (that and cornflakes ~ yes really!!
Whoa, huh, wait. What now?
post #63 of 472
There is a really really great movie called . . . oh crap what was it . . . . Road to Wellville that explains it all.It is by no means a documentry but I have heard it is pretty accurate. If nothing else it is hilarious. Some choice quotes:

Chew chew chew .. it is the thing to do (Do you masticate?)

"An erection is the flagpole on your grave"

:

seriously . . .rent it
post #64 of 472
I don't think the teaching of the church on masturbation is actually going to help your friend. Yes, you can say the teaching of the Church is opposed to masturbation but no where in my references does it say so to prevent it cut off his foreskin. Maybe you should instead focus on the scripture references in the New Testament that tell you Christians are not called to circ, we instead have baptism and no longer have a blood sacrifice.

Lots of info on these threads:

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...40&postcount=6

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...d.php?t=516756

Good luck convincing your friend....
post #65 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by ananas View Post
Whoa, huh, wait. What now?
http://www.historyofcircumcision.net...d=19&Itemid=50

Quote:
So why did circumcision become so prevalent in Christian countries in the 19th and 20th centuries? It seems we have to thank for it the sexual repression of Victorian England. During the reign of Queen Victoria, circumcision was very widely practised, and the main reason for it was to "cure" masturbation. Masturbation, or the "secret vice" was an enormous worry in both England and America at that time. According to the experts of the day, it was responsible for sleeplessness, night terrors, frequent urination, bed-wetting, epilepsy, St Vitus's Dance, kidney disease and insanity. Dr Kellogg, of Cornflakes fame, listed 38 suspicious signs by which habitual masturbators could be detected, and recommended the eating of his breakfast products to effect a cure.
post #66 of 472
Dr. Kellogg worked at a 7th-day Adventist college called Battle Creek College in Michigan, which later moved to nearby Berrien Springs and changed its name to Andrews University. When I lived in the area, I took a few (secular) classes at Andrews and worked at the cafeteria. The cafeteria contracted for cereals with... Post. I thought that was just wrong.

Back to your regularly scheduled thread.
post #67 of 472
post #68 of 472
Quote:
can we all please get over our bodily hangups and realize that pleasurable things aren't evil? or at least, stop teaching children to feel ashamed and Bad and Wrong and Evil about it--?
*sigh* Nobody has posted here believing that circ stops masturbation, first of all.

And then....None of us have posted that pleasure=evil, either.

What some of us do believe, however, is that sex is a wonderful gift from God and needs to be enjoyed in the context He intended for it, for best results. Which is what we teach our children.

Giving them no information except "Dont do it and if you do SHAME SHAME SHAME" would be wrong. Presenting it the way some of the ladies here have is something we will do when our own children are old enough to understand.
post #69 of 472
The whole treating it like nose picking is what got me. It's nasty, go wash your hands. That is shaming and disrespectful imo. Now I would feel differently if someone said for example, we teach our children why we feel it's against Gods wishes and then without guilting or judgment, we let them make their own decisions and keep our mouths shut.
post #70 of 472
well if your hands are in your pants they need to washed. I don't care what they are doing in there. its the same place. end of story. and by comparing it to nose picking I mean it is just an undesirable habit. not the end of the world.

I am not going to debate weather or not my beliefs are right or wrong. I am not asking anyone to change their beliefs about masturbation.

I was thinking about the friend in the OP. Perhaps, besides enlightening her to fact that circed men masturbate on a regular basis, perhaps ask her where we should stop to prevent our children from sinning. would we cut of their hands to stop them from stealing? would we give them a lobotomy to keep them from thinking wrong things? cut out their tounge to keep them from lying? gouge out their eyes to keep them from looking at things they shouldn't? of course not. then why would we cut off their penis to keep them from masturbating? Even if it did work. Amputation will not replace teaching and encouraging them to holiness. even if we could cut something off to keep them from sinning where would it stop? would the one sin not just be overtaken by the next? if we are going to dismember our children to keep them from sinning should we even bother having them? The whole thought of cutting off their legs or arms is just ridiculous and gruesome. but it might help her see the reality of circumcision to reduce masturbation is absurd and pointless.
post #71 of 472
I don't disagree you should wash your hands after handling your girly bits. I disagree that it's an undesirable habit.

Perhaps the op could enlighten her friend a little and help her become comfortable with her own body. I hope it works out and she doesn't feel the need to mutilate or shame her son.
post #72 of 472
I brought this up on another thread, but I might as well ask here too--why is it that teaching a kid a parent's beliefs about sexual conduct is automatically assumed to be "shaming" or "hangups" or "unnatural," but teaching about other things is not? Those of you who are "sickened" at our beliefs about masturbation and sex, do you not ever teach your kids to abstain from any natural impulses--greed, eating candy before dinner, whatever? If you can teach whatever you believe to be appropriate behavior without "shaming" or force, why do you doubt that we can teach our beliefs about appropriate sexual behavior with the same gentle-discipline methods?
post #73 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brigianna View Post
I brought this up on another thread, but I might as well ask here too--why is it that teaching a kid a parent's beliefs about sexual conduct is automatically assumed to be "shaming" or "hangups" or "unnatural," but teaching about other things is not? Those of you who are "sickened" at our beliefs about masturbation and sex, do you not ever teach your kids to abstain from any natural impulses--greed, eating candy before dinner, whatever? If you can teach whatever you believe to be appropriate behavior without "shaming" or force, why do you doubt that we can teach our beliefs about appropriate sexual behavior with the same gentle-discipline methods?
Thank you! I was wondering the same thing!
post #74 of 472
I would venture to guess that it is because at no time in our American history has sex been viewed in a truly positive light, and that most religious teaching about sexuality has been quite negative and repressive.

To ask all posters who have made the break from thinking that masturbation="impurity" to blithely ignore a couple centuries' worth of religio-historical precedent is a little disingenous, IMO. Seems that Christianity has always been deeply invested in controlling sexual expression through shame and guilt.

Though not particularly interested in controlling the gluttony and consumer- consumption of its congregants. The day I hear preachers calling upon congregations to forever abstain from masturbatory consumerism at Wally World will be the day I fall completely out of my chair.

But hey, that's just me.
post #75 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jörð View Post
The whole treating it like nose picking is what got me. It's nasty, go wash your hands. That is shaming and disrespectful imo. Now I would feel differently if someone said for example, we teach our children why we feel it's against Gods wishes and then without guilting or judgment, we let them make their own decisions and keep our mouths shut.
That's funny, because I am pro-masturbation and pro-sex before marriage and I was still going to treat masturbation like nosepicking.

Not, "that's nasty, go wash your hands"...

but "there's nothing wrong with doing that, but it's not polite to do at the dinner table / library / etc, so please do it in the bathroom or your bedroom and remember to wash up afterwards"
post #76 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by eightyferrettoes View Post
I would venture to guess that it is because at no time in our American history has sex been viewed in a truly positive light, and that most religious teaching about sexuality has been quite negative and repressive.

To ask all posters who have made the break from thinking that masturbation="impurity" to blithely ignore a couple centuries' worth of religio-historical precedent is a little disingenous, IMO. Seems that Christianity has always been deeply invested in controlling sexual expression through shame and guilt.

Though not particularly interested in controlling the gluttony and consumer- consumption of its congregants. The day I hear preachers calling upon congregations to forever abstain from masturbatory consumerism at Wally World will be the day I fall completely out of my chair.

But hey, that's just me.
You should come to our church, then. Consumerism, and resistance thereof, is a common theme. It is not shameful though.
post #77 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelly1216 View Post
Thank you! I was wondering the same thing!
I was going to say something like that too!
post #78 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brigianna View Post
I brought this up on another thread, but I might as well ask here too--why is it that teaching a kid a parent's beliefs about sexual conduct is automatically assumed to be "shaming" or "hangups" or "unnatural," but teaching about other things is not? Those of you who are "sickened" at our beliefs about masturbation and sex, do you not ever teach your kids to abstain from any natural impulses--greed, eating candy before dinner, whatever? If you can teach whatever you believe to be appropriate behavior without "shaming" or force, why do you doubt that we can teach our beliefs about appropriate sexual behavior with the same gentle-discipline methods?
I also don't agree with teaching children that things are "bad," and instead teaching them that "this is not considered appropriate, and may have consequences that you won't like."

There's a huge difference between teaching children that they're a "sinner" (which translates to 'bad') if they do something, and teaching them logically about consequences.

To teach my child table manners, for example, I will not say, "it's bad to put your elbows on the table," I will teach her, "it's good to keep your elbows off the table, because most people percieve that to be more polite. This doesn't make it true, but there are times when people's perception of you can impact your life, so it's a good habit to get into and keep."

Instead of teaching them to be ashamed, teach them the good reasons.

If you want to teach against masturbation, teach the benefits of refraining from it. "Dear, we choose to keep our body pure, because it brings us closer to God. It helps us to have a better relationship with him and with our spouse. Our body is also healthier and our soul feels better when we are closer to God and being pure. It is of great benefit in many ways to make this choice."

It can be done without saying, "Oh, and masturbation is a sin, too. If you do it, you are sinning." Sinning is synonymous with being 'bad,' and I fail to understand why anyone wants their child to think they're bad.
post #79 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brigianna View Post
You should come to our church, then. Consumerism, and resistance thereof, is a common theme. It is not shameful though.
Thanks for the invite. I think I'll stick with my Unitarian church, though. Those people see bottled water as a crime against the divine, (and against commone fiscal sense) but I've heard nary a word about wanking.

At least the latter is ecologically friendly.
post #80 of 472
And WTF is up with the weird "purity" language? Is one "impure" just because of jackin' off? Only if you forget to wash your hands afterward?

Is there a statute of limitations on the duration of the icky ritual impurity? Does it matter if you fantasize about your church-sanctioned-domestic-partner-of-the-opposite-sex? Does phone sex with the aforementioned CSDPOTOS count?

:mumbling: Surely God sanctions phone sex...
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...