If you religiously oppose masterbation... - Page 5 - Mothering Forums
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#121 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 10:00 PM
 
eightyferrettoes's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,804
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.
eightyferrettoes is offline  
#122 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 10:08 PM
 
BusyMommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 9,963
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.


:
BusyMommy is offline  
#123 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 10:16 PM
 
daniedb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,524
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.

Mama to H (6) B (3) : A (1)
daniedb is offline  
#124 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 10:17 PM
 
Amris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I am loving and being loved.
Posts: 2,197
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.
Amris is offline  
#125 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 10:22 PM
 
boingo82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: A new-to-us house!!
Posts: 10,125
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.
boingo82 is offline  
#126 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 10:34 PM
 
eightyferrettoes's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,804
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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....)
eightyferrettoes is offline  
#127 of 472 Old 03-27-2007, 11:31 PM
 
Changed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 7,424
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.
Changed is offline  
#128 of 472 Old 03-28-2007, 04:39 AM
 
Aura_Kitten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Down by the River...
Posts: 7,244
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
:



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.

Aura_Kitten is offline  
#129 of 472 Old 03-28-2007, 09:40 AM
 
Amris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I am loving and being loved.
Posts: 2,197
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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?
Amris is offline  
#130 of 472 Old 03-28-2007, 09:51 AM
 
umsami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Capital City
Posts: 10,401
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.

Mom to DS(8), DS(6), DD(4), and DS(1).  "Kids do as well as they can."

umsami is offline  
#131 of 472 Old 03-28-2007, 10:00 AM
 
the_lissa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Southern Ontario, Canada
Posts: 13,253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I disagree with your post too amris.

Jam 7, Peanut Butter 5, and Bread 2.

the_lissa is offline  
#132 of 472 Old 03-28-2007, 10:06 AM
 
Amris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I am loving and being loved.
Posts: 2,197
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.
Amris is offline  
#133 of 472 Old 03-28-2007, 10:11 AM
 
EFmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 8,103
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.
EFmom is offline  
#134 of 472 Old 03-28-2007, 10:28 AM
 
umsami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Capital City
Posts: 10,401
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
List studies Amris.... because everything I've read on sexuality and health says that you are wrong.

Mom to DS(8), DS(6), DD(4), and DS(1).  "Kids do as well as they can."

umsami is offline  
#135 of 472 Old 03-28-2007, 10:42 AM
 
Amris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I am loving and being loved.
Posts: 2,197
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.
Amris is offline  
#136 of 472 Old 03-28-2007, 10:46 AM
 
klg47's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Utah
Posts: 1,655
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm about 3 pages behind on replies, but I'll try to get to them eventually. . .
klg47 is offline  
#137 of 472 Old 03-28-2007, 10:49 AM
 
BusyMommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 9,963
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Actually, that's really interesting. Thank you for bringing it up. I would like to learn more about it.
BusyMommy is offline  
#138 of 472 Old 03-28-2007, 11:03 AM
 
klg47's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Utah
Posts: 1,655
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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
klg47 is offline  
#139 of 472 Old 03-28-2007, 11:12 AM
 
Amris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I am loving and being loved.
Posts: 2,197
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.
Amris is offline  
#140 of 472 Old 03-28-2007, 11:17 AM
 
the_lissa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Southern Ontario, Canada
Posts: 13,253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
That's interesting as Macleans recently interviewed some marriage counsellors who had the opposite experience.

Jam 7, Peanut Butter 5, and Bread 2.

the_lissa is offline  
#141 of 472 Old 03-28-2007, 11:25 AM
 
mshollyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on the dancefloor,under a discoball
Posts: 3,141
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
a) um can we please try to keep in mind that gender isn't as binary as people make it out to be?

b) why can't individuals decide for themselves whether or not masturbation is acceptable based upon their beliefs and understanding of their sacred texts? it really should be between an individual and g-d, don't you think?

c) some people think that masturbation can be a spiritual experience. i happen to be one of them.
mshollyk is offline  
#142 of 472 Old 03-28-2007, 11:26 AM
 
Amris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I am loving and being loved.
Posts: 2,197
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_lissa View Post
That's interesting as Macleans recently interviewed some marriage counsellors who had the opposite experience.
I would like to see their data.

In my experience, women are far more likely to seek out and get their husband to go to marriage counseling when there is no sex from the man.

Men tend to just leave, or have affairs, rather than attempt to get the couple into counseling.

Which actually goes more towards my point. Women are far more likely to try to salvage the relationship. They are also typically more upset by the "loss of affection" than specifically sex in and of itself. The sex issue is usually a symptom of a much larger problem in women's eyes.

Where for a man, the loss of sex is usually the beginning of a much larger issue.
Amris is offline  
#143 of 472 Old 03-28-2007, 12:14 PM
 
umsami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Capital City
Posts: 10,401
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Amris:

You mention that you've spent 10 years training and working with couples... so I'm assuming you are a Marriage and Family Therapist. Be forewarned, that you are basing some of your opinions based on your client base--which are coming to you precisely because they are having troubles with their marriage.

You also say that "men in sexless marriages suffer more than women in sexless marriages." That may very well be the case, but it does not necessarily follow that because of that men need sex more than women do...or have stronger drives. We both seem to agree that women have alternative means of having their intimacy needs met--besides sex. That would seem to offer just as plausible of an explanation as "men's needs."

I'm not saying that men cannot bond during sex at all... but I think that women bond more during sex. If this was not the case, then men would not tend to have more sexual partners than women. Perhaps it is explained by the estrogen-oxytocin link as well as men's changing testosterone/estrogen balance as they age? My understanding is that as we have more estrogen, oxytocin tends to affect us more. (And men have more estrogen as they age which may explain why they stray less.)

Both men and women release serotonin and dopamine when massaged... so don't negate touch as a way of bonding couples. And, BTW, men do release oxytocin when touched as well... as well as when interacting with children. (At least according to Dr. Uväs-Moberg who wrote "The Oxytocin Factor" as well as Dr. Kathleen Light who did a study through the NIH.) The effect is usually stronger in women but it does not mean that men do not produce it at all when touched.

Peace.... and now back to our regularly scheduled thread

I don't disagree that women are much more likely to salvage a relationship or seek counseling. Heck, women are much more likely to seek any medical care than men. That is of no surprise to me.

Mom to DS(8), DS(6), DD(4), and DS(1).  "Kids do as well as they can."

umsami is offline  
#144 of 472 Old 03-28-2007, 12:40 PM
 
Amris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I am loving and being loved.
Posts: 2,197
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by umsami View Post
Amris:

You mention that you've spent 10 years training and working with couples... so I'm assuming you are a Marriage and Family Therapist. Be forewarned, that you are basing some of your opinions based on your client base--which are coming to you precisely because they are having troubles with their marriage.
No, I was a sex counselor.

Quote:
You also say that "men in sexless marriages suffer more than women in sexless marriages." That may very well be the case, but it does not necessarily follow that because of that men need sex more than women do...or have stronger drives. We both seem to agree that women have alternative means of having their intimacy needs met--besides sex. That would seem to offer just as plausible of an explanation as "men's needs."
It doesn't have anything to do with drive. Drive is desire. There will be times when drive will wax and wane.

It has to do with the connection that the couple has. The strength of the relationship. The bond, not the frequency of sex.

Women have alternative ways of BONDING.

Quote:
I'm not saying that men cannot bond during sex at all... but I think that women bond more during sex. If this was not the case, then men would not tend to have more sexual partners than women. Perhaps it is explained by the estrogen-oxytocin link as well as men's changing testosterone/estrogen balance as they age? My understanding is that as we have more estrogen, oxytocin tends to affect us more. (And men have more estrogen as they age which may explain why they stray less.)
Women do bond more during sex. Women bond more when being caressed. Women bond more, pretty much over all. Their phsiology is more based towards bonding.

Women bond more with children. They bond more in communities. Etc. etc.

Therefor, since sex is the predominant way that men bond, while women have many ways and find it much easier to do....

IT IS MORE IMPORTANT TO MEN to get it through THAT avenue. Because they have a comparatively lower likelihood of bonding through any other means.

Quote:
Both men and women release serotonin and dopamine when massaged... so don't negate touch as a way of bonding couples. And, BTW, men do release oxytocin when touched as well... as well as when interacting with children. (At least according to Dr. Uväs-Moberg who wrote "The Oxytocin Factor" as well as Dr. Kathleen Light who did a study through the NIH.) The effect is usually stronger in women but it does not mean that men do not produce it at all when touched.
Yes. They do produce it. They do not produce it in clinically significant amounts. In other words, not enough on average to become addicted to it.

And that is, on a physiological level, what bonding is. A linking of a positive euphorical state with a person or an object.

I hate to break it down into such clinical terms, because there is more at work than just that, but at the end of the day, yes, your partnership with a mate, if you want to keep it long and strong, is in part an addiction to them.

Quote:
Peace.... and now back to our regularly scheduled thread

I don't disagree that women are much more likely to salvage a relationship or seek counseling. Heck, women are much more likely to seek any medical care than men. That is of no surprise to me.
Sadly, women are also much more likely to refrain from sex with their partners by choice instead of by the other person with-holding it.

In some cases, they simply don't realize the harm they're doing.

In other cases, they do this on purpose. Which is a horribly sad state of affairs. Using your partner's cheif bonding as a method of punishment or reward is a wretched idea.
Amris is offline  
#145 of 472 Old 03-28-2007, 01:18 PM
 
holyhelianthus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: the Southern California desert
Posts: 11,082
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
hmmm... skimmed through the thread an had to throw in my $.02.

the friend in the OP weirds me out. i don't understand her thinking. i too wonder if she will lob off parts of her daughter's to prevent them from masturbaition.

it was asked a few times if the parents who opose masturbation have ever done it. i have. a lot. tons. i love sex. i love masturbating. i did it all the time before i was married and even after. i can't get enough. since going back to church i haven't (took a bit) and neither has DH (that took a bit, too) and it has improved our relationship because we are more 'hungry' for it. but that's between us so i would appreciate my sex life with my husband not being bashed because we feel masturbation hendered it, thanks. like with all 'sin' (which, BTW, is healthy and okay to teach. like teaching that anything is wrong. say murder or rape or RIC. just because it is labeled as sin does not mean the parent is taking the 'go beat yourself 100 times with a whip you dirty disgusting child' route in teaching it. it's offenseive that there are so many who feel it's okay to assume this about those of us who believe that people can do wrong (sin) and teach our children along those lines.) my family will teach what it is and why we do not do it. and if i catch my child masturbating? my reaction would be something like this 'sorry i didn't knock. that is so unlike me and rude of me. i would expect the same repect from you.' as long as we have taught them what sin is and how and why we should avoid it the ball is in their court. they are people capable of making their own choices in life. i will not rob them of that choice. nor will i ever tell them they are dirty or disgracfull for having sexual organs or the desire to use them. i'm not an idiot. more likely than not my kids will masturbate at some point. when that time comes they will know their options. going back to why we believe masturbation is wrong- my family takes it like this... those types of physical pleasure are designed to bring a couple closer to one another as 'one flesh'. if you don't believe this or don't believe in that form of coupling or whatever more power to you!! you have every right to. but i have a right to believe it and would appreciate the respect i try and give everyone else in their belifes. it's only nice.

Maggie, blissfully married mama of 5 little ladies on my own little path. homeschool.gif gd.gifRainbow.gif
holyhelianthus is offline  
#146 of 472 Old 03-28-2007, 01:41 PM
 
l_olive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I've been thinking about this thread and its sister in CAC, and the only thing I have to add is this.

As completely opposed to circumcision as I am, I would rather see the OP's friend circ her baby son as an infant than at 5 as a sick punishment for "masturbation." If you think that's a possiblity at all... I dunno.

As devastating as the physical effects of circing are, I would have to believe that the psychological ramifications of the punishment circ would be far greater.

Just throwing that out there in case the OP is still reading.

--Olive
l_olive is offline  
#147 of 472 Old 03-28-2007, 02:01 PM
 
fericito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 208
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I read the whole thread.

I learned long ago that many would think my beliefs or the desire to reaise my children according to my beliefs were victorian-era (or something close as someone here put it).

What I've decided is that I'll do what I think is best for myself and for my children. And on the day when I met my Maker, I'll have nothing to be ashamed of.

To be honest, I don't really care what anyone thinks beyond Him.

That's why I think discussions like this are pointless - because I know I won't convince anyone here to believe the way I do, just as I won't be convinced by the words of some stranger on a message board either.

For the record, I've never masturbated and never will. I'll be teaching my children the same thing.
fericito is offline  
#148 of 472 Old 03-28-2007, 02:38 PM
 
umsami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Capital City
Posts: 10,401
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by l_olive View Post
I've been thinking about this thread and its sister in CAC, and the only thing I have to add is this.

As completely opposed to circumcision as I am, I would rather see the OP's friend circ her baby son as an infant than at 5 as a sick punishment for "masturbation." If you think that's a possiblity at all... I dunno.

As devastating as the physical effects of circing are, I would have to believe that the psychological ramifications of the punishment circ would be far greater.

Just throwing that out there in case the OP is still reading.

--Olive
That's a good point Olive. I've never heard of anyone circ'ing as punishment for masturbation... and I hope it doesn't exist... but good to put out there.

Mom to DS(8), DS(6), DD(4), and DS(1).  "Kids do as well as they can."

umsami is offline  
#149 of 472 Old 03-28-2007, 03:14 PM
 
BusyMommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 9,963
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by fericito View Post
For the record, I've never masturbated and never will. I'll be teaching my children the same thing.
Fair enough.
What happens if you find out one of your kids has been masturbating, though?
BusyMommy is offline  
#150 of 472 Old 03-28-2007, 03:34 PM
 
mshollyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on the dancefloor,under a discoball
Posts: 3,141
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
i view orgasm as a necessary, natural, and yes, g-d-given release, in much the same way as tears are a release, and telling boys that they shouldn't have an orgasmic release except in marriage is no different than telling them that they shouldn't cry, except under certain circumstances. (the same is true for girls, but our society doesn't discourage female crying). when words like "pure" and "clean" are used, they imply that if, for whatever reason, a person cannot refrain from doing a particular activity, they will no longer be "pure" or "clean" and will carry guilt from it, whether or not you have explicitly stated that such things are a sin or not. g-d made each person differently. it may be easy for YOU to refrain from masturbating, but you don't know about anyone else's body.

and anyway, what is to be gained from controlling another person's sexuality? if it turns out that g-d does get really upset about people masturbating, then people who do it will have to deal with that, all of you "pure" people who refrain don't have to worry about anything.

btw, i was taught from age 7 (after being caught, multiple times) that masturbation was wrong. my mom told me to go read the bible after she caught me one time, but i didn't find anything that said i wasn't supposed to do it. for years afterwards, she would inquire as to how i was managing my "problem," if i had prayed about it, etc. i lied, the whole time. i had a really intense drive, and i did it quite a lot, but i can't say that i had "impure" thoughts, i was just really concentrated on the release.

the truth is that you can tell your kids whatever about it. if the need is strong enough, they will do it anyway, but they will feel guilty and ashamed for not being able to live up to your shining, virtuous example, and worse, will feel that g-d disapproves of them.
mshollyk is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off