Did you ever stop to think that if the Catholic “men of the cloth” were allowed to be married, and didn’t think masturbation was sooooo bad, that maybe they would have a HEALTHY outlet for their sexual frustration and not take it out on innocent little boys???

Oh, one of the links you had in your own blog, it states that masturbation is a-okay as long as it leads to pro-creation. And focus on the family thinks it is a grand thing to do.

You do not need porn to masturbate, you do not need a visual or a fantasy going on in your head or playing on the t.v. to masturbate. Do it as a couple, for eachother, you might be suprised at what a turn on it is.

One last thing, I am one of those women that cannot have an orgasm without clitoral stimulation, and I do not take birth control. Your study is bogus, sorry.

Some women can achieve orgasm via nipple stimulation alone…

Now why would God go and do that, huh?

Frankly, I think it’s ’cause God likes women a lot more than the Catholic Church ever did. I think it’s ’cause God actually sees women as more than walking uteruses.

Women are infinitely more complex than men, sexually speaking, and infinitely more powerful. We have stronger, longer orgasms, sometimes multiple orgasms, we can achieve orgasm in all kinds of nifty little ways, and our orgasms aren’t directly linked to procreation or fertility at all.

And the Catholic Church has done everything they possibly can to quash women’s natural sexuality from day one. The truth is, our sexuality and the power it has scares the bloody hell out of the dried up, misogynistic men that make up the institution that is the Catholic Church.

The reason why women can’t achieve orgasm is because of the pill? Um, hon, what about all those women pre-pill…and the women who’ve never been on it…? The reason why many women can’t achieve orgasm from intercourse alone has nothing to do with hormones. It’s strictly a mechanical issue. And they can achieve orgasm when intercourse is either accompanied by other forms of clitoral or G-spot stimulation. So, um, no.

Um…the rest of that…uh, and this has exactly what to do with the discussion…?? Why are you cutting and pasting that nonsense here…? Yes, women are hornier when they’re more likely to become pregnant. Duh. Your point, please…?

With masturbation, you have to play out a fascination with pornography in your mind…? Sweet Jesus, but where do you get this from, seriously? Yes, people fantasize. They do this even when they’re having sex with their spouses. Sometimes they even share their fantasies and play them out. And ya know what, hon? The Church doesn’t care. They’re totally okay with it. If a wife wants to run around in a little french maid outfit and tickle her husband with the feather duster (okay, really lame fantasy, but I’m not sure Renee is ready for the duct tape and hot candle wax…/rolleyes), it’s not wrong/dirty/bad/sinful, and you’d be hard put to find a priest to tell you it is. So, yeah, masturbation is against Church teaching, but please spare us the armchair psychology, ‘k?

As for your experiences, sounds like you have had a lot of sex partners. And I’m glad you dated those teenage boys when you were a teen, too. It would be beyond creepy had you dated them as a forty-something.

Yes, dear. We all want our SOs to be fully focussed on us, and some of us actually want to focus on our SOs, too, rather than sit back and take notes on how he’s doing, or compare him to other partners we may or may not have had. So, yeah…why you think marriage has anything to do with this, I don’t know, ’cause you can run down to any women’s shelter and find tons of married Catholic women with the bruises, broken bones, and scars that prove that Catholic marriage means nothing in itself. It’s what each individual brings to the relationship, not the ritual or the denomination of the house of worship the ritual took place in.

You’re not trying to be preachy? Of course not. You are being preachy.

I know what the Church teaches, and I know that a huge percentage of what you’re passing off as both Church teaching and psychology is a load of horse manure.

I’ve dated my fair share of teenage boys as a teenager who regular masturbated with/without born. Honeslty I can tell the difference when someone is making love with you and when someone is merely treating you like the palm of his hand. I was taught that sex was mere recreation and as a young teenager girl to merely particiapte with it.

Such acts give an unrealistic version of what married life and sex is. Women don’t look like prono stars, we don’t act like them either. We are human being that like to be treated like one. I don’t want the guy thinking of something else, I want the guy to be thinking of me in bed.

Personally I don’t want to look at porn or watch a guy masturbate, I want him to make love to me and understand sex is to make love not just to blow off steam. I want a guy to save that sexual energy all for me and not release it on image, and like I said a mere orafice to fulfill out an false image in his head. Sex serves a purpose greater then ourselves.

Just to explain regarding Natural Family Planning, a lot of non-Catholic use it also. There is a non-religious website called Taking Charge of YOur Fertility. http://www.tcoyf.com where women finally learn about their bodies, something they don’t teach in sex eduation. All sex ed is about do what feels good and just don’t get pregnant, without much talk about the biology of the body.

And on a theological note, there is a great website by Christopher West who explains Theology of the Body, he has several essays. I’m not trying to be preachy, but if you are going to disagree with the Churches teaches I have to inform want they are and not base it on secular rumors.

I mean the whole part of the female reproductive organ, not just the vagina. The reason why women can’t achieve orgasm is because of the Pill, the Pill effectively shut dows the ovulation which stimulates pheromones (the scent that attracts men). There is an interestting study in which a researcher had women come into his lab to be oserved by average people, on the days the women were approaching ovulation and their estrogen levels where at it’s highest peak both men and women thought these women were the most attractive.

Yahoo News made note of an interesting study that women who aren’t aware of the Ovulation/Fertility Awareness Methods unknowingly make themselves more attractive when they ovulate. The force of natural estrogen to release an egg from an ovary follicle is quite powerful. I’m sure the researcher of the study is knowledgeable of the science of natural family planning. I can see why using the urine sample to detect ovulation, rather then changes in cervical mucus in the study was used not to throw off the individuals involved in the study.
“A study of young college women showed they frequently wore more fashionable or flashier clothing and jewelery when they were ovulating, as assessed by a panel of men and women looking at their photographs…
“They tend to put on skirts instead of pants, show more skin and generally dress more fashionably,” said Martie Haselton, a communication studies and psychology expert at the University of California Los Angeles who led the study.
Writing in the journal Hormones and Behavior, Haselton and colleagues said their findings disproved the conventional wisdom that women are unique among animals in concealing, even from themselves, when they are most fertile….
They asked 30 university students to come to their lab for a test, without letting them know the nature of the experiment. “We asked them some things about food, for example,” Haselton said in a telephone interview…..
“One of the things we found pretty interesting is that people sort of have their personal style, almost like their uniform,” she added. “The women would show up to the lab wearing something pretty close to what they wore before, but embellished.”
For example, one woman wore loose knit leggings and a tank top in both photos. “In her high fertility photograph, she would be wearing a very pretty tank top and she was wearing more jewelery. The difference was quite subtle,” Haselton said.
The fertile women did not necessarily dress more provocatively, Haselton noted. “We did see a little bit more skin. It was my impression that the women were just dressing a little bit more fashionably but not sexier.””

Martie Haselton has his own website with a collection of papers. I will take a dive into them.
Ovulatory Shifts in Women’s Preferences, Thoughts, and Behaviors. Women’s heavy investment in reproduction has produced selection for a discriminating sexual psychology. The window of fertility within a woman’s cycle is also fleetingly brief. These two observations suggest that women have mating adaptations that are sensitive to or contingent on fertility status. In our research we are testing

http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/comm/haselton/research.html

> people to whom I spoke, a ghost, an apostle, the Madonna, the Paraclete, the Messiah, and the Father<

Just that.

I am also not sure what is giving you the impression that he is not in command of his faculties. Could you point to the posts in question?

I can maybe think that a couple of them had strange titles (‘If we outlaw death-rays, only Ming of Mongo will have death-rays’, or ‘My invasion plans’) if someone was not aware that Mr. Wright is a published science fiction author.

But if you read his blog in that context, I am having a hard time seeing were the nuttiness is.

Can you help me understand?

Steve pulled one quote where Wright mentions having doubts. What about the rest of the post where he goes on about talking with all those Bible characters?

But frankly I could not blame Wright for having doubts. He might well doubt the existence of his chair. The more I look at his ramblings, the more I recognize familiar elements from having to read the ramblings of people who were certified looneys.

Can we just not even try to derive anything from John Wright as he’s plainly not firing on all thrusters, playing with a deck of <52, a few attendants short of a quorum, nuttier than a squirrel’s nest come hibernation time…… ?

That was one of the funniest ways to say one of the nicer things I’ve heard recently, as only you are capable of. Likewise to you, my black and gold friend.

Quote from Mr. Wright’s post:
[W]hen I suffer doubts, when my faith gets weak, my faith in my memory gets weak too.

Not necessarily. I’ll spare you the quote mining, unless you request it, but your book seems to state that worshipping out of fear is a virtue.

Not so, on two counts (and no need to quote-mine). It is a beginning, not a virtue (fear of God is the ‘beginning of wisdom’). In addition, fear can have the definition you speak of, but the theological understanding of fear is ‘awe’ (don’t believe me, pick up any dictionary). God does not want us to cower in his presence. He wants our love freely given. This is the very heart of the gospel message.

Do you “trust God’s mercy to judge” me fairly?

Yes, absolutely. I also am really worried that he’ll judge me fairly too. I suspect that I might not come off so well on that score.

Since you hardly know me, assume that it is true that I am a kind, loving person that wouldn’t dream of hurting another person. Would that matter to God at my judgment?

Yes and no. It won’t matter how much good ‘stuff’ you did, but it will matter if you did the very best with what you were given. Some are given more, some are given less. I’ll say again, we can only work by the light we are given.

God will deal with the person who got hooked on crack in their mothers womb and all the havoc that wrought in their life far differently than he will deal with a whiner like me with my cushy life. I think I have far more to worry about than the person I describe.

But seeing as how we’re talking about a hypothetical event involving me, a person you barely know, I think I might be a little more qualified to speak on the matter than you are.

I hope one day you get whatever it is you need even if it is not a football through the TV.