Talk:Masturbation/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

Frequency etc...

Masturbation is normal, everyone does it, but a few are afraid to admit it. Studies and surveys tend to suggest that of sexually active and healthy males and females (ones who are capable), frequency ranges from several times a day to several times a week, depending on your equipment. Internet survey's tend to rate higher but probably can't be trusted. Frequency tends to go down as you get above 30 but perhaps that's because they are ejaculating more often from other means. The best suggestion I have come across is to start with is masturbate once a day then work up or down from there, depending on your need. Fact is, it is probably better to do it too much than too little. Some think research is needed to prove that doing something natural to our bodies is healthy. For those, research was recently published proving the benefits of not only masturbation but FREQUENT masturbation for health and reducing the risk of cancer (http://www.news-medical.net/?id=333). Many other studies you can easily find yourself reveal the benefit of regular masturbation to keeping you sexually fit and functioning, and ready for your mate. Regular ejaculation during the developing years is essential to healthy sexual response later... and incase you missed that oportunity, you can't go back to catch up. Any doubters should be dismissed and reason should prevail. In the end, I have never met anyone who wished they had done it less. Everyone I have talked with about it would have done it more had they felt they had permission.

It's past time for an open discussion on the taboo subject of masturbation in the U.S... or at least a discussion on why it can’t be discussed openly. Our inability to discuss and accept it as a healthy and useful tool to postpone teen risky sex is truly another Katrina or Vioxx happening. In 1994 half of all new HIV infections were occurring in youths younger than 25 years of age, many even in teens. As you know, Dr. Elders was fired in 1994 for even suggesting masturbation as a tool in the fight. Only abstinence was offered in its place. A Doonesbury comic (Garry Trudeau) was even censored on 8/29/03 because the topic was masturbation. I can't believe some folks actually think the U.S. is decadent when we can't even say the word masturbation without fear! Any progress so far? The number of new HIV infections has only risen since then. In addition, last September the CDC reported larger numbers of teens engaging in oral sex, a risky behavior. More than normal experimentation, it’s on a regular basis. Teens are using this as a substitute and sometimes even an adjunct to intercourse. If Catholic priests can't even practice abstinence, how can we expect our teens with raging hormones to practice it! This policy is forced on us by people with other interests than our doctors' and sound science, many of whom can't even remember being a teen and are married with a convenient outlet for this sexual impulse they so deny to others. In addition, abstinence-only education offers nothing to teens once they begin engaging in sex.

Shouldn't we inform teenage boys, when it can do the most good, that it's normal, healthy, and expected and that every single guy who walks the earth does it or lies that they don't.

Too Long

This page is not an encyclopedia entry, it's an exhaustive diatribe. Seriously, somebody's compensating.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Logan.aggregate (talk • contribs) 14:58, 27 July 2006

self-abuse?

"self-abuse" does not redirect to this article (nor should it). I removed that reference. - IstvanWolf 23:09, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Social norms

Boys should never worry about masturbating. All the stuff that says it's wrong is anti-biological. The male human gets an erection for a reason, at all ages, because he needs to off load his reproductive product. Boys? young men get erections, why hide it? , it's a fact of life, the best thing fashion could do is make erections fashionable! Why shouldn't a 15 year old boy have an erection in public? As a world public we are affraid of erections. I do not know why. I think we should encourage our young men to have and be proud of their erections!

Burping and farting could be considered biological as well, that doesn't mean we have to do them, or that we should do them in public. I'm not saying anything is wrong with masturbation under the right circumstances (in moderation, in approproate surroundings), but your logic is flawed to say that everything that is biological should be embraced with no boundaries. U$er

I think the idea is interesting, and User:U$er offers an interesting parellel. If I have gas, I try to get rid of it considerately, but if it is inconcenient to leave the company of others I merely excuse myself and forget about it. I'm not ashamed as U$er seems to think I should be, but nor am I proud of my gas like the unsigned poster thinks I should be proud of my erections. I agree that the social climate of shame and humiliation over public erections is harmful and unecessary, but I'm not sure how I would feel about making it into a fashion accessory.  ;-) All the same, perhaps that is a reasonable means to a desirable end. Somegeek 20:19, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Why hide erections?

I'm afraid that being embarrased about having an erection in public is not going away. This can start all the way back to Ancient Roman bathhouses when men were the only gender in there and naked. In these times it was considered bad to have an erection in public. This can set an example of things yet to come hence today.

-> It's bad because: for both the boy/man and fertile females that happen to be around. Both males and females find it difficult to control their sexual urges to a safe degree in this today's world (let's face it, almost noone has all the sex they want), and this might exascerbate the problem, similar to if they saw each other in sexual positions etc. Final note: On nudist beaches when a man gets a sharp erection he is expected to leave where any females are gathered.

Because people are frigid. They've only made modest advancements from the Victorian era but hopefully, in a few decades time, Wikipedia editors will be infrigid enough to include erections. Skinnyweed 19:35, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Having an erection does not show desire to have sex. Erections, especially in teenagers, can happen randomly for no apparent reason. It does show arousal in some cases, but in others an erection only means that the penis needs more blood. This is the reason why erections happen in the nighttime five or six times. omnus 12:56, 11 July 2006 (CST)

Judaism's view of masturbation

I added a section to the article about Judaism, I hope you find it informative:

"The Kitzur Shulchan Aruch reads:

• "It is forbidden to cause in vain the effusion of semen, and this crime is severer than any of the violations mentioned in the Torah... not only do they violate a grave prohibition, but they are also to be banned, and concerning them it is said: "Your hands are full with blood", and it is analogous to the killing of a person...Occasionally as a punishment for this children die while young, God forbid, or they become wicked, while he himself becomes poverty-stricken".[1] Zadil 16:04, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

You chose an indirect source. What is wrong with Gemara Niddah daf 13? JFW | T@lk 23:02, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I:BTW Zadil, I was originally under the impression that "Your hands are full with blood" (Yeshayahu 1:15) was from the Gemara. It clearly isn't. On Niddah 13a, a different fragment of Yeshayahu is mentioned, namely chapter 57. That is clearly about idolatry, but there are many subtle references to Onan (e.g. Bnei Onanah, 57:3). Interestingly, the Gemara draws a parallel between masturbation and child sacrifices. JFW | T@lk 23:21, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

People should recongize the boner for what it is man —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkness88 (talk • contribs) 01:04, 1 July 2006

the us is too worried about showing sexual images then they are about violence imo violence is worse then some naked people —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkness88 (talk • contribs) 21:40, 1 July 2006

Catholicism sentence

"It is the indulgence forbidden in the religous aspect more so over the act of masturbation." Can someone who is familiar with the RC catechism either explain what this sentence means, or make it clearer? If not, I'm planning on removing it, as the rest of the small sub-section seems to make perfect sense without it. --Nigelj 21:08, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

It just means Catholics can't masturbate, basically. Being (1) Catholic and (2) a horny little teenager, I believe that is correct. TommyBoy76 23:23, 14 May 2006 (UTC)TommyBoy76

I believe the quotation from the catechism is incorrect. This is what is really at the link referenced: "The deliberate use of the sexual faculty, for whatever reason, outside of marriage is essentially contrary to its purpose." For here sexual pleasure is sought outside of "the sexual relationship which is demanded by the moral order and in which the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love is achieved." 67.51.34.75 10:38, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Checked the citation in the article with the online Catechism, and it does seem to be incorrect. Should it be deleted? 23:34, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

If it's incorrect - absolutely. --ElKevbo 23:54, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Reworded the last sentence; it should read a bit clearer now. 71.245.221.12 00:25, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Checked myself and deleted the incorrect (nonexistent) citation.

Well, the Catholics are wrong, then. There's nothing wrong with masturbation. It's not even mentioned in the Bible. --"Ringo"

I think you'l find that although masturbation is not mentioned in the bible, The catholic church condems masterbation/contoseptives, etc because of an ambiguous mention of a man disobaying gods comandment for him to impregnate his wife, instead choosing to pull out. "wasteing his seed" and thus being smited by god. This is the reference for which the church has condemed masturbation. Thus Although the "Catholic Church" disaproves of it, it is not stated directly biblicaly.--Fabio 02:37, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Etymology

Doesn't the word "masturbation" come from Latin 'masturbari' or 'masturbor,' which means 'to defile oneself'? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mixaelus (talk • contribs) .

You're right. My dictionary says that the root word masturbate comes from the Latin word masturbari, defile or dishonor oneself. --Starionwolf 05:48, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Added information about the sexcrime status

This article needed to have the important information about it being a sexcrime added —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.214.54.245 (talk • contribs) .

What are you talking about? Where is masturbation considered a "sexcrime"? -GTBacchus^(talk) 17:36, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Isn't it considered a sexcrime under the sodomy laws in many US states?--69.214.54.245 05:17, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Isn't that in Masturbation#Law? — WCityMike (talk • contribs • replies) 05:19, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

It bothers me that Masturbation#Law says masturbation is "universally" legal. I'm almost positive that the author probably meant, "...in the United States," but I don't know enough about the subject. Somegeek 20:24, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Last I heard, you could be arrested for masturbation as it's a sexcrime. That's what I learned in school once before.--69.214.54.245 05:22, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that's the case, and no offense, but we can't add it in just on the strength of it being something you learned in school. The illegality of masturbation in a public place is already covered in the article. But if you can find a link for it in and of itself being against the law, please provide us with a reference, and we can put that in in the "Law" section. — WCityMike (talk • contribs • replies) 05:31, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

That is such BS. 'Sexcrime'. Just because there are some people that are sexually repressed doesn't mean that they have to sexually repress others.

Sketches

Are they neccesary? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slaya Ain't Dead! (talk • contribs)

I wasn't in it, but it has already been discussed. Shall we discuss some more? TommyBoy76 02:06, 23 May 2006 (UTC)TommyBoy76

Perhaps you'd like to see this. Under the bullet "Picture change", the picture you see now has been agreed upon. :) Cheers, TommyBoy76 02:12, 23 May 2006 (UTC)TommyBoy76

"Reading or viewing pornography, or sexual fantasy, are often common adjuncts to masturbation." Now add in that picture and I think that reading Wikipedia leads to masturbation. The preceding unsigned comment was added by —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.15.57.128 (talk • contribs)

I would like to propose this picture for the top of the page instead of the two already there, without any caption - none are required, after all. Haiduc 10:30, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

• Looks good! Thanks for posting to the Talk page first. Johntex\^talk 22:52, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Citations Needed

 I've never heard anyone say  Masturbation is a "Cardiovascular Workout"? where's   the citation???  Stevo D 18:22, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

"Some women masturbate by inserting objects into the urethra (e.g. ball point pens, glass thermometers)" Seriously, is this true or just one person's technique? Maybe we should name it "mad hatter action." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.15.57.128 (talk • contribs)

Yes, it is a known technique. That's why I provided a reference! Try reading the article next time!Bobble2 22:26, 6 June 2006 (UTC)Bobble2

Without trying to traumatize people, I know of men doing that as well.rmbh 22:47, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

The practice is called "sounding" and it's done by both men and women. A urethral sound (medical device) or something similar is considered a safer option. Using pens and glass thermometers would be just plain dangerous (sharp points on pen, potential contamination, injuries-- especially if a glass thermometer breaks and leaks mercury everywhere!). BMEzine.com wiki article about sounds. Jaguara 17:28, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

• winces* Stui 22:59, 26 July 2006 (UTC)