Religious opinions on masturbation

However, it is pertinent to the OP question.

What psychological traits are apparent or reflected in the ways that atheists ... discuss God/gods and religion?

I agree, although in ways you probably don't anticipate.
 
"Shuffling the iPod," Jesus?
I don't hold the video as great intellectual enlightenment; I spent, like, two seconds search. However, it would be nice to know, say, what theists think of it.

Although I think you are seriously toxic, I welcome your foolishness because it represents a good look at what lies beneath the hood, of this delusion.
For that, I thank you.

jan.
 
What psychological traits are apparent or reflected in the ways that atheists ... discuss God/gods and religion?

I agree, although in ways you probably don't anticipate.
"What psychological traits are apparent or reflected in the ways that atheists and theists... discuss God/gods and religion?". Don't parse.
 
Well, there goes whatever vestige of "innocuous" you were mustering ...
Although I think you are seriously toxic, I welcome your foolishness because it represents a good look at what lies beneath the hood, of this delusion.
For that, I thank you.

Well, I'd say a short road to neurosis is denying ones sexuality and I mean that in very broad terms. I'm sure you guys know that the term "superego" was coined by, Freud, as a part of the psyche along with the ego and id.
 
"What psychological traits are apparent or reflected in the ways that atheists and theists... discuss God/gods and religion?". Don't parse.
Since you are an atheist, with spparent self-confessed airs of innocuousness and all that, I edited it appropriately.
 
Well you did rise to the defense of the apparently self confessed innocuous, so ...
I didn't think I needed defending. This thread was about psychology of people and sex/lust is a very primal instinct affecting personality. Jan, started on some fictitious scenario about men doing harm to women. Letting loose frustration for the betterment of some society. I just changed the narrative; kept it real, and talked about masturbation. Can't all people get sexually aroused all of a sudden without even knowing what triggered it? Well, I can, but I know there's a time and place and doesn't take a PhD in cognitive psychology to realize some thoughts are a big distraction.

(Also, I said "denying" sexuality in an earlier post when I probably should have used the word "repress".)
 
I didn't think I needed defending. This thread was about psychology of people and sex/lust is a very primal instinct affecting personality. Jan, started on some fictitious scenario about men doing harm to women. Letting loose frustration for the betterment of some society. I just changed the narrative; kept it real, and talked about masturbation. Can't all people get sexually aroused all of a sudden without even knowing what triggered it? Well, I can, but I know there's a time and place and doesn't take a PhD in cognitive psychology to realize some thoughts are a big distraction.

(Also, I said "denying" sexuality in an earlier post when I probably should have used the word "repress".)
I believe it all stems from a very fundamental cosmic imperative of "movement in the direction of greatest satisfaction", which extends far beyond the "pleasure principle" in animals.
While on occasion Freud wrote of the near omnipotence of the pleasure principle in mental life, elsewhere he referred more cautiously to the mind's strong (but not always fulfilled) tendency towards the pleasure principle.
In Freudian psychology and psychoanalysis, the reality principle (German: Realitätsprinzip) is the ability of the mind to assess the reality of the external world, and to act upon it accordingly, as opposed to acting on the pleasure principle.

Allowing the individual to defer (put off) instant gratification, the reality principle is the governing principle of the actions taken by the ego, after its slow development from a "pleasure-ego" into a "reality-ego": it may be compared to the triumph of reason over passion, head over heart, rational over emotional mind
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pleasure_principle_(psychology)
 
Last edited:
Can't all people get sexually aroused all of a sudden without even knowing what triggered it?
I'd be surprised to hear of many men getting aroused without knowing what triggered it. Generally (and that's a big generally) men tend to be more one-track-minded. They also tend to be stimulated more visually. So there's not a lot of likely stimuli to sift through, looking for an answer.

OTOH, if you're simply talking about 'springin' a boner' that's not uncommon, and often has no conscious cause. But it isn't really associated with sexual arousal; it's just an annoying 'glitch' in the system.
 
pp,550x550.u2.jpg

UNITE!
 
If you take the Bible literally, yes, looking at a woman lustfully who isn't your wife is a sin. I don't think masturbation need be part of that.

As a side: Is society ready to accept Mastersexuals? Or are they doomed to hide under the sheets?
 
This is a serious discussion!

Stop trying to distract me...
Suitably chastised

But I think I have a serious point none the less

Is mutual same as solo or does mutual raise it above and change the level of 'sin' or what ever the Religious View is on the subject

Does it make it more bad?

:)
 
I'll jump some recent questions and:

Abrahamic religions
Biblical scholarship
The biblical story of Onan (Gen. 38) is traditionally linked to referring to masturbation and condemnation thereof,[3] but the sexual act described by this story is coitus interruptus, not masturbation.[4][5][6][7][8] There is no explicit claim in the Bible that masturbation is sinful.[9][10]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_on_masturbation#Abrahamic_religions

Although I think you are seriously toxic, I welcome your foolishness because it represents a good look at what lies beneath the hood, of this delusion.
For that, I thank you.

So, why am I toxic?
 
Back
Top