S&M - weird stuff - not for kids

[drstevej]

nm

 

[Dominus Fidelis]

And how is "BEST" to be defined? Does this not drag God's perspective into the evaluation?

I trust my wife in a myriad of ways, none of which involve duct tape.

I agree. I tend to think that people that want to do those things are using their spouse, not being in union with them.

 

[Dominus Fidelis]

Interestingly the Song of Solomon is often seen as a metaphor for Christ and the Church.

That's true. And there was no degradation in there either.

 

[drstevej]

nm

 

[MikeK]

I would question the DSM in BDSM, but not the B. That B is just plain old good fun.

Actually, I wouldn't question it. I wouldn't practice it, but I wouldn't question what another couple decides they want in their bedroom. I trust that grownup married couples will find whatever works best for them.

 

[Dominus Fidelis]

Jesus washed their feet, He didn't bind them with chains.

 

[drstevej]

nm

 

[MoNiCa4316]

Sorry Im against it..thats' just my opinion...I see it as a perversion of sexuality *runs*

Also, what DF said:

I agree. I tend to think that people that want to do those things are using their spouse, not being in union with them.

 

[JoabAnias]

I would question the DSM in BDSM, but not the B. That B is just plain old good fun.

Actually, I wouldn't question it. I wouldn't practice it, but I wouldn't question what another couple decides they want in their bedroom. I trust that grownup married couples will find whatever works best for them.

You wouldn't condone it for yourself but you would permit it as acceptable to others? Do you see a problem with that reasoning Mike?

I'm actually kind of surprised this is even questioned here. Its immorality plain and simple. I am actually also a bit surprised that no women have weighed in on this attempted degradation of them as it began with a misconceived notion of what the Bible means about the submissiveness of women to men.

Lust is also a sin within marriage. Forgive me but I find this ignorance incredulous.

How not to be used: Love and Responsibility

Peace.

 

[MoNiCa4316]

I am actually also a bit surprised that no women have weighed in on this attempted degradation of them as it began with a misconceived notion of what the Bible means about the submissiveness of women to men.

As a woman, I rather agree.... it's almost like..the Bible tells us that wives should submit to their husbands, but in this case the husband is (mis)using the whole idea to fulfill his own desires..

Plus I'm sorry but I find it disgusting and it's a lot like inappropriate content eww

 

[OnTheWay]

Well, what you want to do in your bedroom is between you, whoever you're doing it with, and God. Really not interested in weighing in on whether or not Christians can do a little bondage here and there.

Now, I did write a paper on the BDSM lifestyle. At first it was largely my way of telling a certain professor to go **** himself. However, it turned out to be a fairly interesting topic. I really doubt you could be much of a practicing Catholic and take part in the BDSM lifestyle. Things like doms trading, or sharing their subs, is common place (which there's absolutely nothing to say the woman can't be the dom). I don't imagine your parish priest would be thrilled to hear that you actually allow the bondage den concil to make rulings you'll abide by in your life.

 

[faithfulchild]

Truthfully speaking...I call it lust!

J/A, I agree with you that it is a misconceived notion of what the Bible means about the submissiveness of women to men.

 

[faithfulchild]

S&M - weird stuff - not for kids

Hey Rhamiel you forgot about the grannies!

 

[Fish and Bread]

This is the most sexual religion forum I've come across in my entire life.

Not that that's a bad thing. It just amuses me.

 

[drstevej]

nm

 

[benedictaoo]

A topic that I would like to discuss is, can you have a healthy Christian marriage and incorporate elements of S&M and bondage? Of course it would have to consensual and in a loving relationship.

Some people would argue that bondage and Dominance and Submission are fundamentally demeaning to dignity of the human person, and even if done “for fun” or recognized as “play” such actions will not promote a healthy relationship between husband and wife.

On the other hand, some would say that husband is called to be the head of the household Ephesians 5:22-26, and this would also be true for the bedroom as well. So the husband as the caring dominant partner and the wife as the more submissive partner would be natural and biblical.

The articles on this website seem to mock Christian teaching, but this one actually makes sense, I would not recommend reading any of the other articles on this site though
http://www.sexinchrist.com/submission.html

(I know this is kind of a taboo topic, so I told the kids to stay out)

I'm not reading all of the posts in this thread. I'm just going to say this and let that be the end of it.

Christian marriage and incorporate elements of S&M and bondage? Of course it would have to consensual and in a loving relationship

Is a total oxymoron. Period. And there is nothing left to discuss.

 

[MikeK]

You wouldn't condone it for yourself but you would permit it as acceptable to others? Do you see a problem with that reasoning Mike?

Nope. I don't condone eating lima beans for myself - I don't enjoy them. I don't mind if others dine on lima beans.

As I mentioned (and worded rather poorly) I have no issues with bondage, so long and one person wants to be tied up, and the other wants to do the tying. Game on.
Tying can be nice I don't think that's really what the OP is talking about though - he's talking about master/servant types of relationships - and I don't think that's healthy at all.

 

[helenofbritain]

From the CCCC:

367. What are the sources of the morality of human acts?
1749-1754
1757-1758
The morality of human acts depends on three sources: the object chosen, either a true or apparent good; the intention of the subject who acts, that is, the purpose for which the subject performs the act; and the circumstances of the act, which include its consequences.

368. When is an act morally good?
1755-1756
1759-1760
An act is morally good when it assumes simultaneously the goodness of the object, of the end, and of the circumstances. A chosen object can by itself vitiate an act in its entirety, even if the intention is good. It is not licit to do evil so that good may result from it. An evil end corrupts the action, even if the object is good in itself. On the other hand, a good end does not make an act good if the object of that act is evil, since the end does not justify the means. Circumstances can increase or diminish the responsibility of the one who is acting but they cannot change the moral quality of the acts themselves. They never make good an act which is in itself evil.







528. What is forbidden by the ninth commandment?
2517-2519
2531-2532
The ninth commandment forbids cultivating thoughts and desires connected to actions forbidden by the sixth commandment.

529. How does one reach purity of heart?
2520
In the battle against disordered desires the baptised person is able, by the grace of God, to achieve purity of heart through the virtue and gift of chastity, through purity of intention, purity of vision (both exterior and interior), discipline of the imagination and of feelings and by prayer.

530. What are the other requirements for purity?
2521-2527
2533
Purity requires modesty which, while protecting the intimate center of the person, expresses the sensitivity of chastity. It guides how one looks at others and behaves toward them in conformity with the dignity of persons and their communion. Purity frees one from wide-spread eroticism and avoids those things which foster morbid curiosity. Purity also requires a purification of the social climate by means of a constant struggle against moral permissiveness which is founded on an erroneous conception of human freedom.

This thread is on thin ice. Keep things clean and the discussion may continue. Devolve intov smut and it will be closed post-haste.

Carry on....

 

[WarriorAngel]

Colleen
I am sorry, I did not mean to offend you, the article goes a little over the top and it is not from a good website, but some of the points it makes are valid IMHO

Mike
of course, I tried to stress that I am only talking about consenting couples

So, could you remove the link and only post an excerpt of importance for dialog?
Technically, this topic is not for Catholic edification imo...
And Fishy is right, why is OBOB so sexual?

OK ... let's say the couple is into degrading language and both enjoy it. By your principle it is not wrong. Yet degradation is the opposite of edification (building up one another).

To be right shouldn't God's standards and not our enjoyment be the true yardstick of what is "healthy"?

Hi Steve...



IMO, I dont want to know what ppl do.
And I dont really want to THINK about what ppl do.

DOes this improve a healthy love relationship?
Not if revolves around physical pain ... chances are even if it is 'preferred' method of 'fun' that it will affect the relationship eventually. And it might even cause eventual resentment if one partner is coerced and accepting but perhaps doesnt really like it.

Not my thing.

 

[WarriorAngel]

528. What is forbidden by the ninth commandment?
2517-2519
2531-2532
The ninth commandment forbids cultivating thoughts and desires connected to actions forbidden by the sixth commandment.

This is precisely why I dont want to even THINK about what other ppl do.
It causes me to have to ponder or think about it...

God Bless.