Is masturbation rational, moral?

[konerko14]

Do you agree that each individual should choose whether or not to masturbate based on their specific situation? So, masturbation as a whole is not moral or immoral but it depends strictly on the situation.

If performing the act affects you negatively(doing it during a concert symphony), then it is immoral.

If performing the act doesnt affect you negatively and gives you great pleasure(doing it during the right time at the right place), then it is moral.

Isnt that really as in depth the discussion can go?

[~Sophia~]

Do you agree that each individual should choose whether or not to masturbate based on their specific situation? So, masturbation as a whole is not moral or immoral but it depends strictly on the situation.

If performing the act affects you negatively(doing it during a concert symphony), then it is immoral.

If performing the act doesnt affect you negatively and gives you great pleasure(doing it during the right time at the right place), then it is moral.

Isnt that really as in depth the discussion can go?

Killing is immoral. Killing in self defence is a moral action. Does that mean that killing is not a question of morality? No.

[softwareNerd]

It does depend on the situation; but, then that's true of all concrete actions. So, one could answer every such question with a one-line reply, "It depends", which sheds no extra light on the concrete at hand.

A good discussion of any such concrete would therefore explore whether it is moral in the typical situation in which arises (or a specific situation, if one is at hand). The discussion can also show contexts where it would be right, and why; and, where it would be wrong, and why.

Masturbation is considered bad by various anti-pleasure moralities. So, it is not surprising that it is an issue that people face and think about.

[konerko14]

Killing is immoral. Killing in self defence is a moral action. Does that mean that killing is not a question of morality? No.

You misinterpreted what I said. I was actually explaining the morality of masturbation. I just meant that it depends on the certain situation to judge if the act is moral or immoral- just like your murder example.

I kind of lost track of the purpose of my intial entries in this thread, so I'm going to clarify the reason I started writing in here in the first place. I wanted to try to answer some of the thread starters questions. I wanted to explain why it doesnt matter if you accept masturbation as a form of hedonism or an evasion of reality, because the desire is strong enough(at least for a lot of people) so that it will almost force you to not refrain from masturbation completely.

And a reason why it doesnt have to be a form of hedonism is because some people act on the desire to relieve the sexual tension and to help them stay level headed- so there can rational reasons to masturbate. It can however be hedonism with the ones who randomly act on the desire.

The reason why masturbation isnt an evasion of reality is because you have to think about some sexual objects to get turned on fully- you cant just stare at a wall and not think about anything. Its an evasion of reality in the sense that you arent really having sex with that person or object but its accepting reality by realizing you have to fantasize about something to get turned on completely.

This kind of goes along with my last paragraph but it answers the fourth question of the thread starters post about pornography. Ayn Rand did say she thought pornography was disgusting but thats an opinion. You need to fantasize about some sexual objects to turn you on properly, and if pornography turns on like that then I think its fine to use as material. Pornography is generally people having sex, so naturally I think most people would get turned on by this, and it wouldnt qualify as a pyschological disorder.

Edited June 3, 2006 by konerko14

[~Sophia~]

You misinterpreted what I said. I was actually explaining the morality of masturbation. I just meant that it depends on the certain situation to judge if the act is moral or immoral- just like your murder example.

Masturbation as such is not immoral but if this behavior becomes destructive to your well being or to other's well being it becomes immoral.

Ayn Rand said: " If I were to speak your kind of language, I would say that man's only moral commandment is: Thou shalt think. But a "moral commandment" is a contradition in terms. The moral is the chosen, not the forced; the understood; not the obeyed. The moral is the rational, and reason accepts no commandments."

Here is your answer. There are not set in stone rules regardless of context. The moral is the rational.

[DamnGirl]

If performing the act affects you negatively(doing it during a concert symphony), then it is immoral.

No. It's masochism.

[RationalBiker]

Do you agree that each individual should choose whether or not to masturbate based on their specific situation?

Of course. If you read any of my last several comments, I was the one stating to you that the entire context and reasoning behind the act, not simply the desire, is what determines the morality of the act. You were the one who appeared to be trying to assert that one could act on the desire alone.

So, masturbation as a whole is not moral or immoral but it depends strictly on the situation.

Yes, as I stated, the morality of the act is contextual.

Isnt that really as in depth the discussion can go?

No, because we can place the act in a variety of concrete situations to debate whether it's immoral or not in those instances. There would likely be disagreement to be worked out. However, I'm not really interested in doing that.

My (relatively) standard answer to "Is X immoral?" is "It depends on the full context." Masturbation is no exception.

I wanted to explain why it doesnt matter if you accept masturbation as a form of hedonism or an evasion of reality,

Perhaps you would be explaining why it doesn't matter TO YOU. It matters to me because depending on my evaluation of someone else's masturbatory practices, I will decide how that affects my relationship with that person.

The reason why masturbation isnt an evasion of reality is because you have to think about some sexual objects to get turned on fully- you cant just stare at a wall and not think about anything. Its an evasion of reality in the sense that you arent really having sex with that person or object but its accepting reality by realizing you have to fantasize about something to get turned on completely.

One of the reasons why I'm having such a hard time of understanding what you are trying to say is because of statements like this. The first sentence is in contention with the second sentence. You say "it isn't" in one breath, and "it kinda is" in the next. Which is it?

Again, I think you need to think of the "evasion" aspect in terms of context. In a concrete setting let's say a man feels more comfortable masturbating while thinking of his wife rather than actually having sex with her (assuming a certain amount of other facts in the situation that suggests it would be proper and safe for them to have sex). This person MAY be evading something wrong in their relationship. Or he may not be evading. As softwareNerd said, "It depends".

[~Sophia~]

I wanted to explain why it doesnt matter if you accept masturbation as a form of hedonism or an evasion of reality, because the desire is strong enough (at least for a lot of people) so that it will almost force you to not refrain from masturbation completely.

I think you can run into this kind of dilemas only when you hold false beliefs.

A person without a sexual partner is not evading reality by acknowledging the fact that they have sexual needs (like any healthy human being single or not) that are not fullfiled. If you hold a false belief that masturbation is immoral regardless of cirumstances (and decide to fight those natural urges and not self-relieve) then you will be in this situation in which your biology, your physical reality are going to be in conflict with your mind. When your beliefs match reality (in this case recognizing that masturbation in itself is not destructive - but it can be in some circumstances) then you do not run into such conflicts.

From Galt's speach: "The purpose of morality is to teach you, not to suffer and die, but to enjoy yourself and live."

Edited June 4, 2006 by ~Sophia~

[konerko14]

You were the one who appeared to be trying to assert that one could act on the desire alone.

Perhaps you would be explaining why it doesn't matter TO YOU. It matters to me because depending on my evaluation of someone else's masturbatory practices, I will decide how that affects my relationship with that person.

One of the reasons why I'm having such a hard time of understanding what you are trying to say is because of statements like this. The first sentence is in contention with the second sentence. You say "it isn't" in one breath, and "it kinda is" in the next. Which is it?

Again, I think you need to think of the "evasion" aspect in terms of context.

I never said that someone should act on the desire alone. What I was saying is the desire will get too strong and make you very uncomfertable if you do not act on it eventually. And that doesnt mean you have to do it during a concert symphony- wait until a better time, but you may be uncomfertable until that time comes.

I guess masturbating rationally is not evading reality because youre not necessarily trying to escape anything, youre probably just trying to satisfy a desire. Because even though you are fantasizing about sexual acts that you arent really performing, that is the only way to get off.

You cut one of my sentences short and then commented on the part that didnt matter. Heres the full sentence "I wanted to explain why it doesnt matter if you accept masturbation as a form of hedonism or an evasion of reality, because the desire is strong enough(at least for a lot of people) so that it will almost force you to not refrain from masturbation completely." I was referring to the individual and that even if he accepts masturbation as hedonism(or any philosophy) and thinks its evil, he will still get that strong urge eventually and will have to act on it to relieve the stress. You can convince yourself that masturbating is bad for you but its going to be hell trying to hold off from doing forever. Meaning, you have to act on it to function properly.

[softwareNerd]

The idea of "evading reality" has come up a couple of times. I think I understand the sense in which it is being used, but only in a vague sort of way. I wonder if you could concretize this. What does it mean to "evade reality"? Does an actor evade reality? What about a science-fiction author? Does a person playing chess with a computer evade reality? Does anyone imagining anything evade reality? Does a person who takes a pain-killer evade reality? Does someone who gets drunk for an evening evade reality (check this post)? If only some of these are evasions of reality, then what's common about those and what differentiates them from the others? Then, appyling that differentiator, is masturbating an evasion of reality?

[konerko14]

The idea of "evading reality" has come up a couple of times. I think I understand the sense in which it is being used, but only in a vague sort of way. I wonder if you could concretize this. What does it mean to "evade reality"? Does an actor evade reality? What about a science-fiction author? Does a person playing chess with a computer evade reality? Does anyone imagining anything evade reality? Does a person who takes a pain-killer evade reality? Does someone who gets drunk for an evening evade reality (check this post)? If only some of these are evasions of reality, then what's common about those and what differentiates them from the others? Then, appyling that differentiator, is masturbating an evasion of reality?

Something they all have in common is that they are an interest, a pleasure, or a relief to the person. They are all desires designed to make the individual feel good- the desire to act, the desire to play chess, the desire to relieve pain with painkillers, the desire to get drunk.

Taking pain killers to relieve a physical pain is different than getting drunk to relieve emotional pain. Taking a painkiller is to help you to function better, and getting drunk will make you function worse.

Being an actor or science-fiction writer are usually chosen because you have an interest to do that, and doing so will help you function better;i.e. make you happy.

If you masturbate rationally you are not evading reality because the act will help you function better(ease stress and anxiousness), as I pointed earlier.

Hows this hypothesis: when you avoid using a rational moral code, your actions will evade reality. If you dont use reason to make a particular decision, you will inevitably be escaping something in reality with that decision.

Edited June 4, 2006 by konerko14

[RationalBiker]

I never said that someone should act on the desire alone.

And I didn't say you directly said that either. I said that's what you appeared to be asserting. Let me provide a few of your earlier quotes to support what I said;

The desire to masturbate in certain situations will overmatch the immorality of it because it is such a powerful desire.

Whats the difference if its moral or not if that wont change someone's actions? I know humans have free will but I'm making this decision based on personal experience, and the desire to masturbate in certain situations influence your final action more than morality. So, the reason I wanted to point this out is to explain my opinion why figuring out if masturbation is moral or not is irrelavant.

In short, why think about it, just do it. (My bold emphasis above)

Whether I knew if masturbation was moral or immoral wouldnt change my actions towards it because I could only refrain from doing it for so long anyways. So yeah, that specific action is beyond my control at certain times. Im 20 male, and the urge to do it is stronger than my free will, and I think a lot of people would agree with me.

Don't think about it, just do it. Not only that, but you try to bolster this opinion with consensus; i.e. a lot of other people would agree with you.

I like the issue of morality, just not for this specific topic.

I don't want to think about it, I just want to masturbate when I want to.

It wasn't until after these statements that you started to demonstrate any recognition that one SHOULD think about the morality of masturbation before engaging in it.

[konerko14]

And I didn't say you directly said that either. I said that's what you appeared to be asserting.

I didnt realize I came off that way. I see how it appears that Im saying to act on the desire alone. But that wasnt my intention, and I'll try to be more clear next time.

Edited June 4, 2006 by konerko14

[eram ansari]

morality is not synonymous to hedonism. it is placing one's happiness as the ultimate aim of one's existance only if one knows he deserves and has acquired the right to happiness by his/ her individual pursuit.

well then the question of masturbation being moral boils down to just this-if u think u deserve happiness only by masturabtion, its moral. if u think u derserve happiness from reality, its sex.

[Atlashrug9]

morality is not synonymous to hedonism. it is placing one's happiness as the ultimate aim of one's existance only if one knows he deserves and has acquired the right to happiness by his/ her individual pursuit.

well then the question of masturbation being moral boils down to just this-if u think u deserve happiness only by masturabtion, its moral. if u think u derserve happiness from reality, its sex.

I am pretty sure we are all in agreement that morality is not synonymous to hedonism.

I am an Atheist, I do not think God is watching and my physical pleasure is a value in itself. So here we have two things, I can attain my physical pleasure, and hurt no one -- I can see no reason that this would evn be a moral question. You can choose not to mastubate but that is just a choice it does not make the act any less or more moral.