Sinful to use a vibrator?

Someone mentioned this in another topic, that using a vibrator is just as sinful as having gay sex. I figured I’d start another topic, though, because this strikes me as quite extreme. Of course it would be sinful to use one to masturbate, but in the context of marital sex? I also suppose over-dependence on one can lead to sin and the woman caring more about getting an orgasm than expressing love for her husband, but not all men have certain skills, of course they can be learned, but is the wife just supposed to grin and bear it until he does?

Using the same arguments, it seems logistical to conclude that even using an artificial lubricant is “unnatural”, and sinful too!

Some of the more extreme posters on this issue, really seem to think that women don’t need to enjoy sex, and that if she doesn’t achieve orgasm by intercourse alone, then tough luck, that’s just the way God made her.

That’s really not my impression of mainstream Catholic thought on women and sex. Please, someone reassure me!

I don’t think you’ll find any specific Church teaching on this particular question. This is something that would be left to the prudential judgment of the couple - perhaps in consultation with their spiritual director / confessor. In my opinion, there would be no issue as long as, at the end of the act, the man climaxes within his wife. Pope St. John Paul, in his theology of the body, stipulated that a man can certainly aid his wife in achieving orgasm, even AFTER he has climaxed himself - I don’t see why using a tool would be intrinsically wrong.

1 Like

I’m also interested to know the answer to this…

A simple equation:

B (bedroom)=P (private)

:smiley:

You can make it sinful, but it doesn’t have to be. Everything in moderation.

That about sums it up. :thumbsup:

For some couples, the use of a vibrator could be a really serious temptation to sin, even if only used in the context of marriage. For other couples, it might not be.

1 Like

I once asked a priest in confession if anything goes between a married couple.His answer"you could ask ten different priests and get ten different answers":confused:
So,I went away from that,still not knowing the answer.
However,I tend to agree with others,that as long as relations end in a unitive nature there shouldn’t be a problem:shrug:

The trick is not marrying the stupid or the pigs.

Regarding lubricant it depends, if the couple is in a situation where it is painful for one (or both) and lubricant remedies that situation then it would be quite morally licit.

No, that is called the husband needs to learn how to please his wife in morally acceptable ways.

Wow. Sorry, but. Wow. Really? Maybe you’ve really met guys befitting the labels but if this is your term for any dude who can’t ‘naturally’ get a girl to that particular ‘state of mind’ then I can only say, “Ouch!”

Aaaaaaand he’s supposed to know all that after getting married. Fast. Despite the ‘morally acceptable way’ also including the deprivation of one’s mind from any talk of sex, sex positions, pleasure spots or whatever.

I hope you won’t use the “Doing the right thing isn’t always easy.” card for this because I really think that sounds like a highly predictable excuse for asking the impossible. (And on that note, I might also say the same for “With God, all things are possible.” card too.)

By that I mean those incapable of learning (the stupid) and those who don’t care about his wife’s satisfaction (pigs).

While it might take many engagements of sexual intercourse for newlyweds that tends to come fast. :wink:

Talking about sex, sex positions, pleasure spots and many other things are morally licit to talk about for married couples.

Really, it isn’t that hard, major locations to stimulate are the breasts and the clitoris (has more nerves than your penis), also keep in mind whispering things into her ear helps it too.

No, it is called women need to learn how to train their husband; men can take a while to get housebroken.

I am biting my tongue (in a virtual sense) because this thread is ripe for sarcasm/snide/snarky comments.

But today I will refrain from the snide, sarcastic, and snarky and focus on the sincere. Also I will focus on alliteration.

My assumption is that a sexual stimulator would be o.k. as long as it did not interfere with the uniative and openess to life aspects of the act.

Of course it is. You already know that at some level, otherwise you wouldn’t ask the question here.

Lust in itself is sinful. It is one of the capital vices. It may be redeemed by the sacrament of marriage, which means it must be procreative.

Chastity is best. Marriage is not a sin, if it is true marriage (i.e. procreative). Everything else is the temptation of Satan, of the Lord of this World.

Will a ‘vibrator’ bring lasting happiness? Eternal happiness? NO. Therefore it is a sin, a deception…

“You must not love this word nor ANYTHING in this world. For the world, and the lusts thereof, are passing away.” 1 John, 2

It seems to me a tool might fall out of the “natural” part of the equation. The Church hasn’t pronounced on this and I don’t expect it feels the necessity to do so.

That being said, foreplay is perfectly acceptable (and necessary) in the natural course of sexual relations between a couple. In the procreative dimension of sexuality, I have heard of studies that indicate an excited woman is more likely to conceive. God is so good.

Surely if a vibrator is used -for it’s own sake- that would not fall into the natural progression of things, any more than oral sex -for it’s own sake- would.

In any case, patience and consideration is required. God made it pleasurable for a reason.

1 Like

Twinkies are not natural, but it’s still pleasurable to eat them. Does that make them sinful?

I hardly think so
(eaten in moderate quantities :smiley: and assuming you aren’t using them to reach orgasm :D:D).
Why would you think Twinkies are sinful?

Just noting that an “unnatural” pleasure isn’t necessarily sinful. :cool:

If you are referring to the use of the word “natural” in relation to sexuality, I am using it in a different sense than that used for a Twinkie. Twinkie’s don’t grow on the Twinkie tree for sure, but lot’s of things don’t naturally occur in nature that are useful or pleasurable. A guitar is another example.

By natural I mean the naturally intended form, not just the substance. You may take pleasure from a Twinkie. The natural form for that enjoyment is to take it in your hand and chew and swallow it, and go MMMMMMMMM !

You could also take several Twinkies and shove them down a friends throat til they choke to death. That would be an un-natural use of Twinkies (and a great explanation for why I have Twinkie crumbs all over myself).

So it -might be- (I dunno) with a vibrator. Does it fit within the natural sexual form designed by God? If I use the vibrator for pleasure as an end in itself outside the context of the natural progression of intercourse, that would most certainly be dis-ordered. (As would be oral or other sex acts to completion outside the natural progression…)

One thing I have discovered is that things which propose to increase pleasure and intimacy (pornography is another that I used to use for this purpose) do not in fact serve that purpose. They may have a “wow factor”, but in the context of ongoing marital relations, nothing can substitute for words, eye contact, touching, etc etc etc…real intimacy between married people. The “enhancements” become a distraction and a cause of frustration and distance, in the long run.

1 Like

Many couples use sex toys, role play, even lingerie/dressing up to add excitement and passion in their relationship. There is nothing wrong about that.

Yes, pretty much. It’s a waste of resources, its bad for health (not that health is an absolute moral priority- but we are given a body so we can serve God, so it pays to keep it in good order). It also weakens the disciple of the ruling faculty (i.e. the sense of taste rules the brain). Also, they’re a luxury, and there’s plenty of poor people who would be grateful for some bread or beans.

It’s OK to eat them, IMO, if it would be ungracious or uncharitable to refuse (e.g. someone gives you one as a kind gesture). But otherwise, it’s not good to eat them. SO, maybe not a sin, but certainly tending towards being a vice…

That hardly seems consistent with Buddhist orthodoxy. “The source of suffering is desire…” Anything which increases or serves fleshly desire ultimately increases suffering.There is everything wrong with it. As a Buddhist, you realize (I hope) that passion is suffering. In fact, the word ‘passion’, literally, means suffering. In the Christian (and Buddhist) tradition, human passions and lusts are not to be encouraged, but overcome.

Buddha, like Christ, practised, and advocated, chastity.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.