Puberty brings a whole new set of problems for young people who have been indoctrinated in Christian anti-body teachings. In my own experience I always was familiar with the subtle pleasure that was associated with an erection. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to discover that certain manipulations of the penis are pleasant. But after puberty arrives, those sensations lead to something even more dramatic—orgasm. Suddenly, this self-touching is much more than just feeling yourself or exploring—it is a means to a goal: achieving that altered state of consciousness that sublime ecstasy that is experienced in orgasm. The pleasure police begin working overtime with young people who are old enough to experience the dangers of orgasm!

I've always found our customs of sex education in North America to be wholly inadequate and of little use to our young people. We are taught in school about the mechanics of reproduction. Most of us received little or no direct instruction about sex in the home. In my own instance, the ONLY home-based sexual "education" came from my father when I was probably 15. It consisted of a single simple warning, which he undoubtedly heard from his parents (perpetuating a myth begun in the nineteenth century): "Never play with your penis; that will make you go insane." By that time of my life I was already masturbating and dealing with a tremendous range of frustrations and conflicts associated with that solitary pleasure. Dad's instruction was not helpful and it did nothing but add to an already high level of psychological pain and confusion.

Parents seldom (and schools never, I understand) describe sexuality to children as a mechanism for feeling good, both physically and emotionally. [In my comprehensive sex discussions with my own sons I told them about sexual pleasure and that it was okay to masturbate.] We teach your children that sex has but one noble purpose—creating babies. Oh, there are some who admit that sex IN ITS PROPER PLACE (marriage) is useful for helping the husband and wife bond in order to create a more loving atmosphere for the upbringing of children. But the message still is that sex has one single purpose, engendering babies. The physical pleasure is never to be sought after; that is only a secondary benefit when sex is experienced within the marriage bed. It reminds me of a comment made years ago by a girlfriend after we had both had explosive orgasms. "Do you suppose it's all right to feel this good?" she asked with a twinkle in her eye. She was kidding, but that joking remark sprung from a deep feeling that it is NOT all right to experience physical pleasure. That attitude is still widespread in our culture. We are afraid to tell children that the physical and emotional pleasures associated with sex are tremendous. They are enjoyable. They are uplifting (or can be). They contribute to better physical health and emotional well-being. We do not tell our children these things because we are telling them, instead, that sex is to be restricted, tightly controlled, and experienced only with one's spouse.

Our cultural attitudes toward sexuality did not come from any natural source of what was right or wrong; they have been slowly developed over the centuries. Christian writings, which are the basis of many of our cultural beliefs, are not too favorable toward sexuality. St. Paul said, "It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband" (I Cor. 7:1-2) and "I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I [single]. But if they cannot contain [sublimate their sexual needs], let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn [with passion or burn in hell]." (I Cor. 7:8-9) Paul also demanded that "those who have wives" should live "as though they had none (I Cor. 7:29). The insinuation is that there are to be no orgasms at all—that chastity and abstinence are the most desirable conditions for humans. But if you are the poor slob who can't live without shooting off once in awhile, then by all means marry and have an occasional orgasm.

According to Joachim Kahl, a former theologian (see bibliography; quote from page 75), "The New Testament is the work of neurotic philistines, who regarded human sexuality not as a source of joy, but as a source of anxiety; not as a means of expressing love, but as a means of expressing sin. Often overtly, but sometimes in a more concealed manner, the New Testament writers outlawed everything to do with the body."

These doctrines are still the official Roman Catholic preference but chastity is now pretty much institutionalized within the priesthood and the women religious (nuns). The negative attitude toward sexuality, which is still codified in Catholic doctrine, remains in only slightly modified form in virtually all Christian denominations. (For an in-depth discussion of Christian teachings about sexuality I highly recommend Uta Ranke-Heinemann's scholarly book Eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven: Women, Sexuality and the Catholic Church. Remember, much of the Protestant attitude toward sex originated in the Roman Catholic Church so this book is a valuable eye-opener to all of Christianity's anti-body rhetoric. It should be noted that Thomas Aquinas, the great Catholic scholar, taught that masturbation was a greater sin than harlotry and the church prescribed very severe punishments for this "transgression.")

Again, the implication is quite clear: Sex is dirty, mostly unacceptable by God, it must be tightly regulated and it is improper and invalid unless it is experienced within the confines of marriage. Some churches go so far as to teach that only certain positions of intercourse are acceptable (hence the term "missionary position" because missionaries were fond of telling their heathen converts that the varied ways of coupling they previously used were not looked upon favorably by their new Christian God.) Oral and anal sex is strictly taboo by most churches and masturbation, if it is ever talked about at all, is given a resoundingly negative coloring.

It seems to me much more logical to teach people the joys of self-loving as a wholesome and pleasant alternative to unwanted relationships, unwanted sexually-transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancies. But, instead, we tell your young people to "just say no" and remain non-sexual beings until they are magically transformed with the slipping of a wedding band upon the third finger of the left hand. It just doesn't work that way. As Dr. Ira L. Reiss has written, "The 'Just say no' approach to sex simply ensures that young people who say yes will be unprepared to prevent disease and pregnancy."