Why is sex such a taboo subject in religion?

[Wechtlein Uns]

Why not?

We gotta repress something, and I don't think food and water would be very stable...  

[Whitney]

Sex is awesome. It should be celebrated, not stifled.

Some religions of the past and present do celebrate sex.  Don't some Wiccan groups have ritualized orgies (I realize they don't all choose to do that)?

[karadan]

I think you're onto something with the pleasure bit.

sexual repression totally screwed me up. I think waaaaay to highly of sex and I'm bound to both disappoint and be disappointed when I get around to losing my virginity. All my life it's been "wait until marriage" but now I'm "allowed" and I don't know what the hell to do! lol.

Wow.. The experience is amazing when with someone you like a lot (in my case with someone i had liked for years) which really hightened the experience. If you do it with someone just for the hell of it, then you run the risk of it feeling awkward and weird. That can have a lasting effect on any future endeavours you might have.

Don't worry about not having done it yet. Just make sure that when the time comes, to do it with someone you know and like because the experience will be explosively amazing.

[curiosityandthecat]

Just finished reading an article about religiosity and teenage sexuality. Citation and abstract:

Hardy, S. A., & Raffaelli, M. (2003). Adolescent religiosity and sexuality: An investigation of reciprocal influences. Journal of Adolescence, 26(6), 731.

The present study examined potential bi-directional associations between religiosity and first sexual intercourse. The sample, drawn from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, included 303 teens (22% Hispanic, 35% Black, 43% White; 53% male) aged 15â€"16 in 1996 and 17â€"18 in 1998. All teens included in the sample were virgins at Time 1. In the longitudinal analyses, higher Time 1 religiosity (a composite of importance of religion and frequency of church attendance) was associated with a lower likelihood of first sexual intercourse between Time 1 and Time 2. However, transition to sexual activity between Time 1 and Time 2 was not significantly related to Time 2 religiosity. Thus, results do not support a bi-directional association; instead, it appears that teens with higher levels of religiosity tend to delay sexual involvement more than those with lower levels of religiosity.

(I wanted to type up some of the highlights. No citations or page numbers, and sentences don't necessarily come one after another in the original text. Paragraphs are still separated... this is literally what I have highlighted, and emphasis is mine.)

Because of these potential consequences, scholars have searched for factors associated with delayed sexual initiation. One such factor is religiosity, or religious attitudes and behaviors. Most research on religion and sexuality has sought to understand whether, and to what extent, religiosity influences sexual behavior. This research suggests that religiosity likely delays the onset of sexual intercourse, and may reduce sexual activity thereafter. ...the purpose of this study was to extend the existing research on bi-directional associates between religiosity and adolescent sexual behavior.

One possible avenue by which religion may influence the timing of an adolescent's transition to sexual activity may be by acting as a source of social control. ...humans all have an innate drive towards deviance that can be restrained by bonds to social organizations... although teens might have a tendency toward sexual involvement, if they are bonded to a social organization with conservative norms regarding sexual behavior (such as a religious organization), they should be motivated to delay sexual behavior.

Part of the basis for religion as a social control is that it provides consequences for deviance, such as guilt, shame, public embarrassment, and threat or expectation of divine punishment. Knowledge and fear of these consequences provides motivation for conformity to religious doctrines. If religious individuals do choose to deviate from the norms of their religion... associated psychological distress...  cognitive dissonance... a contradiction between what an individual believes and how he or she behaves. They may experience cognitive dissonance in the form of feelings of "unworthiness."

Almost all studies of religiosity and teen sexual behavior posit a unidirectional linkage whereby religiosity influences sexual behavior. Part of the association reported between religiosity and first sexual intercourse might be due to the reciprocal influence of transitioning to sexual experience on subsequent religiosity [this was not supported, by the way. -curio]. However, this possibility has not been adequately explored.

Church attendance significantly predicts sexual attitudes (permissiveness) and behaviors (coital experience and number of sex partners), whereas sexual permissiveness but not coital experience predicted religious attendance. Another... study... reported that religiosity did not significantly predict frequency of sexual intercourse in the past year, but frequency of sexual intercourse negatively predicted religiosity.

The sample consisted of 15-18 year old virgins. Higher initial religiosity was linked to lower likelihood of transition to sexual intercourse for female teens but not male teens (after controlling for sex attitudes), but engaging in sexual activity was not associated with a subsequent change in religiosity for male teens or female teens.

While higher religiosity is often associated with delayed first sexual intercourse or lower likelihood of sexual experience, the few studies that have examined the reciprocal effect of transition to sexual activity on religiosity have yielded mixed results.

First, it was hypothesized that teens who reported higher religiosity would be less likely to transition to sexual activity than those who reported lower religiosity. Second, it was hypothesized that teens who transitioned to sexual activity would experience a significant decrease in religiosity.

[The study determined levels of "religiosity" by using answers to these two questions: "How important would you say religion is to you?" and "In the past year about how often have you attended religious services?". Just wanted to throw that in there. -curio]

The hypothesis that becoming sexually active might influence subsequent religiosity was not supported.

Of the existing studies that have utilized similar measures of religiosity, most have found higher religiosity to be related to delayed first sexual intercourse or lower likelihood of sexual experience. Religiosity can act as a "protective factor" against teen sexual intercourse.

Teens who had their first sexual intercourse between the two study time points [T1 being at 15-16 years old, T2 being two years later. -curio] did not show a significant reduction in religiosity, although such a reduction was predicted based on cognitive dissonance and social control theories and past cross-sectional findings.

Religiosity might not lead teens to postpone sexual intercourse; rather, some third variable, such as temperamental differences related to risk-preference, may be responsible for both high importance placed on religion and delayed first sexual intercourse. Causal ordering of events can be better assessed the more time points that are included, and the closer they are together. The analytic sample was limited to teens who were virgins at the initial time point, leading to the exclusion of 40% of the original sample of 15-16 year olds.

It is conceivable that once these mechanisms become  clearer, information will be available for the development of interventions from a variety of perspectives (e.g. programs to help teens postpone sexual activity and reduce sexual risk-taking), including programs that are not religion-based. Some research suggests that religion might influence sexual behavior by affecting attitudes towards sex, such that teens with more conservative sexual attitudes engage in lower levels of sexual risk-taking. An intervention to promote religiosity among teens would undoubtedly be controversial, attempts to change attitudes and beliefs regarding sexuality (e.g. promoting individual and group norms that discourage early sexual involvement) are typically accepted.

It's a lot. I know. But, now at least when a theist says that teens having sex will turn them away from God (or some other version of that argument), you have empirical evidence that shows the opposite. Some things popped out to me, though:

• All participants were virgins at 15/16 years old, and "virgin" was the control theme.
• There were many limitations to this study.
• Fear is suggested as a way to delay sexual "risk-taking"
• Somehow, instead of educating teens about sex, it is better to simply delay sex until they are older.

I'll put this as scholarly as I can: WTF?!

[Kylyssa]

In Japan the average age people lose their virginity is years older than it is in the US.  I think the repression and fear tactics make it more likely kids will have sex and more likely that it will be unsafe.

Sex is repressed in the western world because we have descended from a patriarchal society.  In the past, women were little more than talking cattle as far as society was concerned.  The requirement of virginity was to insure the paternity of any offspring.  The tradition of the honeymoon came about to make double sure any first children were the legal husband's.

Historically, religion flourishes in hard times.  When people are leading enjoyable lives fewer people turn to religion.  In this time of relative, overall not-too-bad times it probably helps to restrict any method of finding joy.

I'll post something more coherent when my fever comes down.

[SSY]

The tradition of the honeymoon came about to make double sure any first children were the legal husband's
.

I never knew that, interesting.

[VanReal]

I don't have a problem with the teaching of "Abstinence Only." It's a good way avoiding STDs and other complications. Not to mention sex is overrated.

Thank you!  I always feel like I am the only one that thinks that.  Nothing really entertaining or exciting about it to me.

I agree with the above posts that for social reasons sex was included in religion, after all religion was used to control the masses, just makes sense they'd include it there.

[Kylyssa]

I don't have a problem with the teaching of "Abstinence Only." It's a good way avoiding STDs and other complications. Not to mention sex is overrated.

Thank you!  I always feel like I am the only one that thinks that.  Nothing really entertaining or exciting about it to me.

While asexuality is a sexual orientation, it's relatively uncommon, so programs to prevent the spread of STD's and to prevent unwanted pregnancies need to be aimed at the rest of the spectrum of sexuality.

People don't understand that traditional sex education also teaches abstinence but without the hellfire or humiliation tactics.  I think that the humiliation techniques used in abstinence only programs are harmful but I believe the religious component in abstinence only programs is completely inappropriate for public schools.

Teaching children about how their bodies work does not increase their interest in having sex.  In countries where sex education is taught seriously, the average age of first sex is higher and the rate of STD's is lower.  Education is not a bad thing.  US sex education programs are at best completely half-assed but still better than the Abstinence Only program with religious overtones foisted upon some students at the cost of $50 million per year.  Traditional sex ed is usually taught as part of health class and doesn't cost anything in addition to the regular curriculum.

[SSY]

I agree, abstinance only education makes about as much sense as driving without a seatbelt in the belief that if you are careful enough, you will never crash.

Young people will always make a choice about sex, the very best you can do is to outline all the options open to them and then the consequences of those actions. "Because I said so" never works, as people quite rightly question it.

[Ihateyoumike]

BTW I always wondered why the Pope, who uses his organ for peeing only, has any moral rights to make decisions about the sex life of millions of his followers.

That's not pee, that's concentrated evil coming out of there!

The tradition of the honeymoon came about to make double sure any first children were the legal husband's.

Not sure if what you said is true, or if this is true, but I actually just got an e-mail with little known "facts" which had this to say about honeymoons:
 

It was the accepted practice in Babylon 4,000 years ago that for a month after the wedding, the bride's father would supply his son-in-law with all the mead he could drink. Mead is a honey beer and because their calendar was lunar based, this period was called the honey month, which we know today as the honeymoon.

[curiosityandthecat]

1656 BLOUNT Glossogr., Hony-moon, applyed to those marryed persons that love well at first, and decline in affection afterwards; it is hony now, but it will change as the Moon.

So, who knows. Heh.

[Ihateyoumike]

1656 BLOUNT Glossogr., Hony-moon, applyed to those marryed persons that love well at first, and decline in affection afterwards; it is hony now, but it will change as the Moon.

So, who knows. Heh.

They all sound like good definitions to me.  

[AnnaM]

Sexual control is for social and political control, it is only tangentially connected with religion.

A better question is why don't people think for themselves and just ignore the baseless 'opinions' that surround them?