Catholic and Kinky
Guest Post by Joe Williams
It is well known amongst faithful Catholics that sexual acts within marriage must be both open to procreation and be unitive. Most of the discussion about Catholic sexual ethics involves openness to procreation and what Catholics can and cannot do towards those ends. For instance, most moral theologians agree that oral sex is permissible as a part of foreplay so long as the man climaxes inside the woman’s vagina thus being open to procreation. I will take this of course as a given. Considerably less is written as to the unitive aspect and what is and is not permissible. It is simply not enough to say that anything is permissible as long as it is procreative. Sex between spouses must be an expression of mutual self-giving love. It cannot be harmful or degrading even if it is open to procreation. This begs the question of the licitness of so called kinky sexual practices such as BDSM. I think there is a natural reaction amongst faithful Catholics to regard such practices as illicit. Those instincts are correct when it comes to sadomasochism though not all kinkiness or even all of BDSM is expressly sadomasochistic. To say that sexual practices that some might find kinky cannot be a mutual expression of self-giving love is to take an exceedingly narrow view that limits the expression of conjugal love.
BDSM is an acronym that encompasses a broad range of activities some of which are quite innocent and some of which are not. The B stands for bondage, the D stands for dominance and also for discipline, the S stands for sadism and also submission, and the M for masochism. I think it is fairly obvious that sadism and masochism have no place within a Catholic marriage and are disordered. Sadism is deriving pleasure from the infliction of pain or torment on another. It should go without saying that sadistic acts are not loving and intrinsically wrong. Conversely, masochism, the enjoyment of pain being inflicted on oneself, is also disordered just as self-harm is disordered. Discipline is defined by the dictionary “as using punishment to correct disobedience.” The idea of one spouse punishing the other is also obviously problematic, however, discipline in the context of BDSM is almost always fake or pretend. (There are people who practice full time BDSM where one spouse is the other’s slave and subject to punishment but I think it is pretty obvious that treating your spouse as your slave is beyond the pale). The idea of pretend discipline will be addressed later. Dominance is a natural human proclivity rooted in the sin of pride. Seeking to dominate one’s spouse is likewise problematic.
Thus far, this article appears to be a condemnation of kinky sexual practices though I actually have the opposite intent. Bondage is a morally neutral act that is closely tied (to use a bad pun) to submission which is a morally positive act. Submission to another is a great act of self-giving love and many times in a marriage both spouses will have to submit their will to each other. The sex act itself is the act of giving one’s self to another and is thus an act of submission. In the marital act, we are naked both literally and figuratively, giving ourselves to our spouses. There is nothing wrong with submission freely given, and it is in fact a great act of love that ought to be encouraged. Submission is only good, however, when freely given not imposed. That is why the marital act when freely given is a great good and rape including marital rape is a great evil. How though can submission be positive if dominance is not? The distinction is submission must be freely given not imposed. The dominance of accepting someone’s free gift of submission is not wrong.
Bondage, the act of physically tying or restraining another, is representative of submission. Allowing another to tie you up is an extremely submissive act that shows your absolute trust in that other person. I do practice bondage in my own marriage from time to time. When my wife allows me to tie her to the marital bed for the performance of the marital act, it is a profound gift of herself to me. She is giving herself to me totally and completely. She is placing her trust in me entirely which shows how much she loves me. She never looks more beautiful, and yes men are visual creatures which is why men love to see women naked or in lingerie. I have never felt closer to her or more loved by her. Marital sex is a profoundly spiritual experience and brings us closer to God, and by allowing me to tie her, her gift of herself is heightened bringing us closer to God. She is physically bound to our bed but it spiritually binds the two of us together so that we truly are one flesh. The bondage we practice is no one of leather and chains, but of silk ties. Bondage is so often seen as whips and chains but is also of silk ties and feathers, which is very much what we practice.
The issue of discipline is more complex. As stated earlier, the discipline is not real. It is pretend. The idea of actually disciplining one’s spouse is obviously extremely problematic, and the idea of pretend discipline is not without problems. That being said, I think that light spanking can be an appropriate form of marital intimacy provided both spouses consent. Playfulness is an important if not required part of sex. I think spouses may playfully discipline one another on grounds that they have been “bad” or “naughty.” Such spankings should be minimally painful as they are playful. Implements such a small paddle can be used so long as they are not designed to cause much real pain. Spanking your spouse because she is “naughty” is an extremely playful act and receiving a spanking from one’s spouse is also an act of submission as it is an exercise in trust. When you allow your spouse to spank you, you are telling him that you trust him completely not to hurt you. The danger of course in spanking is that it can lead to sadomasochism. That’s why caution must be employed to make sure that the spanking remains playful and no real pain or injury takes place. That is not to say that there cannot be some mild pain, but anything that last for more than a few minutes or leaves marks is taking things too far.
Humiliation is a common BDSM activity that has absolutely no place in a Catholic marriage. Spouses should not degrade one another and if one spouse finds an activity degrading the couple should not engage in that activity. Though “talking dirty” is fine, spouses should not call each other degrading names like slut or whore. At the same time, an activity can be humbling without being humiliating. For example, being naked in front of a group of strangers would be humiliating though being naked in front of your spouse may be humbling but it is not humiliating. Kneeling naked in front of your spouse and performing oral sex is certainly humbling, but it is also a self-giving act of loving submission (In this example I am of course assuming that the husband will not climax from oral sex).
The argument may be made that though I am technically correct in that while light bondage and playful spanking are not inherently sinful, they still may be occasions of sin or a slippery slope leading to sadomasochism. This is not an argument that I will dismiss out of hand, and it does raise a valid point. However, if we avoid anything in life that may be fun or interesting, we will live a very boring life. Drunkenness is a sin but unless you are an alcoholic it is not reasonable to avoid all alcohol lest you drink to excess. Letting sexual intimacy grow boring or stale within a marriage is also a profound danger to a marriage. I would argue that if a couple finds that these activities bring excitement to the marital bed and add to intimacy, their benefit in preventing staleness is outweighed by the danger of falling into sadomasochism. This criticism is also built into my own argument. This is why I recommend only engaging in lighter activities. It may be possible to engage in more extreme activities without them becoming sadomasochistic but the risk is probably too great. The mindset of the participants is also critical. Using light bondage to carry out a rape fantasy is extremely disordered while using light bondage as a symbol of trust between spouses and a gift of one spouse’s self to the other is a beautiful expression of marital love.
Kinkiness can have a place within a Catholic marriage. If one spouse is kinky and the other is not, it may be beneficial for the non-kinky spouse to indulge the kinky spouse’s needs from time to time. At the same time, the kinky spouse should do his utmost to keep things as light as possible and recognize the gift he is receiving. If, however, there are grave reasons to avoid these practices, then the couple should abstain completely. For example, if one spouse has past sexual trauma that may be worsened by BDSM. In any case, all of this requires trust, maturity, and communication between spouses. However, staying within the confines of what the Church teaches, Catholics should never be afraid to limit the ways in which they can express marital love.
