Talk:Celibacy

celibate homosexuals

some Christian denominations also suggest some form of celibacy for LGBT people who are willing to convert Okache Dawit Yohannes Wonah (talk) 23:17, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

typical conceptual failure

Looked not only at current full text of article but the archives as well and nowhere is there apparently a definition in terms that are matter of fact. Is it proposed that celibate men never ejaculate? Ejaculation would be considered sex by most ppl, so the real distinction is in having sexual partners. Why is basic stuff hard? Lycurgus (talk) 10:36, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

In this case, definitions are difficult because people have different ideas about what the word does/should mean. Up until the middle of the previous century, I understand that the definitions for a man worked like this:

• celibate: he's not married, even if he is regularly having sex (e.g., with prostitutes) or is planning to get married in the future
• chaste: if he's married, he only has sex with his wife; if he's unmarried, he doesn't have sex
• abstinent: not engaging in any (or in specified) sexual activities. This includes temporary and/or involuntary abstinence (e.g., while recovering from a serious illness).

It is under these definitions that one could say that Pope John XII was celibate but neither chaste nor abstinent.

Also, the definition of what counts as "having sex" varies by time, place, and culture. This should be familiar if you remember a US president declaring "I did not have sex with that woman". WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:30, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Right, in that case a contemptible mendacity was evident in implicitly saying that oral sex, presumably anything other than penetration wasn sex. At least the above acknowledges an issue (sort of). The sexual instinct is discharged in males during conscious ejaculation. In an objective sense this is having sex. So again, why is this hard? The stuff above refers to a detritus of lang and culture without addressing this forthrightly, giving the musty recall and evasion of that fact. We can leave it here, this isn a serious venue, and I wanted there to at least be something in the back matter that pointed out this issue. Common sense says that for males in the prime of life, a sensical definition of the celibate is no sexual activity with any other living being (which FTR i call 'quorum sex' requiring at least two actual participants), but not no sex at all which for males poses physiological questions also missing. Religion is the domain of confused, old and illogical thinking but this is a practical term which has uses outside that. I'm sure in a medical context it's made clear. Lycurgus (talk) 11:18, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

I think you're looking for the article on sexual abstinence.

By the way, there's a discussion on one of the village pumps about anti-religious bigotry among Wikipedia editors. No matter how deeply felt the sentiment, it's not a good look. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:26, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Looks are subjective, I think it's a very good one. The moral very high ground in fact. Also it's not bigotry any more than disliking any evil which ppl can and will eventually change rather than their essentialy unalterable identities is bigotry. It's righteous disapproval and other good things. If there are two articles about the same thing, a merge may be in order, if not then a clarification of the distinction would be. You may have the last word if you like. Lycurgus (talk) 19:10, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

I doubt that a WP:MERGE proposal would be successful, but you're welcome to try it, if you'd like. I think the first point you'd need to make is which of the three obvious candidates (Celibacy, Sexual abstinence, and Chastity) you want to merge, and why (or why not, if you leave out one). WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:33, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Celibacy and masturbation?

A clarification would be needed for the definition of celibacy: Is a person who has a habit of masturbating but does not have sexual intercourse with other people celibate or not? Flux66 (talk) 13:51, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

In the traditional definition, which is a synonym for unmarried, it wouldn't matter. The person is celibate unless and until they get married, and no amount of sexual activity changes that. One hears the occasional news story about Catholic priest who is caught having children; the priest who hasn't married his mistress is still celibate, and one who has secretly married her is not.

In the more modern definition, i.e., when we use celibacy to mean chastity, it would depend on whether the activity in question is considered by that person/community/culture to be a sexual activity. For example, in some cultures, it's ordinary to exchange a kiss socially; in other times and places, that was a sexual activity. I would not expect a one-size-fits-all answer to that question. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:31, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Odd image

Ali Boutemtam78, I wonder why the strange image of an 18th-century Italian friar was repeatedly included. It's neither necessary for the article nor typical; moreover, it's at least odd. For some reason, the part of the explanation stating that this garment was worn *for a funeral* was omitted each time. We don't know in which region or in which order such masks were worn at funerals at that time. Incidentally, the person depicted is clearly not a monk. (The tense was also incorrect, among others, religious still live celibate lives). Please do not reinsert it. Medusahead (talk) 09:11, 27 October 2025 (UTC)