12

Reconsidering Solitary Sex from a

Jewish Perspective

Rebecca T. Alpert

W E L E A R N A lot about something by examining the words we use to de-

scribe it, where they come from, how they sound, what they evoke. Things
related to sex usually have many descriptive terms, and the act of stimulat-
ing our own genitals for sexual satisfaction is no exception. I use the term
“solitary sex,” but there’s also the slightly more sexy technical term “auto-
eroticism” and the many slang terms that may also come to mind (I’ll spare
you the list, but you can look it up). The most common English word to
describe these acts is, perhaps, “masturbation,” from the Latin, and the
least common is “onanism,” but both terms came into use around the same
time, at the end of the seventeenth century.1
The term “onanism” connects solitary sex to Jewish tradition in a cir-
cuitous way. It refers to the story, in Genesis 38, of Onan, a grandson of
the patriarch Jacob, the second son of Judah. Onan’s older brother, Er, was
married to Tamar. Er was in some unexplained way “displeasing to Adonai,
and Adonai took his life” (38:7). According to the custom known as le-
virate marriage, Onan was obligated to have sexual relations with Tamar
in order to provide a son for his brother’s line and, according to the text,
was directed to do so by his father, Judah. But Onan did not want to pro-
vide his dead brother with offspring, and so, we are told, he “let his seed go
to waste” when he had relations with Tamar. This, too, displeased Adonai,
and so Adonai took his life as well (38:9 – 10).
What was Onan’s crime? The most obvious conclusion is that it was
his refusal to comply with the task his father set for him, which was to im-
pregnate Tamar. So although the term “onanism” should refer to a refusal
to follow orders or to take a stance against the custom of levirate marriage,
it refers instead to the method Onan used to accomplish this act, namely,
“letting his seed go to waste.” Commentators disagree, however, about

182

Ruttenberg_pp105-190.indd 182 3/3/09 4:23:55 PM

 Reconsidering Solitary Sex from a Jewish Perspective 183

what “wasting seed” means. Some argue that it refers to coitus interruptus
(withdrawal of the penis from the vagina before ejaculation). The text tells
us that Onan had sexual relations with Tamar, so that would seem to be a
logical conclusion. But those who coined the term may also have believed
that, by masturbating, a man weakens his ability to impregnate a woman,
and so they assumed Onan masturbated in order to avoid his obligation.2
Hence “onanism” is defined in the dictionary as both withdrawal before
ejaculation and solitary sex, and even, in some cases, all sex that does not
involve vaginal penetration.
Thinking about onanism in reference to solitary sex has strong prec-
edent in the Babylonian Talmud, where Onan’s crime is used as a proof
text to support an antipathy toward male self-arousal. The deed is emphati-
cally condemned in the Mishnah: “Every hand that frequently checks: in
women, it is praiseworthy but in men you should cut it off ” (Nidah 2:1).
The text does not support female masturbation; in fact, the Gemara here
assumes that women can check because they will not experience a sensa-
tion through self-examination (BT Nidah 13a). This viewpoint, however,
is inconsistent with other rabbinic passages. One text in BT Avodah Zarah
44a3 indicates an awareness that women used phalluses to masturbate, and
comments about lesbian behavior indicate that the Rabbis were aware that
women rubbed against one another (presumably also by themselves) to
achieve orgasm (BT Yebamot 76a).4
But this text is concerned primarily with men, not women. Although
it reinforces women’s obligation to check their genitals for any flow that
might indicate the start of their menses — defining their entrance into their
monthly state of nidah, or seclusion — its main focus is to remind men, in
no uncertain terms, of their obligation to refrain from touching their pe-
nises because, as the Gemara explains, it may lead to self-arousal. Whether
that arousal is intentional or unintentional doesn’t matter; the Gemara’s
only concern is with the resulting semenal emission. But although the
Rabbis warn against all possible emission of semen, they take particular
notice of self-arousal with intent to achieve pleasure.
The Gemara that focuses on intentional self-arousal (BT Nidah 13b)
makes it clear that this is unacceptable because it will result in terrible and
dangerous consequences, including having one’s hand cut off. According
to Rav, “anyone who willingly causes himself to have an erection will be
banned by the community.” Rabbi Ami calls such a person a “renegade”
(avaryen) and blames the yetzer ha ra (the evil inclination) for inducing
a temptation that the masturbator cannot resist. Rabbi Ami assumes that

Ruttenberg_pp105-190.indd 183 3/3/09 4:23:55 PM

 184 Rebecca T. Alpert

self-arousal will ultimately lead a man down a slippery slope that ends in
idol worship. The connection to Onan is attributed to Rabbi Yosi, who
suggests that “anyone who incites himself lustfully is not brought into the
precinct of the Holy One, blessed be He” (in other words, one who arouses
himself will not be welcome in the World to Come) because he, like Onan,
“did what was displeasing to the Lord.” Death, Onan’s fate, would also be
the fate of the lustful inciter. Finally, Rabbi Eliezer is credited with accus-
ing masturbators of “committing adultery with their hand,” citing Isaiah
1:15 (“Your hands are full of blood”) in support.
The discussion in the Gemara concludes by considering whether the
mishnaic punishment, to cut off a man’s hand, is a law or merely a curse.
According to Rabbi Tarfon, it is better to be without a hand than to end
up “descending into the pit of destruction.” Although it is unlikely that
masturbation was a crime that was actually punished, and the Gemara is
inconclusive as to whether cutting off the hand is a law or simply a curse
that serves as an admonition, the text gives us a sense of how strongly the
Rabbis felt about the evils of male self-arousal and the lengths to which
they would go to warn against it.
So, according to Jewish tradition, solitary sex is unthinkable for men
and rarely considered for women. Men who masturbate are doing wrong
because they should work to control their impulses. A man’s yetzer ha ra
needs to be managed through appropriate sexual engagements with his
wife. It is important to remember that, unlike Onan’s obligation simply to
produce an heir for his dead brother, those sexual encounters were sup-
posed to result both in procreation and sexual pleasure for both partners,
as concretized in the law that a man is required to satisfy his wife sexually,
known as onah. As long as sex was channeled properly, it was not viewed
negatively. Just about any sexual position was considered acceptable in
marriage, as was contraception in certain circumstances. But orgasm, even
if viewed positively, was to be experienced only within the context of ap-
propriate relationships, and certainly not by individuals in solitary exer-
cises that encouraged sexual fantasy or had the potential to turn them away
from their social obligations.
To understand the rabbinic view of solitary sex with the goal of mov-
ing Jewish thinking beyond negative pronouncements, it may be instruc-
tive to look at the parallel case of homosexuality.
The most obvious similarity between these two phenomena is the way
the differences between same-sex desire is described in men and women.
In the Hebrew Bible there is no same-gender sexuality for women and

Ruttenberg_pp105-190.indd 184 3/3/09 4:23:56 PM

 Reconsidering Solitary Sex from a Jewish Perspective 185

no allusion to female masturbation, whereas lying with a man as with a

woman is famously prohibited twice in the Torah. Although later rabbinic
texts pay little attention to the possibility that women indulge in solitary
sex, they do approach lesbianism negatively. The transgression is still mi-
nor, however, compared to male homosexuality, and is not taken seriously.
Much speculation surrounds the question of why the Rabbis did not
take women’s sexual desires seriously, since women’s reproductive capaci-
ties are of great import in ancient Jewish texts. It is surprising in part, given
the existence of onah, which demands that men satisfy their wives’ sexual
desires. Of course, these laws may have emerged because of the link the
Rabbis make between sex and reproduction, and the concern may not be
at all about a man satisfying his wife’s desire for sex but, instead, her de-
sire to have children. It is also possible that in ancient Judaism sexuality
was only “real” if it involved a penis, which is also assumed necessary in
the brief mention of female masturbation in Avodah Zarah. But then the
prohibition against women rubbing their clitorises against one another
for sexual satisfaction, as found in BT Yebamot 76a, would also make no
sense. We simply do not know why women’s sexuality wasn’t of concern to
the Rabbis. Whether they believed that women really did desire men and
motherhood to the exclusion of other possibilities or what women did in
private was of no concern or interest to them, it remains our legacy that
only what men do matters, for better and worse.
We are left, in any case, with a gender divide that does not speak to our
present reality. As Jewish lesbians began to become vocal, demanding a
presence in the community, the world of traditional Judaism responded by
emphasizing the few negative statements in our ancient texts about female
same-sex love. However, no such effort has been made either to redeem or
condemn solitary sex for women.
The reasons given in opposition to solitary sex and same-sex love are
also similar. As we saw in the discussion of BT Nidah 13a – b, the Rabbis
were concerned that male self-arousal would lead a man down a slippery
slope: if a man can’t control his urge to give himself an orgasm, the think-
ing goes, how can he avoid the greater temptations of idol worship or
nonkosher food or the gymnasium? The Rabbis also may have held to the
notion that frequent masturbation would weaken the man’s capacity (or
interest) in satisfying his wife. The same argument is made on the subject
of homosexuality. In explaining why male homosexual sex is considered
toevah (generally translated as “an abomination”), the Rabbis pun on the
term and suggest that in fact it means to say toeh ata ba, “you will go astray

Ruttenberg_pp105-190.indd 185 3/3/09 4:23:56 PM

 186 Rebecca T. Alpert

because of it.” Again, the temptation to be involved in homosexual or soli-

tary sexual experiences are not necessarily bad in themselves, but they are
understood as leading a person in evil or destructive directions and away
from the goals of a well-lived life.
The last similarity between solitary sex and homosexuality brings us
back to the term “onanism” and the related derivation of the term “sod-
omy.” Both are based on stories in the Book of Genesis, and on surpris-
ing interpretations of the relevant texts. Although the Rabbis adopted the
story of Onan as their proof text for solitary sex, they did not for the most
part attribute homosexual behavior to Sodom; many Christian commen-
tators did, however, and hence the prevalence of the term in European
thought prior to the modern era. It is important for us to remember that,
just as Western culture has been influenced by stories from the Hebrew Bi-
ble, Jewish teachings have also been deeply influenced by ideas of the host
societies in which Jews have lived — Muslim, Christian, and secular. Not
only do negative views defined by the terms “sodomy” and “onanism” have
roots in Jewish tradition, but Jewish views on masturbation and homosex-
uality in modern times have also been influenced by the negative Western
attitudes (both religious and medical) toward these acts. Throughout the
modern era, sodomy and onanism were given broad public discussion and
approbation in European thought. The historian Thomas Laqueur has ar-
gued that the term “onanism” was coined in 1712 in response to a grow-
ing social acceptance of sexual pleasure in marriage, as well as concomitant
concerns that masturbation might appear to be acceptable and, because
of its private nature, uncontrollable. It is in that era when the idea that
masturbation caused warts, syphilis, and blindness (to name only a few
imagined consequences) began. Sigmund Freud shifted the nature of the
concerns about solitary sex from the physical to the psychological, but he
also argued that, like homosexuality, masturbation was an immature sexual
response that was harmful if not outgrown.
In our own world today, we have witnessed a significant change in at-
titude regarding same-sex desires as the movement for LGBT (Lesbian,
Gay, Bisexual, Transgender) rights has had a powerful impact on public
behaviors and policies. The women’s movement has made it clear that both
women and men have same- and solitary-sexual desire and participate in
same and solitary sexual behaviors. The sexual revolution has also helped
rehabilitate solitary sex. Those who write about the topic today note a
shift from earlier eras. Beginning in the 1980s, they argue, masturbation

Ruttenberg_pp105-190.indd 186 3/3/09 4:23:56 PM

 Reconsidering Solitary Sex from a Jewish Perspective 187

came to be seen as a valid way for people to express themselves sexually,

and a healthy habit.5 But even with these changes, sexual self-arousal is still
considered by many to be immature, harmful, even dangerous. Mention-
ing masturbation in public certainly was dangerous for Joycelyn Elders,
the Surgeon General who was dismissed from her post in 1994 for recom-
mending that schools teach about solitary sex as a positive outlet and a
means of preventing sexually transmitted diseases.
When I taught an undergraduate course on religion and sexuality, I
gave students the assignment to write a paper about any issue of sexuality
from the perspective of three of the world’s religions. The students who
wished to write about masturbation (and there were several) were unable
to do the assignment because they couldn’t find sufficient information to
write viable papers, beyond the book by Thomas Laqueur from which I
draw the title for this article.6 It’s time to reconsider the value of this widely
practiced activity that “dare not speak its name.”
To rehabilitate solitary sex from a Jewish perspective, it makes sense to
return to the perspective of the Rabbis. They presented strong arguments
to suggest that solitary sex should not be judged as an end in itself but be-
cause it is a means to a (harmful) end and leads its practitioners to danger.
Given contemporary perspectives, however, rather than seeing mastur-
bation as a means to harmful ends, we can find in this activity a way to
achieve valuable goals.
Self-care is an important Jewish value. Maimonides was a strong pro-
ponent of “maintaining physical health and vigor so that the soul may be
upright and in a condition to know God” (Mishneh Torah Hilchot Deot
4:14). Though once considered an unhealthy practice, studies today show
that masturbation has advantages for sexual well-being.7 As boys and girls
learn to give themselves orgasms, they learn an important technique to re-
lieve stress. They also develop the capacity to engage in fantasy and learn
what arouses them sexually.8 At the same time, encouraging young people
to engage in solitary sex may help them avoid the real physical dangers of
other forms of sexual experimentation that can lead to harmful ends like
unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. But it is also im-
portant to remember that solitary sex can have value for adults, both in
and out of relationships. For the adult in a long-term committed relation-
ship, solitary sex may also provide opportunities for relaxation, experienc-
ing sexual variety without going outside the relationship, developing a ca-
pacity for fantasy, and understanding what he or she desires. For the adult

Ruttenberg_pp105-190.indd 187 3/3/09 4:23:56 PM

 188 Rebecca T. Alpert

who is not in a relationship, masturbating has the advantages described

above and can also be an empowering way to satisfy sexual needs. This is
particularly the case for older people, who should be encouraged to mas-
turbate to keep their sex drive alive, as achieving orgasm has been shown
to have long-term health advantages;9 further, sexual response needs regu-
lar stimulation to stay in shape in the same way that our other muscles and
nerve endings do.
Preparation for sexual activity with others is another goal of solitary
sex. Solitary sex has the potential to lead to more comfort with one’s own
sexuality, and that extends to making sexual connections beyond oneself.
The command to “love your neighbor as yourself ” (Lev. 19) can be under-
stood as an injunction to love yourself so that you can learn how better to
love others. In this paradigm, solitary sex provides an avenue of discovery
for enhancing and improving sexual intimacy for partners. If you under-
stand your own sexual desires and how to achieve orgasm effectively for
yourself, it is not unlikely that in the process you will also discover how to
please your partner and how to teach your partner to please you. Solitary
sex is limited because it does not create actual opportunities for intimacy
or the possibility of pregnancy. However, it can lead one in the direction of
understanding how achieving mutual sexual pleasure enhances the pros-
pects of achieving these other goals as well, on the principle that self-love
leads to love of others.
Privacy is also an important Jewish value and can be fostered by soli-
tary sex. We are taught that modesty (tzniut) is fundamental to Jewish eth-
ics. Solitary sex is modest because it happens in solitude, away from public
consideration. Jewish teachings encourage us to behave modestly, to hold
private that which we value as sacred. I am reminded of the scene in the
(very Jewish) film Borat where the protagonist becomes enraged when he
finds his business partner masturbating while looking at a photograph of
Borat’s “sacred” love object, Pamela Anderson. This scene describes the
antithesis of the values that properly modest masturbation aims toward.
Borat is right to be angry; masturbation and its attendant fantasies are
private matters. Jewish values encourage us to keep certain matters out of
public discourse and attention. Solitary sex can lead to an understanding
that certain things in one’s life should not be shared with others. This is
particularly valuable in today’s society, where everything is on display and
under surveillance. In this way solitary sex is unlike homosexuality. For gay
and lesbian people, making sexual orientation visible is crucial, as it has
created opportunities for political and social rights unknown in prior eras.

Ruttenberg_pp105-190.indd 188 3/3/09 4:23:57 PM

 Reconsidering Solitary Sex from a Jewish Perspective 189

What I offer here is a tentative effort to bring attention to a valuable,

safe, and potentially enriching activity that is often disparaged and ignored.
Rather than remaining tied to an ancient (or contemporary) negative per-
spective, it is my desire that this new Jewish approach to solitary sex, which
is open to its positive consequences, may increase possibilities for sexual
health and pleasure.

NOTES
I am grateful to Sarra Lev and Danya Ruttenberg for their helpful editorial com-
ments on this essay.
1. For a full discussion of the history of the definitions used to define the
practice, see Martha Cornog, The Big Book of Masturbation: From Angst to Zeal
(San Francisco: Down There Press, 2003), 3 – 14; for a list of slang terms in all
languages, see 15 – 22. Cornog distinguishes solitary sex from masturbation that is
a component of sexual activity involving others, as do I throughout this essay.
2. See Michael Satlow, “ ‘Wasted Seed’: The History of a Rabbinic Idea,” He-
brew Union College Annual 65, no. 1 (1994): 159.
3. R. Jose answered them: “But has it not been stated, And also Maacah the
mother of Asa the king, he removed her from being queen, because she had made
an abominable image . . . he made dust of it, and burnt it at the brook of Kidron!
. . . What means miplezeth [abominable image]? Rab Judah said: [An object which]
intensifies licentiousness [maphli’lezanutha] as R. Joseph taught: It was a kind of
phallus with which she had sex every day.”
4. Greco-Roman civilization was also aware of similar practices of female
masturbation. See Vern L. Bullough, “Masturbation: A Historical Overview,” Jour-
nal of Psychology and Human Sexuality 14, no. 2/3 (2002): 22 – 23.
5. See Arne Decker and Gunter Schmidt, “Patterns in Masturbatory Behav-
ior: Changes between the Sixties and the Nineties,” Journal of Psychology and Hu-
man Sexuality 14, no. 2/3 (2002): 35 – 48.
6. Thomas Walter Laqueur, Solitary Sex: A Cultural History of Masturbation
(New York: Zone Books, 2003).
7. See Eli Coleman, “Masturbation as a Means of Achieving Sexual Health,”
Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality 14, no. 2/3 (2002): 5 – 16. Coleman
cites research which indicates that masturbation is an early marker of healthy
sexual development. It has also been used as a technique to help those with hy-
poactive sexual desire disorder. See Brian Zamboni and Isiaah Crawford, “Using
Masturbation in Sex Therapy: Relationships between Masturbation, Sexual De-
sire, and Sexual Fantasy,” Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality 14, no. 2/3
(2002): 123 – 142.
8. Zamboni further argues that sexual fantasies are necessary in many cir-

Ruttenberg_pp105-190.indd 189 3/3/09 4:23:57 PM

 190 Rebecca T. Alpert

cumstances to stimulate desire, which in turn is necessary to achieve arousal in

single and dyadic sexual encounters (Zamboni and Crawford, “Using Masturba-
tion in Sex Therapy,” 139).
9. A recent biological study suggests that sexual satisfaction through the
production of prolactin is much greater (400%) in intercourse than through mas-
turbation, thus limiting, though not entirely, the value of masturbation for health
(Stuart Brody, “The Post-Orgasmic Prolactin Increase Following Intercourse Is
Greater Than Following Masturbation and Suggests Greater Satiety,” Biological
Psychology 71 [March 3, 2006]: 312 – 315).

Ruttenberg_pp105-190.indd 190 3/3/09 4:23:57 PM