I take part in the 'Epicureanism' reddit forum mainly as a way to interact with folk not seemingly too far down the rabbit hole for purposes of connecting with "new" people and formulating "guidance" for when I start my own Epicurean group. Anyway, there have been a few posts about sexuality, pornography and masturbation in the last few months that are common and I have been taking some swings at that, and came away with what I think was helpful for me to organize my reading of Epicurean texts that can be confusing around these more stark and confusing ethics questions; and a second item which is a possible practice and solution for matters of consistent and virtuous Epicurean stances on common issues dealing with sexuality.
As for organizing:
There is difference between cannonical statements like:
“For my part I cannot conceive of anything as the good if I remove the pleasures perceived by means of taste and sex and listening to music, and the pleasant motions felt by the eyes through beautiful sights, or any other pleasures which some sensation generates in a man as a whole"
and passages that ought to be taken as meleta, or advice, to a specific person with issues:
"Sexual intercourse never helped anyone, and one must be satisfied if it has not harmed." - is advice or meleta, delivered to a specific person; probably a young man as in some of the dating and sexual advice found in Lucretius.
As for practice:
Philodemus wrote erotic poetry, and I'm wondering if other Epicurean sages did the same. In any case, the cultivation of expression through erotic writing ought to be considered among the Epicurean practices as a way of expressing sexuality as connection to and adoration of individual people; both from a perspective of human community and attachment but also to shield one's self or soul from the often vile and crassness of pornographic or human sexual objectifying culture and other cultural currents which tread upon the delicacy an sensitivity of intimate affections and natural sexual realities of our bodies.
I have been writing some saucy poetry myself after reconnecting with a beloved person, and it brings so much pleasure to use art to express such adoration when physical consumation is not in the cards; and leads to other forms of non-erotic expression of friendliness and soft affections in artistic inspiration. Allowing for sexual expression, even in poetry and prose, invites the flood of all other forms of care and concern for other parts of their human experience and we can begin to love and care for a person so deeply in so many other ways that can be fueled by just a bit more freer erotic expression.
I'll post what I originally wrote for a slightly more explicated take in my often meandering train of thought, philosophical writing style, haha!
"Thinking of sex or romantic, or otherwise emphatic love as 'goals' at all is the problem. Anyone who has experienced any real love that includes actual care for the person knows that love and sexual relations are ongoing forms of Friendship and require all the jollity, passion, creativity, suavity, tenderness etc that has nothing to do with knocking out a to-do list of achievments like it's a form of work or something; whatever this gross, crass culture here in the anglo-sphere want to denigrate delicacy and sensibility. Ongoing relation is the point, in order to understand the nature of self and other to achieve the telos of living pleasantly more usually with others; and you don't get that in porn or anything of the sort. I mean Philodemus expressed his sexuality in erotic poetry... I'm not sure if other Epicurean Sages did, but why is writing erotica not counted as a "practice" of Epicurean Philosophy? I quite enjoy writing some verbose, high-minded smutty stuff to my beloveds... particularly the ones I am never going to be sexual or particularly intimate with... Lots of great philosophers and men and women of letters did such things, and if that is embarrassing, silly or beneath you then that is your thing to figure out.
Furthermore, Masturbation or similar such things are also not a single dimensional act of physical self-pleasure, but an intense psycho-visual experience that has a uniquely powerful imprint on the Soul for most people and porn blunts and otherwise distorts the naturalness of the act and development of healthy, human sexuality, and affections for the person they desire balanced against inter-personal relationships and virtuous form. Arousal itself should be something reasoned about and discerned about what the soul is actually telling you concerning what generates sexual desires and arousal, and the psycho-social and historic reasons for such things in your particular case.
The problem is that these questions don't go deep enough into the actual nature of the soul-body, imo; rather than some problem of arranging our language games.
Many of you need to discern between Epicurean meleta and Epicurean Doctrine and Canon.
“For my part I cannot conceive of anything as the good if I remove the pleasures perceived by means of taste and sex and listening to music, and the pleasant motions felt by the eyes through beautiful sights, or any other pleasures which some sensation generates in a man as a whole" - canonical statement
"Sexual intercourse never helped anyone, and one must be satisfied if it has not harmed." - meleta, specifically to a younger man. Lucretius makes similar entreaties of advice to refrain from sex to his Memmius.