Sexual jokery (erotic jokery) in religions:--

religion as source of jokery------------------------------religion as butt of jokery

Islam:-- Because of the doctrine that each man hath a qarinah (supernatural sexual partner) who would be jealous of his wife; the official doctrine is that men ought to divorce wives frequently, before the qarinah hath enough time to build up much jealousy. Because of the doctrine that oath-breaking is divinely punished, any rash oath is officially expected to be upheld.

Regarding these official doctrines as absurd, husbands' favorite joke is that they swear to divorce their wife.

Christianity (Catholicism):-- Because of the doctrine that there are no marriages in heaven; therefore persons (viz., in religious orders) who are endeavoring to maintain the semblance of the heavenly order, will not tolerate any [marital-style, i.e., heterosexual] sexual behavior. Because they tend to have some sexual desires, monks and priests are driven into practicing homosexuality; and because of the idealization of young children ("Be ye as little children"; the Infant Jesus, etc.), therefore they (priests) are forced, nilly-willy, into committing paederasty.

Laymen are afforded much merriment by the spectacle of priests caught committing paederasty; so much so that it re-enforceth their determination to maintain the rule requiring caelibacy (non-marriage) on the part of the religious (those in holy orders). The monks and priests, on their part, are content to play their ro^le (as homosexuals and paederasts) with much gusto, aware of the delight of merriment that it affords to their parishioners. The nobility also see the antics of the religious are delightfully amusing, on a level similar to monkeyshines. [Hence the numerous drolleries involving monkeys in the books of Canonical Hours of Jean, Duc de Berry.]

Buddhism:-- Similarly as with Christianity. Remarkable features include the fact that whereas the Buddha reputedly laid down the rule that no monk was to have an orgasm [or seminal emission] other than in a dream, there is a lack of any literature praescribing and describing proper etiquette for any such sexual encounters in dreams -- and this despite [in Vajra-yana] abundant [and, it might be added: useless and frivolous, from the point of view of praescriptions for monkish behavior by way of Vinaya] depictions (in pornographic sytle) of [hetero]sexual intercourse between male and female deities.

To provide praescriptions of proper etiquette for the sexual behavior of monks in dreams would be a serious matter, rather than so absurd as all the other monastic regulations [the ones which are written down in detail] must definitely appear to laymen. The same persons who laugh at the contrast between monastic celibacy and the pornographic depictions of deities, are doing so actually because they think it a matter for great merriment that monks could be so stupid as not to be able to realize that they are in violation of the divine code of conduct by refusing sexual intercourse for themselves.

American Indian customs:-- one of the expectations (Cocopa tribe, in AZ) is that women should wish to press their vulva against every man's face; and also that men of other tribes [thought of as too insane to consent to this] would have to be compelled. In consequence, they slaughter [in warfare -- engaged in only for this] and behead men of other tribes, giving the decapitated heads to their own women, so that the women can press their own vulva against the face of the head.

Parenthetically, it may be noted that statements "Christ the head of the body, the Church", etc. regarding the head (only!) of Christ as married to the lower body-parts of the "Church" which is a woman is intended as a titillating lewd allusion to a man's applying his face to the lower parts of a woman's body: this is supposedly written by a cleric praetendedly ignorant of the sexual content -- all this praetended ignorance being in good fun, calculated to amuse the audience of layfolk.

African temples:-- here (Igbo tribe, Biafra), the temples display life-sized idol-couples in the form of a woman having sexual intercourse with a dog; and in the form of a man having sexual intercourse with a she-goat.

These displays of bestiality are intended to amuse, and thus delight, onlookers. The amusement of the layfolk stemmeth from considering the obtuseness of the clergy in not realizing that they are in violation the ways of the divine world when they refuse to commit bestiality personally.