I'm a Virgin...

[berrieh]

-Why? Simple. Thats just my personal bias. I am entitled to one, aint I?

 

Well...I don't believe anyone is neccesarily "entitled" to be sexist...but maybe that's just my personal bias.

[exclusivelyME]

Right, but if girls should save themselves, while boys should have experiences... who can they have those experiences with? Oh, those girls who did what they shouldn't have done; of course!

 

It's an awful double-standard that promotes sexism.

 

P.S. How does "she can be older" factor into waiting till marriage? Are you saying they should sleep with married women?

 

 

Just because I believe women should save themselves and men shouldn't necessarily doesn't mean they both will. That is a HUGE misinterpretation.

 

No, that's not what I'm saying. Divorce, anyone? You know, it does exist. But that isn't point. I made a generalization. That is to say NOT ALL PEOPLE WILL FOLLOW IT. That is what you have to understand. While MANY girls may wait, there are those that won't so there will be those chicks to "experiment" with. I just said the older woment bit to add to the list of potential female partners.

[exclusivelyME]

Well...I don't believe anyone is neccesarily "entitled" to be sexist...but maybe that's just my personal bias.

 

Everyone is entitled to believe in whatever they choose. You're entitled to believe I'm sexist--which I'm not, BTW

[berrieh]

Everyone is entitled to believe in whatever they choose. You're entitled to believe I'm sexist--which I'm not, BTW

 

A double standard for men and women requires a sexist attitude.

 

From dictionary.com, sexism is: "Attitudes, conditions, or behaviors that promote stereotyping of social roles based on gender. "

 

Isn't that what you just said above - that you believe each gender has their own social role in regard to sexuality?

[norajane]

-Why? Simple. Thats just my personal bias. I am entitled to one, aint I?

 

Your bias comes from somewhere. There IS no valid, logical reason or purpose for a man to need much more sexual experience than a woman before he marries. So where is this bias coming from if not from any kind of logic? Is it just blind adherence to the misogynist beliefs of those around you? That men are free to cat around while women must remain pure? There is no purpose for that.

 

I'm hoping that you'll consider this rather than just blindly holding on to your bias.

 

And some men do acknowledge that virtue. Are you telling me you'd be perfectly fine with your woman having slept with as many or MORE men than you have woman? (I'm assuming you're a guy. If not, please correct me)

I don't judge people's value and worth - men or women - by the number of people they've had sex with.

 

Your question clearly shows that you DO believe women lose their value if they have sex with men and that they are supposed to remain virgins in order to retain their value in the eyes of men. And that men should look down on women or feel insulted or somehow invalidated or emasculated if the woman he marries has had as many or more partners than he.

 

You are reducing the value and worth of women to ONLY what they have to offer to men - their virginity and sex. Women are far, fare more than their sexuality. They have much to offer, and sex is one small part of what they have to offer to men, women, children, their communities, and the world. You do yourself a disservice as a woman if you believe their virginity is all they have to offer that is valuable, and you do MEN a disservice if you think that's all they value in a woman.

 

-I didn't say women didnt deserve it--dont misinterpret. I simply stated it was unrealistic. Again, my personal bias

 

-I explained the math in my above comment

Your math doesn't add up. For a man to have many sexual partners, while women remain virgins, the only women men can have sex with are already married to someone else, whores, or other bad girls/unworthy and no-longer-valuable women who "gave away" their precious gift...women you look down upon.

[Gremio]

I don't judge people's value and worth - men or women - by the number of people they've had sex with.

 

And why not? It's a smart judgement. It doesn't matter male or female, if a person is in their 20s and has had sex with over 100 people, you don't think of them any differently? Obviously they don't respect themselves or others, so why would they deserve mine?

 

I can think of two scenarios that happened to me directly. A friend I knew for years, we brought up the topic of sex. She was around 24 at the time. She told he she had slept with 22 people at that point in her life. I thought different of her after that. It means she uses her body to connect, that she doesn't use her mind, her intellect.

 

Another male friend I know is absolutely a slut. He has been with well over a 100 women, so many he doesn't even remember 50% of them. It sounds funny and I am exaggerating a bit, but I'm not comfortable even sitting in the same chair after he does.

[berrieh]

Gremio, I agree that there's nothing wrong with judging by numbers. I don't view anyone as bad or corrupt...but I do make judgements. But my judgements don't change based on the gender of the person in question.

[norajane]

And why not? It's a smart judgement. It doesn't matter male or female, if a person is in their 20s and has had sex with over 100 people, you don't think of them any differently? Obviously they don't respect themselves or others, so why would they deserve mine?

 

I can think of two scenarios that happened to me directly. A friend I knew for years, we brought up the topic of sex. She was around 24 at the time. She told he she had slept with 22 people at that point in her life. I thought different of her after that. It means she uses her body to connect, that she doesn't use her mind, her intellect.

 

Another male friend I know is absolutely a slut. He has been with well over a 100 women, so many he doesn't even remember 50% of them. It sounds funny and I am exaggerating a bit, but I'm not comfortable even sitting in the same chair after he does.

 

You're talking about people who would never get close enough to a real relationship to get anywhere near marriage.

 

In the context of the question I was asked, no, I wouldn't judge someone who had more sexual partners than me as unfit for marriage.

[Gremio]

You're talking about people who would never get close enough to a real relationship to get anywhere near marriage.

 

In the context of the question I was asked, no, I wouldn't judge someone who had more sexual partners than me as unfit for marriage.

 

What if someone you had a committment to had a large amount of partners, e.g. let's say 100 by the age of 30. How would you feel about them? Would you be comfortable? Would you see them as "dirty", which most people often think of when finding something like that out.

[norajane]

What if someone you had a committment to had a large amount of partners, e.g. let's say 100 by the age of 30. How would you feel about them? Would you be comfortable? Would you see them as "dirty", which most people often think of when finding something like that out.

 

I wouldn't think of them as "dirty". There's usually a reason someone seeks out a large number of partners - sometimes it is the result of past sexual abuse, parental neglect or abandonment, or other psychological issues that drive them to seek validation or attention in the arms of other people.

 

I could not be in a position to make a commitment to them because whatever internal issues are driving them to pursue meaningless sexual experiences would prevent them from developing a close relationship leading to commitment with me or anyone else. Not until they had done some significant therapy or sought out other means of help to understand their issues and overcome them.

 

You have to look beyond the surface as human beings are just that - human.

[tobe]

Hello

 

I found this thread to be interesting. I am an attractive woman who has chosen not to have sexual intercourse yet. However, at this moment in my life, I feel that it is unhealthy not to experience love or love making. I feel that my body and soul needs it. For many years, I chose not to have sex with guys because of many reasons. I was focused with school, did not want to get pregnant, catch any diseases, and I never really felt that connection to proceed with anyone. What I am trying to say is.... find someone that you love.... and enjoy the pleasure of love and sex. I know that one day I will find that special someone and enjoy it! If you can have sex now enjoy it. Now, that I will be turning 30 soon I see life in a different way...enjoy it now....live in the moment. As for me.. I think I am mature and ready now to find someone who I can connect with in all levels and enjoy the wonderful sex!

[exclusivelyME]

norajane,

I did not say a man NEEDS more sexual experience than a woman. This is a very iffy topic and I continue to be misinterpreted. What I'm saying is that a man is more prone to lose is virginity before marriage and at a younger age and, as a result, HAVE MORE SEXUAL PARTNERS than a woman. The logic behind my reasoning is history. It is the way I been brought up, the beliefs that have come entrenched in my mind. I do not expect my future husband to be a virgin when we tie the knot--the odds on that one arent in my favor. But many of the males I associate with DO expect or in a subconscious manner, WANT to be the first in their woman's life.

 

When it comes to a considerably LOW number, no. There is no reason for ANYONE to have to had slept with the whole world--man or woman. If a man were to tell me he has slept with an extremely large number, yeah, I would look at him differently. I'd see him as a guy who isnt looking for a serious relationship and one which I couldnt see myself taking seriously in a potential relationship. A man would see a woman in the same situation as a whore--an easy in. It'd be hard for him to see that woman as potential wife and mother of his children.

 

No, I do not. Its not a question of whether the woman is a virgin or not but rather how many she's been with. You're twisting up my words--that is not what I mean at all.

[norajane]

norajane,

I did not say a man NEEDS more sexual experience than a woman.

 

No, actually, you said they should:

 

Overall, I think guys should lose their virginity at a younger age than girls and I think that over a lifetime, should also have a considerably greater number of sexual partners. Now, I'm not saying that its ok for a guy to sleep with the entire female population so don't get me wrong. I think guys should 'experiment' more before meeting that special one, or simply that one he'll later choose to marry and be committed to.

[exclusivelyME]

No, actually, you said they should:

 

Do they mean the same thing? If you think they do, I am doing a poor job of portraying what I mean to.

[norajane]

Do they mean the same thing? If you think they do, I am doing a poor job of portraying what I mean to.

 

SHOULD is a recommendation, as in they are supposed to do this.

 

You should brush your teeth everyday.

Men should have more partners than women do.

 

If all you're saying is that you expect men will have more partners than women because "boys will be boys", then I see no reason why women should save their virginity for men or why women should have fewer partners than their husbands do.

[spookie]

Virgin brides are less likely to divorce. It's something like 80% marriages work for virgin brides, and 50% for non virgin brides.

 

Hence the importance on sex is misplaced according to the stats.

 

Hence nothing. Hence you are misinterpreting correlation for causation.

[MissTiger]

Sex is special and it's nothing to play with. It takes two to tango and I wonder if most non-virgins realize that. Sex is treated as being cheap and it makes me sad to know it's being treated that way.

[berrieh]

It takes two to tango and I wonder if most non-virgins realize that.

 

I don't even know what you mean by that, but I'd assume most non-virgins do realize that two people are involved in sexual intercourse. They'd have first-hand knowledge.

 

Just because someone doesn't view sex as something solely within the confines of marriage doesn't mean they don't view it as special and it doesn't make it cheap. I think it's a fallacy that being with only one person makes it more special.

 

Making something "rare" is one way of making it special, but it's certainly not the only way. In economics, scarcity is used essentially to "jack up" the value (i.e. oil companies lower production to raise prices) of a commodity. If that's what you want to do to sex, I view that as cheapening it more than using sex when you want to express something within a relationship (or, if you're into it, even outside of one).

[MissTiger]

I don't even know what you mean by that, but I'd assume most non-virgins do realize that two people are involved in sexual intercourse. They'd have first-hand knowledge.

 

Just because someone doesn't view sex as something solely within the confines of marriage doesn't mean they don't view it as special and it doesn't make it cheap. I think it's a fallacy that being with only one person makes it more special.

 

Making something "rare" is one way of making it special, but it's certainly not the only way. In economics, scarcity is used essentially to "jack up" the value (i.e. oil companies lower production to raise prices) of a commodity. If that's what you want to do to sex, I view that as cheapening it more than using sex when you want to express something within a relationship (or, if you're into it, even outside of one).

 

Why does only being with one person make sex false? It is special, it shows the other person that you waited to be with him or her for a very long time.

[berrieh]

Why does only being with one person make sex false? It is special, it shows the other person that you waited to be with him or her for a very long time.

 

I didn't say it made sex false, and I have no problem with people who want to wait and only be with one person, for themselves. I said that I view the idea that it's more special that way to be a fallacy (commonly false idea) based on the idea of viewing sex as a commodity, where scarcity makes it more valuable.

 

Sex isn't a commodity. So, scarcity has no purpose in terms of value. The value of sex depends upon the people involved, the circumstances, and the unique feelings. Not numbers etc. If it is a commodity, I think that cheapens it.

[MissTiger]

Oh okay, I see where you're coming from.

 

I just despise the fact that most of the time that me and the other virgins out there as looked down upon. Usually we're seen as not knowing any better or we just can never get a date or something. But we know what we're doing, we're just waiting till our wedding night.

 

So it wasn't like in the movies for your first time, but that's you. Who's to say that it will be like the movies for the one's who haven't lost it yet?

[Green]

Oh okay, I see where you're coming from.

 

I just despise the fact that most of the time that me and the other virgins out there as looked down upon. Usually we're seen as not knowing any better or we just can never get a date or something. But we know what we're doing, we're just waiting till our wedding night.

 

So it wasn't like in the movies for your first time, but that's you. Who's to say that it will be like the movies for the one's who haven't lost it yet?

 

So are you going out on dates? Do you have a mutual connection with any guys right now?

[vanilla87]

So after reading countless post here I'm going to throw in my own two cents...

 

Okay so both sides are right, but both sides of the argument are also wrong. Everyone has a different view point and belief, which is healthy if you ask me. Conflict like this is good.

 

Anyway, I'm not a virgin, but one of my best friends is still one. Her fiance is too. They are getting married two years from now and they will be about 23 by then.

 

See the thing is I worry, cause I've had sex and know what bad sex is like and fantastic sex is too.

 

In the bible I know they say sex before marriage is a sin, but see idk, this is just my opinion, not fact, but when you look at today, the only reasons people get divorced is because there is no love and they have high expectations about needing passion and romance and are just not aware of comfortable silence and quiet evenings and just good conversation, which is a very good thing to have for a marriage. I have relatives that I've seen go into marriage virgins and end up getting divorce, more so for the lack of passion or the lack of compatiblity, mostly cause of finding out that the physical stuff didn't work especially after they had kids.

 

Sex is very liberating with the right person and the right frame of mind. With the wrong person, you'll end feeling foolish and stressed out and just wondering how the heck you ended up in bed with someone you don't mesh with on that level.

 

Also STD's? Worried about 'em? then stay safe! get tested every 6 months and use condoms and birth control together if your extra paranoid. Also be open with communication about sex with a partner is high recommended in keeping things from going sour.

 

I think thats the one thing I notice about virgins: they are deadly afraid to talk about sex and use the proper medical terms in reference or anything that is more then the missionary position, which explains why when one watches tv or a movie with a sex scene they get highly uncomfortable and need to change or fast forward quickly, but also non-virgins like myself can sit through an entire episode of the tudors and the image of two people fornicating on a bed doesn't making me squirm because I already know that it happens when you do the act itself.

 

I have a huge lis of stuff I'd like to add, but I'll wait till someone makes a valid counter argument back to say more.

[vanilla87]

Oh okay, I see where you're coming from.

 

I just despise the fact that most of the time that me and the other virgins out there as looked down upon. Usually we're seen as not knowing any better or we just can never get a date or something. But we know what we're doing, we're just waiting till our wedding night.

 

So it wasn't like in the movies for your first time, but that's you. Who's to say that it will be like the movies for the one's who haven't lost it yet?

 

lmao, sorry but um, sex for anyone their first time, is rocky. Go ask your parents or someone that was a virgin till after they got married to know what it was like, and if I'm correct, they will state that it was not all fireworks and birdies singing out music to your ears. Cause sex the first time, you usually don't know what to do, no matter how many times you see it in the movies or read about it or learn about it, till you've actually leanred to put your hands in the right spots, know where to move and where to kiss and what to do with your body, you will be confused and also for the girls it kind of hurts, cause your tight down there and it'll have that resembling feeling like when you get a shot with a big needle, cause of the pressure that happens down there from stretching out the area. All I can say, practice makes perfect with the right person...

[gd26]

...and I'm proud of it. Sex is overrated and I see my virginity as a rare and precious gift, like a diamond. I want my husband to be the only lover I'll ever know. I want my husband to be a virgin as well. I'd be disappointed if he didn't wait for me,our marriage bed would be pretty "crowded" if you know what I mean.

 

Any virgins here agree with me? And is there anybody who doesn't?

 

Good for you. I just posted on another thread on this topic... but I am a 27 year old virgin. I am not religious, I simply wait because I feel it is a good thing to do, as it is a responsible way to live. I am happy to still be one, and have no regrets. Unfortunately most of the men I meet these days are no longer virgins, but they know that if they want to be with me, they will have to wait until we are married before sex.

 

This may greatly reduce my dating pool... but I don't mind. I find that the guys who are willing to wait tend to be far more genuine and decent guys. So I'm cool with it. I will wait. I'm not worried about 'test driving' anything, because I want to be with someone who I genuinely love. If I truly love someone and marry him, then I care more about him than his sexual performance. I'll take him for whatever he is... it's okay by me. I don't need to test him out first.