Queen Zenobia Posted August 3, 2011 Posted August 3, 2011 It will kill your chances with him only if he values sex more than character. If staying pure means that's a deal breaker for him, then good riddance. Your attitude is refreshing, and rare in this day and age. Very admirable. There are men out there who value a women for her character and good qualities, and would respect her for having the morals that you have. My husband was a big-time player before I met him. His friends would tell me he'd go to some event and come home with five women's phone numbers in one evening. Never at a loss for female companionship. I was the only one of the bunch that showed any sense of morality. Guess who got the man in the end? So premarital sex = lack of morals and character? I'm not advocating taking home someone new every night but I mean that kind of approach to sex is rather antiquated. And I say this as someone who's only ever been with one man, so I'm not completely knocking people with more conservative ideals on sexuality.
Scottdmw Posted August 3, 2011 Posted August 3, 2011 Glad you brought it up. I've encountered this before and I can tell you a few things: * Majority of those researches are biased; i.e. were pre-ordered by the religious organization. * Most (and by that I mean 99%) of religious women don't actually know any better (it's a fact) and when asked if their sex life, a.k.a. their marriage (yes, those 2 are the same for them) is satisfactory, they would reply with a yes. * "Yet, during the same period the divorce rate has skyrocketed" - this attempt at correlating sexual freedom with divorce rate is futile; I can say that the divorce rate skyrocketed after the invention of the computer, or after the growth sprout of feminism or after a certain war or simply because a certain president was elected. Imagine this: Imagine you didn't know what chocolate(orgasm) is; Now, so far you've eaten your waffles(sex) w/o chocolate(orgasm) and then I come and ask you, how do you enjoy your waffles(sex)? What would you answer me? you'd say "I like my waffles(sex) very much" - now, this is true only because you don't know what you're missing on. My preference is not to live in the dark: I'd rather know about the chocolate and seek to get it, than not know about it and be satisfied with what I have. Ignorance isn't bliss HOWEVER, I do agree that there's a correlation between spirituality (not to be confused with religious) and good sex, especially for women. So, these particular studies were reported in USA Today, and done by Redbook, the University of Chicago, and Stanford. None of these organizations, to my knowledge, has a reputation as being religiously motivated or funded. Rather the opposite, they are widely accepted mainstream sources of information. I would say that lacking further evidence there is no indication of bias, and no reason for assuming it other than the results are different than what conventional wisdom accepts. There's more here than a simple correlation. You and others are making the positive claim that you believe experimentation with sex is good for marriage. Yet, we have a period in history when experimentation went up but marital happiness went down. Now, it is possible that experimentation is indeed good and was pushing marital happiness up during this period while some other factor which was much stronger pushed it down. That is possible. But, it seems to me unlikely. Sexual practice is far more likely to be linked to marital happiness than the other things you mention like computers or who is elected president. Feminism is a possibility, yet interestingly people also argue that that should theoretically help marriages. Even if you don't think this is valid, do you have any actual evidence to support your own claim that experimentation is beneficial to marriage? There is possibly something to your “ignorance is bliss” argument. Let me offer a counter-example though. I have heard that using crack cocaine is the most intense pleasure possible for a human being to experience. Yet, I'm very happy to remain ignorant of that. Remaining ignorant, I’m able to be quite happy with the levels of pleasure I get from things like food, work, exercise, and relationships. In your view, am I just keeping the wool over my own eyes and not experiencing all the world has to offer? I think experimentation with sex is similar. It may be true (though you have offered no evidence) that person can find more intense sexual pleasure if they shop around. However, are you sure that necessarily leads to better marriage? It may be that a person finds a sexual partner that they really like but that other person only kind of likes them, and ends up leaving. The person then has to live the rest of their life remembering how great that sex was but not being able to share that level with the partner they actually end up with. Is that a good thing for marriage? At that point it depends what your goal is. If your goal is to look back at the end of your life and know that you experienced the most powerful sexual pleasure you could at some point, then you would do what you suggest and shop around. If your goal however is to spend as much of your life as possible happily married to one person, I would say that having powerful sexual experiences with others is not going to support that goal except perhaps in the relatively rare cases when both members of a couple have their best sexual experience with each other, AND are otherwise compatible for marriage. Scott
Scottdmw Posted August 3, 2011 Posted August 3, 2011 Gotcha: http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2001/jan/23/healthandwellbeing.health2 Any encounter can end up in pregnancy, if woman keeps the sperm, and puts it in her vagina in sufficiently short time frame. Ah yes, the incredibly rare exception.
KathyM Posted August 3, 2011 Posted August 3, 2011 So premarital sex = lack of morals and character? I'm not advocating taking home someone new every night but I mean that kind of approach to sex is rather antiquated. And I say this as someone who's only ever been with one man, so I'm not completely knocking people with more conservative ideals on sexuality. I guess it would help if you knew the context of my perspective. I am a Christian who takes their religion very seriously, and takes God's laws very literally. I value and admire someone who has moral values. I think that shows character in a person who is not willing to sleep around. That concept is not antiquated, but it is rare. I do, however, know a lot of young people who have those values, but I realize they are not typical in today's society.
KathyM Posted August 3, 2011 Posted August 3, 2011 i havent had sex at 34 but i've had a dozen blow jobs. Im pure but your thoery is nutso. 34, huh? Could have fooled me.
Queen Zenobia Posted August 3, 2011 Posted August 3, 2011 I guess it would help if you knew the context of my perspective. I am a Christian who takes their religion very seriously, and takes God's laws very literally. I value and admire someone who has moral values. I think that shows character in a person who is not willing to sleep around. That concept is not antiquated, but it is rare. I do, however, know a lot of young people who have those values, but I realize they are not typical in today's society. I'm a Christian as well (and come from a conservative culture, more conservative than most TBH) but I don't think two people in a committed relationship who have sex are any less moral than two people who are married having sex. In this era of (relatively) easy divorce, there's really no difference between two people in a committed relationship and two people who are married except one has a piece of paper and the other doesn't. Sure you could argue that marriage vows are sacred but, they're clearly not sacred enough to keep people from violating them, even religious people.
KathyM Posted August 3, 2011 Posted August 3, 2011 I'm a Christian as well (and come from a conservative culture, more conservative than most TBH) but I don't think two people in a committed relationship who have sex are any less moral than two people who are married having sex. In this era of (relatively) easy divorce, there's really no difference between two people in a committed relationship and two people who are married except one has a piece of paper and the other doesn't. Sure you could argue that marriage vows are sacred but, they're clearly not sacred enough to keep people from violating them, even religious people. See, I don't define morality. God does. And if you're a Christian, you accept God's laws, and don't try to change them to suit your own purposes or desires. There are a lot of Christians out there that conform to society's standards of morality, but those are not in keeping with God's laws. Well, I really have to run and get to my homework assignments. Have a good day.
Lovelybird Posted August 3, 2011 Posted August 3, 2011 See, I don't define morality. God does. And if you're a Christian, you accept God's laws, and don't try to change them to suit your own purposes or desires. There are a lot of Christians out there that conform to society's standards of morality, but those are not in keeping with God's laws. Well, I really have to run and get to my homework assignments. Have a good day. Did you wait for marriage? Your husband must press you for sex before marriage?
Queen Zenobia Posted August 3, 2011 Posted August 3, 2011 See, I don't define morality. God does. And if you're a Christian, you accept God's laws, and don't try to change them to suit your own purposes or desires. There are a lot of Christians out there that conform to society's standards of morality, but those are not in keeping with God's laws. Well, I really have to run and get to my homework assignments. Have a good day. I think it's a matter of how you understand the morality of the Bible. If you think of it as a rigid code of rules and regulations, codes of conduct, and do's and don't's then I guess what you're saying makes sense. That's not what Biblical morality is to me though. Just a difference of opinion that's all.
Lovelybird Posted August 3, 2011 Posted August 3, 2011 i wont have sex before mariage but i demand daily blow jobs you sound more like sour grape than pure
Ross MwcFan Posted August 3, 2011 Posted August 3, 2011 Hmm, I thought catholicism was a Christian religion. One learns something new everyday on this forum.:laugh::laugh: I thought Christian and Catholic were two different things.
bluenightowl Posted August 3, 2011 Posted August 3, 2011 I understand that sex is very important in a relationship. However, I would really like to wait until Im married. Question, if im in a relationship and i tell him i would like to wait...is it going to kill my chances of keeping him around? It might, might not. It depends on the guy and his values as well. If he is the same as you, this could be bliss. I do really feel there is something to be said for sexual compatibility. I think the more experience a man or woman has, the more important this will become, because I think its hard to forget once you have had it. At the same time, a relationship and "LOVE" - caring for someone beyond sex is a very powerful force.
rafallus Posted August 3, 2011 Posted August 3, 2011 Ah yes, the incredibly rare exception. Only rare, because requires clear willingness or mind-blowing sloppiness. Technically, it isn't hard to pull off at all (unless it was anal or swallowed).
homersheineken Posted August 3, 2011 Posted August 3, 2011 The big deal is that in the 50s, most people waited. lol @ ........
Recommended Posts