I Luv the Chariot OH Posted March 31, 2005 Posted March 31, 2005 I've known this guy for 2 1/2 years, and now we've been dating 3 1/2 months. He's a great guy, but I won't get into that. He's not a virgin, but I am (and I hope to stay one until I've found the person I want to spend my life with). According to him, sex is the 3rd most important thing in a relationship, after liking each other and loving each other (though I think liking and loving each other are the same thing), but I don't agree. I think any relationship that relies so heavily on sex is using it as a crutch, and if it can't exist happily without it, it shouldn't exist at all. We were arguing abortion on Monday night. I'm pro-life and he's pro-choice. It came down to him asking, if we had sex and I got pregnant, would I abort the baby? I said no. His response then was "Then that means I can never have sex with you" And he broke up with me on the spot. This was over the phone though, and by the end of the conversation (after much crying on my part) he revoked it, so I guess we're back together. I suppose it comes down to this; here is a guy who claims to love me, but would break up with me at the mere thought of not having sex with me. But that's a little oversimplified. I know he does care about me a lot, otherwise he'd go after an easier girl, since pretty much anyone else in existence would be easier to sleep with than me. But it seems to me that he places sex at a higher importance than people (ie. me). So...I guess I need advice. Any is welcome (especially the non-virgin perspective).
tanbark813 Posted March 31, 2005 Posted March 31, 2005 In my opinion, physical intimacy is as important as emotional intimacy in a relationship. Ideally, you want to be able to connect with someone on a physical, emotional, and intellectual level. There are also incompatabilities that can arise in any of these 3 areas that can all cause problems down the road. I mean, what happens if you get married, and then find out that you guys have completely different sex drives or are into different things? It's not uncommon for sexual incompatabilities to break up a marriage. A healthy sex life is as important to a relationship as any other aspect of it. By no means is it a crutch. I'm not trying to change your beliefs or anything, but I think you're doing yourself and your relationship a disservice by assuming that because your bf wants to have sex with you, then that must mean sex is more important to him than you or the relationship is to him. That's not necessarily the case. As for the abortion argument you guys had, I think he was just using that as leverage and manipulation to get you to change your mind on the sex issue. I doubt any guy would really decide not to have sex with a girl just because she didn't agree with his opinion on abortion. That was lame on his part, but guys can be babies when sex is withheld. Anyway, you're obviously entitled to your beliefs and position on the matter, but I really don't think you should hold it against the guy too much for wanting to have sex with you. That's just how we're wired.
Author I Luv the Chariot OH Posted March 31, 2005 Author Posted March 31, 2005 I'm not questioning his claim that sex is important, because no doubt it is. But that he would break up with me because I won't have sex with him, doesn't that mean I'm just another girl to him?
tanbark813 Posted March 31, 2005 Posted March 31, 2005 Originally posted by I Luv the Chariot OH doesn't that mean I'm just another girl to him? Maybe. But it also might mean he's just bad at handling rejection.
tyreas Posted March 31, 2005 Posted March 31, 2005 I would toss him to the curb. I mean come on, if he really loves you he would wait until you are ready. 3 1/2 months is not long enough to demand sex(not that there is a timeframe). This guy is a loser. I am pro choice but would never force a girl to have an abortion. The baby is HER choice, I was stupid enough not to pull out. I already made my choice.
Author I Luv the Chariot OH Posted March 31, 2005 Author Posted March 31, 2005 Well, he said he will wait until I'm ready, but the only time I'll really be ready is when I'm sure he's the one I want to marry, and he's pretty much against marriage, so it's sort of a paradox. The only timeframe he gave me was that he wouldn't wait longer than a year. But if you love someone, aren't they worth a year of your life?
tyreas Posted March 31, 2005 Posted March 31, 2005 Originally posted by I Luv the Chariot OH But if you love someone, aren't they worth a year of your life? No they aren't worth a year, they are worth a lifetime. People use "love" lightly.
HoldOn Posted March 31, 2005 Posted March 31, 2005 I think two people need to share their basic values in order to have a solid relationship. Or at least be respectful of the other person's basic values. Here, you two are at a major impass. He doesn't respect your decisions or opinions. I don't think this relationship is good for the long term and will end sooner or later. So, I don't think you should have sex with him, you'll just end up hurt when it doesn't work out. I also think that you shouldn't have sex unless you can cope with the possible consequences, such as an unplanned pregnancy. If you decided to have sex with him and accidentally got pregnant, it sounds like he wouldn't be supportive. BTW, my bf and I also had the abortion conversation before we ever had sex. I am pro-life. He asked me what would happen if I accidentally got pregnant and I said I would never have an abortion. He was a little wigged out by that, I guess. But now he knows where I stand and we both know the possible consequences of our actions.
paradox Posted March 31, 2005 Posted March 31, 2005 I think he is immature and I would definitely not rush into sex with him. Wait until you are confident that if you will he is not gonna leave you afterwards. Perhaps he likes the chase. Don't let him pressurise you! If he trully loves you he will wait for as long a time as you need and if he'll leave you because of it then he's not worth it and you should be gald you never done it with him in the first place cause that means he was not as much in love as he claimed and there would be a high risk of him leaving you afterwards.
paradox Posted March 31, 2005 Posted March 31, 2005 Don't stick to his deadline. Do it when YOU feel ready
Author I Luv the Chariot OH Posted March 31, 2005 Author Posted March 31, 2005 tyreas: I agree, that's why I was trying to imply. That fact that he tells me he's been deeply in love with 3 girls by the age of 20 sometimes makes me wonder about his ideals for love. HoldOn: It's always good to share values with anybody you associate with, just because it makes getting along much easier. But I don't think that just because you disagree on an important issure, you should cut yourself off from someone, or not bother trying to make things work. I don't see eye to eye on important issues with my friends all the time, but it doesn't make me want to stop being friends with them. paradox: I'm not so much afraid of him leaving me right afterward, I'm pretty much certain he wouldn't do that. I'm worried about him leaving me at all, be it even a year from now, because I don't want to have sex with him unless he is the only one I'm ever going to have sex with in my life.
curiousnycgirl Posted March 31, 2005 Posted March 31, 2005 I agree with Holdon - shared values are a very basic requirement to a lasting relationship. You understand that physical compatability is important, you just believe you need to wait. I say stick to your guns and if he cannot respect that - then there are more fundamental problems in the relationship. NEXT!
HoldOn Posted March 31, 2005 Posted March 31, 2005 HoldOn: It's always good to share values with anybody you associate with, just because it makes getting along much easier. But I don't think that just because you disagree on an important issure, you should cut yourself off from someone, or not bother trying to make things work. I don't see eye to eye on important issues with my friends all the time, but it doesn't make me want to stop being friends with them. It's true that you can "get along" with people better when you have shared values. But that's not what I am talking about. You are not trying to be "friends" with this guy. You are trying to decide whether to marry him or not. You are trying to decide whether you want to merge your lives forever, live together every day and raise children and grandchildren. And I also said that even if you don't agree on basic values, you MUST be respectful of the other person's opinion. He is not respectful of your opinion because he doesn't care that you feel it is important to wait to have sex. he is not respectful of your opinion because he broke up with you for being pro-life. Hello, red flags! Even if you can't agree, you have to agree to disagree.
Cecelius Posted March 31, 2005 Posted March 31, 2005 Originally posted by HoldOn It's true that you can "get along" with people better when you have shared values. But that's not what I am talking about. You are not trying to be "friends" with this guy. You are trying to decide whether to marry him or not. You are trying to decide whether you want to merge your lives forever, live together every day and raise children and grandchildren. And I also said that even if you don't agree on basic values, you MUST be respectful of the other person's opinion. He is not respectful of your opinion because he doesn't care that you feel it is important to wait to have sex. he is not respectful of your opinion because he broke up with you for being pro-life. Hello, red flags! Even if you can't agree, you have to agree to disagree. It's not a "red flag" for him to have his positions, conclude that his were incompatible with hers and break up with her. That's just being realistic.
clynn Posted March 31, 2005 Posted March 31, 2005 Originally posted by I Luv the Chariot OH Well, he said he will wait until I'm ready, but the only time I'll really be ready is when I'm sure he's the one I want to marry, and he's pretty much against marriage, so it's sort of a paradox. The only timeframe he gave me was that he wouldn't wait longer than a year. But if you love someone, aren't they worth a year of your life? I guess I wonder why you're going out with him if you're both far apart on what your intentions are. If it is just to pass the time, then just keep passing time . . . .
HoldOn Posted March 31, 2005 Posted March 31, 2005 Originally posted by Cecelius It's not a "red flag" for him to have his positions, conclude that his were incompatible with hers and break up with her. That's just being realistic. By "red flag", I mean red flag for the relationship in general. Not saying that he is a bad person. It's still a little rude of him, though.
jazzandcookies Posted April 1, 2005 Posted April 1, 2005 I think this guy is wasting his time with you. 1. He doesn't believe in marriage 2. You won't have sex unless you will marry the guy Why are you wasting time with each other? Go find someone that would be willing to marry you. Let him find someone to have sex with.
WithOrWithoutYou Posted April 2, 2005 Posted April 2, 2005 Tanbark's comments in this thread so far are very wise, and I substantially agree with them. It does sound like you and your BF's values are very different. You want to lose your virginity only to the man you want to marry, and have that man be the only man you ever have sex with for your entire life. He wants to enjoy a realationship with you (with all that a relationship normally involves by his value system - and I think his views on sex [i'm not referring to his views on abortion here] are pretty close to the views of the majority of Americans today), and see where it goes without constraints on where it must go, or on what can happen if you are not yet sure that is where it is going. It also sounds like you are very conservative (and also religious, perhaps), and he is somewhat liberal, but that alone doesn't necessarily mean a relationship can't work if love is there (look at Mary Matalin and James Carville). That said, I really think his breaking up with you when you said you would not abort the baby if you got pregnant by him was WAY over the line. There is just no need for a conversation about that to get so heated, since there are ways to avoid pregnancy that are 99.999% effective (such as the use of both birth control pills and a condom) that will virtually eliminate any possibility of anyone needing to think about abortion anyway. I think you should both definately take a long, hard look at where you are going, and whether it is worth pursuing. Maybe it is, or perhaps, it isn't. That is something the two of you need to decide together. You want a lifetime commitment, and he is looking for someone to share good times with, and see where it goes without restrictions or limitations on your time together or what you can share. That is in itself, somewhat of a conflict. Whether you can work through it (which would probably involving him slowing down a little, and you speeding up some), is a question only the two of you can figure out. He has said he will give it a year. I don't think I would look at that as an ultimatum. He's just saying that he doesn't want to be in an artificially restricted relationship with you for longer than that. He doesn't want to go without physical intimacy with the woman he loves for 3, 4, or 5 years, or feel like he has to "pop the question" before he can really enjoy all that a relationship with you could be (the emotional, as well as the physical). He obviously loves you, or he wouldn't be willing to give it a year without enjoying the things that people who love each other usually enjoy. Personally, I don't think either of your viewpoints are unreasonable, just very, very different. Different value systems work for different people, and there are many with both liberal and ultra conservative views on sex whose beliefs serve them wery well, and who are very happy with their lives. My values are probably somewhere in between those of you and yoru BF I think (I do think sex and physical intimacy are a very important part of any long-term relationship where people are in love, etc., and withholding that would be very hard on any relationship), but that doesn't mean that your viewpoint is wrong, and it certainly does not mean that you should lose your virginity to him if you are not comfortable with that. Play it by ear, see where it goes, and follow your heart. Know that as a man, he has needs, and I imagine that you as a women do also, and keep that in mind. Maybe at some point, it will just feel right, and you will want to pursue a physical relationship with him. Or, perhaps, at some point you may decide for sure that he isn't "the one" - and if your viewpoint about sex does not change, and you ever become sure that he is not the one, you should let him go.
moimeme Posted April 2, 2005 Posted April 2, 2005 (look at Mary Matalin and James Carville) I think they are mentioned often precisely because they are making their relationship work despite flying in the face of conventional wisdom. I suspect that they simply agree to disagree and never speak of their differences. This difference of opinion is over major aspects of relationships - sex and marriage. Of all value disputes, these differences could definitely be the most divisive. I think there is absolutely no point in these two continuing in a relationship - nothing will come of it but conflict which will eventually break them up anyway.
Recommended Posts