|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: What is it about Virginity?
|
jlg
What is this place?
Why am I here?
# 98
|
Posted
On sex with strangers working out , there have been a few comments along the line of
quote:
If you lose your virginity ...you not only have given a significant part of yourself to someone else....
and I always think to myself, "Huh?".
I have honestly never understood why people get so hung up on the idea of virginity per se (as opposed to the obvious desire of men to be sure of the parentage of their progeny and other practical considerations). For me it was just part of the continuum of sexual experience: first kiss, first gropes (of various sorts), first period, first shaving of "adult" hairy places, first tampon,first wet-dream, first orgasm, first oral sex, first vaginal penetration sex, first "late period" scare, first attack of killer menstrual cramps, first miscarriage, first pregnancy, first childbirth, first abortion, first hot-flash, first menopausal missing period....
Obviously some of these are out of one's control and some aren't (and my list is skewed toward female stuff), but why oh why is the "first vaginal penetration sex" the only one that is considered "a significant part of yourself"? To the point that people allow themselves to do all sorts of sexual things and consider themselves "virgins" and get on their high horses about it and predict the fate of any eventual marriage based on this one act out of all that vast continuum of sexual experiences.
I honestly don't get it.
Just to clarify things, I do not want a discussion of why premarital sex is wrong, the pitfalls or wonders of promiscuity, trite Biblical speeches about one's body being the Temple of God or what Paul said. I just want to know why you see vaginal penetrative sex and the breaking of the hymen as the defining test of one's sexual status and "a significant part of oneself".
[ 24. February 2004, 22:50: Message edited by: Duo Seraphim ]
Posts: 17391 | From: Just a Town, New Hampshire, USA | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
I share your puzzlement, jlg. When people ask me how old I was the first time I had sex, I ask them to define sex (please, no tired Clinton jokes). The experience of my first French kiss was so mind-blowing as to count as penetrative sex in my book, and it was all a continuum from there.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ags
Knocked up
# 204
|
Posted
I'm afraid I don't quite get it either.
The 'significant' part of me that is given and shared (and I know I'm very lucky to have a good relationship in which to do the safe sharing) is me! The hopes, fears, dreams, joys, insecurities etc. The really crap, bad stuff and the good too.
Yes, sex is one of the ways we share (& I don't want to go on a tangent here either), but my sexual 'status' is and always has been just a part of me.
I certainly don't consider that some guy who I've not seen for a very long time has some significant bit of me!
(Oh dear. I'm going to a shipmeet next month. Nobody will sit with me, or drink with me. ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif) )
--------------------
I think that we are most ourselves at our best, because that is what God intended us to be. The us we really like, the us that others love to be with. Moth
Posts: 2707 | From: London | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
I think a large part of the attraction of virginity is that virgins don't have anyone to compare their (first) partner to. After that first time, there's always the comparison between the current beau and previous lovers, even if it's only subconscious (unless you genuinely stick to one partner throughout your life).
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357
|
Posted
[Pretentious hat: On]
When a woman is a virgin, if a man sleeps with her and can prevent her from sleeping with other men, he can be pretty sure that any child is his. If she isn't a virgin, there is more doubt. (Or at least that's how it used to go)
--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.
Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.
Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kyralessa
Shipmate
# 4568
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by jlg:
I just want to know why you see vaginal penetrative sex and the breaking of the hymen as the defining test of one's sexual status and "a significant part of oneself".
Because I was brought up that way.
That was easy. Next question?
--------------------
In Orthodoxy, a child is considered an icon of the parents' love for each other.
I'm just glad all my other icons don't cry, crap, and spit up this much.
Posts: 1597 | From: St. Louis, MO | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
jlg
What is this place?
Why am I here?
# 98
|
Posted
Autobailer: I already mentioned that (did you read the OP?) and that's not the point.
Kyralessa: I was brought up that way, too. So why didn't I fall for it?
Posts: 17391 | From: Just a Town, New Hampshire, USA | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Saint Osmund
Pontifex sariburiensis
# 2343
|
Posted
Oh dear! ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
Picking up on what jlg said in her OP, what is sex?
I have a friend who insisted that she was a virgin until the point that she had a penis stuck inside her. She had done all sorts with men before that point. I shan't go into graphic detail, but in my view what she has done was sex, and so she was no virgin. But as far as she was concerned, 'sex' was the insertion of a penis into a vagina. She described the things she had done as "sexual acts", but not sex. I asked her how these acts could possibly be sexual if they weren't sex, and she couldn't answer.
I then went onto ask what she thought of me, as a male who would say that he has had sex, but has never inserted his penis into a vagina (and has no intention of so doing), and of women who have fulfilling relationships with other women, in which sex plays a part, but also who have never had a man play a part in this. Is this not sex, simply because it doesn't fit into the narrow definition that some people attach to 'sex'? Is this somehow inferior? Somehow defective?
I think not!
I think that before we can debate where virginity falls in the Christian view, we have to look seriously at how we define the term 'virgin', an if it is 'a person who has not had sex', then we need to define what 'sex' is! And no, there is no distinction between 'sex' and a 'sexual act'.
The latter term is a made-up one by people who want to have fun but still wish to describe themselves as virgins, which is simply wishing to have the best of both worlds, which is just a laugh.
Any thoughts?
M x
Posts: 2965 | From: here | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Emma Louise
Storm in a teapot
# 3571
|
Posted
(just being fascetious here... ) and what about those who have had a penis in their vagina but not enjoyed it? does that mean theyre still a virgin?
Posts: 12719 | From: Enid Blyton territory. | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kyralessa
Shipmate
# 4568
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by jlg:
Kyralessa: I was brought up that way, too. So why didn't I fall for it?
The very fact that you word it that way indicates to me that it would be extraordinarily difficult, if not impossible, to try to explain it to you.
I will say, though, that I don't agree with the "technical virgin" viewpoint. In my book any fooling with genitals was out of line; likewise anything necessitating removal of clothing. And I am one of those puzzled that oral sex has become the step before vaginal rather than after. Heck, though I wasn't myself this "puritanical" (the quotes are there for a reason), I had friends in college who didn't kiss before they were at least engaged.
I didn't have sex till I was 25 and married. I have not noticed my life to be much diminished as a result of this. But of course the fundamental problem in discussing these things is that you'll never know what it would have been like to follow my course, and I'll never know what it would have been like to follow yours.
[ 19. January 2004, 22:32: Message edited by: Kyralessa ]
--------------------
In Orthodoxy, a child is considered an icon of the parents' love for each other.
I'm just glad all my other icons don't cry, crap, and spit up this much.
Posts: 1597 | From: St. Louis, MO | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
Perhaps those that wish to think of themselves as morally strict find the idea of a "technical virgin" appealing because it's a handy black-and-white measure in the midst of a complex issue. This certainly would make sense if you try to think of these people as looking for simple explanations throughout their lives - spiritual, moral, or otherwise.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spiffy
Ship's WonderSheep
# 5267
|
Posted
You obviously haven't heard about the Born-Again Virgins. This article focuses on teens, but I've heard of women of all ages signing up. Never any men, though. Hmmm.
My youngest cousin (16) was showing off a ring she'd bought for herself at a family dinner. She announced that it was a Promise Ring--she'd decided she was going to wait until marriage to have sex. My sister and I (both [presently] unmarried and decidedly non-virgin) were the only ones to extend our support. Her mother's jaw dropped, I don't think she'd even considered the fact her little girl might be thinking about that. My mom actually tried to talk her out of it, which is funny since mom taught teen mothers for eight years.
I say anything that keeps her from being underaged and pregnant and a high school and/or college dropout is a good thing. But if she comes crying to me because she can't keep her vow at nineteen, I'm not going to chastise her. 'Cause, well, if she makes it to nineteen, she'll have beaten my record...
--------------------
Looking for a simple solution to all life's problems? We are proud to present obstinate denial. Accept no substitute. Accept nothing.
--Night Vale Radio Twitter Account
Posts: 10281 | From: Beervana | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Papio
Ship's baboon
# 4201
|
Posted
I think that the church tends to install a huge amount of paranoia into people re: sex and sexuality. I know that for the longest time, I thought I would be chucked into the fiery furnace of everlasting nastiness if I so much as acknowledge the possibility that I could find another human sexually attractive. ![[Projectile]](graemlins/puke2.gif)
Unless I was married to them of course, in which case the missionary position once a year might just be acceptable. ![[Eek!]](eek.gif) ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif) ![[brick wall]](graemlins/brick_wall.gif)
I don't think that, on the whole, people who have been indoctribated with such beliefs find it easy to have a causal, relaxed attitude towards either their sexuality or the sexuality of others. ![[Frown]](frown.gif) I mean, I am NOT saying I still belive this stuff in my head, but it's kind of like a emotional trigger in my head that I have to deal with.
(hey ho! There goes any chance I ever had of meeting someone )
--------------------
Infinite Penguins.
My "Readit, Swapit" page
My "LibraryThing" page
Posts: 12176 | From: a zoo in England. | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Well certainly the old ideal of two-virgins-marrying-and-being-faithful-to-one-another-forever does curb the spread of certain diseases.
I guess it depends on how important, spiritually, you think sexual relations are. If they're not terribly important, it probably matters less whom (and how many whoms) you do it with; if they're more important, it probably matters more.
Somewhere between the one extreme of total casual sex with anything with 2 legs on the one hand, and the stance that all sexual relations whatever are totally evil and heinous and desecrating on the other, somewhere in that vast middle ground there, is --presumably-- sanity.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Left at the Altar
Ship's Siren
# 5077
|
Posted
I suspect that it has to do with putting two sets of rude bits together. As opposed to one person's rude bit with another person's different bodily bits (hands, mouths) or two non-rude bits. Putting two sets of rude bits together is viewed as dangerous because it could lead to babies. It's also a very tempting thing to do for most people, so those who resist, or have no interest in doing it, sometimes wear it as a badge of honour. And advertise it as such.
Frankly, it's no big deal as far as I'm concerned. Full points for resistence, if you desperately want to do it, but don't. But I'd give the same full points to any hungry person who resists a plate of fish and chips for the sake of a diet. It shows that they are strong. But in the end, I doubt it makes them a better person than those who eat the food or have sex.
Personally, I am amazed that oral sex is not viewed as full sex by some people. Good grief! Putting someone's genitalia in your mouth (the very same one that you use to eat your Tim Tams and drink your Earl Grey tea)is not as intimate as putting it in a part you never see? Talk about denial. I went to school with a girl who gave blow jobs like there was no tomorrow, but prided herself on being a virgin. Yeah, right.
--------------------
Still pretty Amazing, but no longer Mavis.
Posts: 9111 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tortuf
Ship's fisherman
# 3784
|
Posted
Originally posted by Left at the altar quote:
I went to school with a girl who gave blow jobs like there was no tomorrow, but prided herself on being a virgin. Yeah, right.
Why do Shipmates who post this kind of thing never give names and addresses?
Posts: 6963 | From: The Venice of the South | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Timothy the Obscure
Mostly Friendly
# 292
|
Posted
Mousethief mentioned:
quote:
total casual sex with anything with 2 legs
Oh, Mousethief--you're so conventional...
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Timothy
--------------------
When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion.
- C. P. Snow
Posts: 6114 | From: PDX | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Did I say exactly 2 legs?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Scot
Deck hand
# 2095
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
The experience of my first French kiss was so mind-blowing as to count as penetrative sex in my book, and it was all a continuum from there.
I can relate to that. The French kiss lasted a lot longer though.
--------------------
“Here, we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it.” - Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 9515 | From: Southern California | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
that Wikkid Person
Shipmate
# 4446
|
Posted
It isn't wrong to open presents before Christmas.
I personally see marriage as an arbitrary time you set, after which time you are probably going to act differently in various ways besides just in how you'll fill out your Income Tax Forms.
That's why I feel the way I do about sex. I want to hold something back. I don't want to have sex with a number of partners (serially or simultaneously). I want one, and I feel like waiting for some sign that there's some staying power makes the thing more meaningful. (Delayed gratification) Exactly how that will work and exactly what and how much is fairly negotiable. I don't see how being "seen naked" by someone makes you not a virgin, but any stuff with genitals would seem to me to be sexual enough to make me feel that calling myself a virgin would be kinda silly, even if I could argue technicalities.
Virginity is something I am actively choosing and doing, not something I am abstaining from.
--------------------
We have only one truth and one reality. Let's make the most of them.
Posts: 1007 | From: Almonte, Ontario, Canada | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
I'm abstaining from virginity.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Left at the Altar
Ship's Siren
# 5077
|
Posted
Yes, but can you keep it up, Mousethief? You may give in at any time.
![[Biased]](wink.gif)
--------------------
Still pretty Amazing, but no longer Mavis.
Posts: 9111 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
well it comes in spurts, altar
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Left at the Altar
Ship's Siren
# 5077
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by that Wikkid Person:
It isn't wrong to open presents before Christmas.
It's just that if you tell the recipient all about the present, let her feel it, squeeze it, give it a shake, etc so that she knows vaguely what she's getting, but not let her open it until the sales are over and it's too late to exchange it, she might feel that it's not worth the wait and go somewhere else for Christmas. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
--------------------
Still pretty Amazing, but no longer Mavis.
Posts: 9111 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gmixolydian
Shipmate
# 2653
|
Posted
jlg, it was my post that you quoted at the beginning of this thread. I must say that either I have rather poorly explained myself, or you have jumped to conclusions and misunderstood me.
Nowhere did I say that sex was the only significant thing you can give to a partner (I said it was A significant thing). There's a lot of ways you can show your commitment to a bf or gf- even spending several months or years in a non-sexual relationship with the same person is a commitment, which will hurt if it ever does end. At the same time, the impression which has been given to me by hearing friends talk about their sexual experiences is consistently that they did not realize how significant it was until it had already happened.
I think it's an odd, insane brand of legalism which causes people to do everything but actual vaginal penetration, and think that's somehow ok, but penetration of the vagina wouldn't be.
I also think a lot of spiritual and psychological mentors would support the concept that sex is more than an act- but more like a very spiritual thing of extreme significance in anyone's life. Can anyone vouch for this?
Posts: 133 | From: Canada | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Firenze
Ordinary decent pagan
# 619
|
Posted
I like the idea - which I think I got from Esther Harding (Jungian analyst) in her book 'Women's Mysteries' - of the ancient idea that a Virgin Goddess was virgin not in the sense of never-had-sex (since they usually had a son) but in that they did not belong to a male. Therefore, virginity=autonomy.
So, in that sense, I am an enthusiastic virgin.
[ 20. January 2004, 07:14: Message edited by: Firenze ]
Posts: 17302 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gracious rebel
Rainbow warrior
# 3523
|
Posted
quote:
and it was all a continuum from there.
Well now, after 18 years of marriage, it all does feel like a continuum, but while I was still a virgin I felt very strongly that penetrative sex was the defining moment, the moment that must be delayed until I had a ring on my finger. Just that looking back it is hard to see what the big deal was, and like the OP said, just why that particular stage assumes so much importance.
In days gone by I guess it wasn't so much of an anomaly, since those who were virgins at marriage had most likely not had any sexual type experiences at all (well apart from kissing), but in today's world there are so manmy opportunities for sex, that people who decide they want to stay virgins, have to 'invent' a definition of what counts as virginity for them. and penetrative sex seems to be the classic definition that people use for technical virginity.
--------------------
Fancy a break beside the sea in Suffolk? Visit my website
Posts: 4413 | From: Suffolk UK | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nicodemia
WYSIWYG
# 4756
|
Posted
I'm wondering if there is an age-related thing here. Us older ones, brought up in a much more censorious age, were terrified that we would become pregnant if we had penetrative sex. Most girls wouldn't trust boys, female contraception was virtually impossible to lay your hands on, and even boys were rather nervous about going to their local chemists to "buy something". So, we made do with other more or less exciting sexual activities. ![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
I don't know how this relates to the US. But I got married in 1960, and had to produce date and evidence of my firm intention to get married before the Family Planning Clinic would let me have one of the more revolting and awkward forms of contraception. The Pill hadn't been invented!
Maybe all you freedom loving girls are a good bit younger than me? ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Nic
Posts: 4544 | From: not too far from Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nicodemia:
I'm wondering if there is an age-related thing here. Us older ones, brought up in a much more censorious age, were terrified that we would become pregnant if we had penetrative sex. Most girls wouldn't trust boys, female contraception was virtually impossible to lay your hands on, and even boys were rather nervous about going to their local chemists to "buy something". So, we made do with other more or less exciting sexual activities.
I don't know how this relates to the US. But I got married in 1960, and had to produce date and evidence of my firm intention to get married before the Family Planning Clinic would let me have one of the more revolting and awkward forms of contraception. The Pill hadn't been invented!
Maybe all you freedom loving girls are a good bit younger than me?
Nic
I got married 1967 and the Family Planning clinics were still demanding signature from the husband before they gave The Pill which was then out (and IMO we were being experimented on) or any other female contraceptive.
And they decided (I hadn't asked or expected any) not to do any vaginal tests on me "because she's only just started"!!! So, yes, there was a different culture around....
I think there is a technical physical "virginity", not having penile-vaginal penetrative sex, not having a broken or stretched hymen (tampax is still forbidden by some cultures), and also a psychological or emotional type of "virginity" which is for some reason not recognised by so many youngsters. Once you've got into a sexual relationship, and begun to do sexual things, your attitude and feelings change. You don't feel the same. That doesn't mean that many people don't feel different, physically and emotionally when they do have penile/vaginal penetrative sex.
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
3M Matt
Shipmate
# 1675
|
Posted
In my view the Biblical line is to not have sex till marriage. That is God's law.
However, it seems often overlooked that God's law is usually immensly practical.
I think there are good physical reasons (pregnancy, STDs etc) and emotional reasons why God says this.
What I personally can't abide is over spiritualisation of virginity.
The Biblical stance "Do not have sex unless you are married" is a classic example of a pre-condition. "Do not do X unless Y".
With sex we have somehow taken the "X" part of the above conditional statement, inverted it into the positive and made it into a sacred cow called "Virginity". To see how stupid this is is made clearer by anaology:
Suppose the Bible contained a law which said "Do not cross the road unless you have your eyes open". This is the same sort of instruction. It is a precondition on an otherwise permissable activity.
This would be an immensly sensible and practical law, but it would be bizzare to say the least if we took the X part of this condition clause (Do not cross the road) and then upheld the state of "not crossing the road" as holy and virtuous in it's own right and would have missed the point completely.
Yet that is exactly what Christianity has traditionally done. We have made Virginity rediculously mystical.
This maybe has something to do with the Mother of Jesus being a Virgin, but this again, is purely practical. It is nothing to do with the "purity" of Mary, but simply the practical point that if she were a married woman in a sexual relationship there would be no way of proving the child was supernatural. (Hence why Joseph has no sexual relations with her till the child is born..so as not to cloud the issue).
This has spilled over into the institutional church, celebacy of priests and nuns etc, as if virginity has some intrinsic holiness.
Finally, in the modern era, the most worrying aspect is the impact on modern evangelical teens for whom Christianity seems to amount to little more than a publically declared celebacy till marriage.
There is a severe danger of these kids beliving they are spiritually "ok" so long as they are not having sex, or, conversely, that they are spirtually bancrupt if they do. Virginity has become the be all and end all of pre-marital Christian morality.
None of which should be read as undermining the view that Christians should not have sex until marriage, just that inverting that to "Christians should stay virgins till marriage" puts a different slant on it which is unhelpful.
matt
Posts: 1227 | From: London | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
I_am_not_Job
Shipmate
# 3634
|
Posted
Answering the OP, because generally penetrative sex is how you get pregnant.
I can't understand the coldness with which some of the posters are addressing this aspect. Yes, patriarchy wanted to control who was there child, or evolution wants to ensure its heirs, but let's talk about the humanity of it. Creating a child is a gift, a responsibilty and an awesome thing. Contraception does not always work. It seems extraordinarily careless and cavalier to not really think about whether the person your bonking is the sort of person you want to share being a parent with. Let alone the psychological rammifications for that child should its parents not have thought this through (presumably most would agree marriage/life partnership being the most preferable option and then degrees of commitment and/or agreement on visiting rights down to total non-contact from one [both?] parents). Having sex without taking these considerations on has to be completely selfish, if you get down to the mechanics of it, seeking at best a (max 7 seconds? - let's start a competition girls ) orgasm, and risking creating a whole life.
I have been no saint in the past, but I certainly knew how stupid I was being. I'm not trying to be judgemental, I'm just trying to show the stark fact of the matter. I'm pro abortion in the case of rape etc. but a lot of 'inconveniences' are down to irresponsibility, IMO.
(Prepares for torrent of abuse from more open minded people )
--------------------
Hope for everything; expect nothing
Posts: 988 | From: London | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
HairyOrangutan
Apprentice
# 5224
|
Posted
quote:
I think it's an odd, insane brand of legalism which causes people to do everything but actual vaginal penetration, and think that's somehow ok, but penetration of the vagina wouldn't be.
As an odd, insane legalist, I thought I'd attempt to briefly defend my views. For me, the issue with vaginal penetration is the overtly baby-making action of it.
Being an RC who more or less agrees with the reaching on contraception; (vaginal, penetrative) sex is more or less inseparable in my mind from being open to having babies. If one isn't in a relationship where that's an option, then one shouldn't be having (v, p) sex. Which pretty much restricts it to marriage. And outside marriage allows more or less anything else.
But I should point out that it's only the reproductive issue which makes a difference. Were I to think that contracepted sex were permissible, I can't really see any reason why one should not engage in it with all and sundry (emotional baggage notwithstanding.)
Posts: 49 | From: Cambridge, UK | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
HairyOrangutan
Apprentice
# 5224
|
Posted
Er, yes. s/reaching/teaching/ in previous post, in case that wasn't clear.
Posts: 49 | From: Cambridge, UK | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gracious rebel
Rainbow warrior
# 3523
|
Posted
Well at least this person values her virginity. So much so that she is trying to sell it for £1000+ on e-bay!! ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
[ 20. January 2004, 14:38: Message edited by: Gracious rebel ]
--------------------
Fancy a break beside the sea in Suffolk? Visit my website
Posts: 4413 | From: Suffolk UK | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Caz...
Shipmate
# 3026
|
Posted
How hilarious!
Is it wrong that I'm now thinking about somehow reclaiming my born-again virginity and doing exactly the same thing????
--------------------
"What have you been reading? The Gospel according to St. Bastard?" - Eddie Izzard
Posts: 1888 | From: here to there | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
jlg
What is this place?
Why am I here?
# 98
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gmixolydian:
jlg, it was my post that you quoted at the beginning of this thread. I must say that either I have rather poorly explained myself, or you have jumped to conclusions and misunderstood me.
<snip>
I knew I was taking your words out of context, which was why I didn't attribute them to anyone in particular. With 20/20 hindsight, I shouldn't have put them in a quote box. My apologies. It was really just the phrase "...a significant part of yourself..." that struck me.
And I'll reiterate once again that I'm not looking at the practical aspects of avoiding penile-vaginal sex for reasons of disease and pregnancy prevention (both definitely items which deserve serious consideration), nor am I denying the role that sex (and fidelity within marriage) plays in creating a lifelong bond. I just find myself increasingly puzzled by the fact that people think of their virginity as "a significant part of [themselves]".
It seems to me that the significant part of oneself that one gives to another person is trust and caring and making oneself vulnerable to that other person. Virginity might be felt as a symbol of that "giving" of oneself, but except that we have been taught to think of it as something particularly precious, I don't think it has any intrinsic resonance greater than many of the other events I listed in the OP.
To be honest, I felt more of a sense of taking a drastic action each of the three or four times in my life I have suddenly cut my hair (from thigh-length to above my chin) than I did when I lost my virginity. My long hair, for some odd reason, seems to be a rather core part of who I am and I never feel quite myself when it is short.
Posts: 17391 | From: Just a Town, New Hampshire, USA | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
HenryT
Canadian Anglican
# 3722
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Matt the Mad Medic:
In my view the Biblical line is to not have sex till marriage. That is God's law.
The fun comes when we attempt to find this in the bible. I'll post into Kerygmania shortly...
On the main topic, one of Heinlein's characters remarked to the effect that virginity was "an easily cured perversity."
--------------------
"Perhaps an invincible attachment to the dearest rights of man may, in these refined, enlightened days, be deemed old-fashioned" P. Henry, 1788
Posts: 7231 | From: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kyralessa
Shipmate
# 4568
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by jlg:
...I just find myself increasingly puzzled by the fact that people think of their virginity as "a significant part of [themselves]".
It seems to me that the significant part of oneself that one gives to another person is trust and caring and making oneself vulnerable to that other person. Virginity might be felt as a symbol of that "giving" of oneself, but except that we have been taught to think of it as something particularly precious, I don't think it has any intrinsic resonance greater than many of the other events I listed in the OP.
We get dunked in water all the time, but the act of baptism is more than just getting dunked in water...and yet we still do the dunking rather than conclude that we can dispense with that and just focus on the "important part." (Yes, I know some groups don't baptize, but let's not get hung up on details...) Likewise, even many groups that don't believe in the Real Presence still take communion; they could just spend some time meditating on Christ's sacrifice or some such, but they use the symbol instead, because symbolism is powerful stuff.
--------------------
In Orthodoxy, a child is considered an icon of the parents' love for each other.
I'm just glad all my other icons don't cry, crap, and spit up this much.
Posts: 1597 | From: St. Louis, MO | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
I just posted this on another thread, but it wouldn't hurt repeating here ...
There is a perfectly good thread in Dead Horses on sex before marriage if you want to discuss that topic.
Alan
Purgatory host
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sheriff Pony
Shipmate
# 3911
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Henry Troup:
On the main topic, one of Heinlein's characters remarked to the effect that virginity was "an easily cured perversity."
Oh, Heinlein, that theological wunderkind!
Posts: 382 | From: Space! | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
"Virgins" have had some kind of power in myth. For example, a unicorn can only be caught by a virgin, and it comes and lays its horn on her lap .
Nowadays, in some places, it's believed that sex with a virgin will cure you of AIDS.
So is the power, the "magic" of virginity something that makes one want to think it is a vital part of one's self? Has the past, fairytales, myths, had such an influence?
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sheriff Pony
Shipmate
# 3911
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daisymay:
So is the power, the "magic" of virginity something that makes one want to think it is a vital part of one's self? Has the past, fairytales, myths, had such an influence?
Or is it the other way 'round. Because it's a vital part of one's self, it is mythologized to be magical and powerful?
--------------------
If we're all going to hell in a handbasket, can't we at least have a nicer handbasket?
Posts: 382 | From: Space! | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gmixolydian
Shipmate
# 2653
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by jlg:
...nor am I denying the role that sex (and fidelity within marriage) plays in creating a lifelong bond. I just find myself increasingly puzzled by the fact that people think of their virginity as "a significant part of [themselves]".
\
And isn't that bond a large part of what is the "significant part of themselves"? The thing is, once you've been "bonded" to one person in this way, it seems like it would be very hard to ever fully sever that bond, or ever fully recreate a similar bond with another person.
A friend of mine let her boyfriend take her virginity even though she felt rather iffy about him- but now she says that the thought of having sex with anyone else makes her want to vomit. If sex can create such a bond with "iffy boyfriends," I wonder what it could do for a well-thought-out marriage committment!
Gmix
PS- I am NOT saying that even in a marriage is sex somehow the miracle glue that keeps a couple together forever- (there's a lot more that MUST go into a marriage than just that)- but I do think it can help significantly in creating an intimate bond between husband and wife. Thanks for your thoughts, all. It's nice to have some honesty.
[Edited UBB bold in quote]
[ 20. January 2004, 22:52: Message edited by: Duo Seraphim ]
Posts: 133 | From: Canada | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gmixolydian
Shipmate
# 2653
|
Posted
Oops. Please omit the word "even" from first line of Post Script in previous post. Argh, sorry...
Posts: 133 | From: Canada | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
I had never been within a million miles of penetrative sex prior to our wedding night, but when I read the term "technical virgin" on the Ship some time ago it gave me more than pause for thought.
It stirred my conscience, and I perceived that my sexual intimacy seemed to have been violated in a previous relationship.
There's a lot in the Bible about our consciences and how they differ, and I think that different people will have very different thresholds at which they might have the same impression I had.
Yes, we were virgins on our wedding night. But I think I could have been more of a virgin .
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kyralessa
Shipmate
# 4568
|
Posted
As a side note, perhaps, it seems that a lot of people think, at least subconsciously, that those who are virgins when they marry must have some sort of aversion to sex, and that even when they're married and it's finally OK, they couldn't possibly enjoy it very much.
I suspect this is because the sort of people who would preserve their virginity until marriage are also not the sort to go bragging about their sexual prowess or adventures in public. Therefore those who believe that virgins-till-marriage have it so miserable are not likely to encounter any evidence to challenge their assumptions.
--------------------
In Orthodoxy, a child is considered an icon of the parents' love for each other.
I'm just glad all my other icons don't cry, crap, and spit up this much.
Posts: 1597 | From: St. Louis, MO | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
that Wikkid Person
Shipmate
# 4446
|
Posted
Ya. If I came onto the Ship and said "I had sex with three different women last week" I would probably get much fewer and less nasty comments that I'd get if I said "three women offered to have sex with me last week and I turned them all down and don't regret it for a minute"
If I said the latter, I'd likely get "You're probably lying about the women" and "Hope you feel righteous, ass!" and "What were you doing wrong to make them offer to have sex with you? Were you asking for it? Were you wearing tight pants?" and "You should wear a sign if you aren't going to put out"
--------------------
We have only one truth and one reality. Let's make the most of them.
Posts: 1007 | From: Almonte, Ontario, Canada | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Left at the Altar
Ship's Siren
# 5077
|
Posted
Perhaps if you turned them down without publicising it to the world, no one would even feel the need to comment.
--------------------
Still pretty Amazing, but no longer Mavis.
Posts: 9111 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sheriff Pony
Shipmate
# 3911
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kyralessa:
As a side note, perhaps, it seems that a lot of people think, at least subconsciously, that those who are virgins when they marry must have some sort of aversion to sex, and that even when they're married and it's finally OK, they couldn't possibly enjoy it very much.
Do "a lot of people" really think this? Or does it just "seem" that "a lot of people" really think this?
And if so, are they merely trying to salve their own consciences by assuring themselves that even if they weren't virgins, at least they had better sex?
Quite puzzled.
At any rate, it's an assumption I'd like to challenge. ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
Posts: 382 | From: Space! | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jenn.
Shipmate
# 5239
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by that Wikkid Person:
Ya. If I came onto the Ship and said "I had sex with three different women last week" I would probably get much fewer and less nasty comments that I'd get if I said "three women offered to have sex with me last week and I turned them all down and don't regret it for a minute"
This might be true, I don't know. But this isnt what you have been saying. You have been saying that women all want to have sex with you, and you let them get intimate with you and then push them away. Sorry to be harsh but it sounds to me like you are leading these girls on. Don't put yourself in such a precarious position. If there is a really steep cliff you don't want to fall off you dont walk as close as you can to the edge - you stand away from the edge.
Posts: 2282 | From: England | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
