Poll: Pre-marital chastity - Bad idea, or not?

[game-lover]

I don't necessarily think it's a bad idea. I can't think of a reason why it would be. Of course, don't necessarily think it's a good idea either.

Would I do it? Oh no way. To use that crude analogy--I need to test drive before I commit to a man.

But there are just as many merits to saving yourself for marriage as there are to not doing so.

 

[Kavonde]

EDIT: Also, "sexual compatibility" is something that takes work no matter the couple. Waiting until marriage won't change the learning curve. And besides, if you met somebody wonderful that had trouble, um... enjoying... would you want to give up on who could be the love of your life simply because he/she isn't perfect at the moment?

Not precisely what I meant by sexual compatibility. You might find out that you're not attracted to your partner's body type. Or that he or she unconsciously does something you find annoying during sex. Or, as has happened plenty of times in human history, it turns out that one (or both) of you is gay. Slightly more dramatic stuff than just needing more practice.

Not here to sway anyone to my views, by the by. Just putting some information out there for passers by to consider.

 

[JUMBO PALACE]

my opinion? FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK chastity. What's so special about sex anyway? I didn't feel a deep spiritual bond when I lost my virginity. I felt an orgasm. And I wanted to feel more of them.

 

[Daveman]

I wouldn't say it's a bad idea as such because hey, they can do what they like. However I think the reasoning usually behind that type of abstinence is wrong. Usually it is religious and I have serious problems with people who pick and choose which bits of the bible they agree with. For example I expect that they wouldn't have such an issue with doing work on the sabbath or eating pork or observing the rules about being "clean" in the bible, in fact just ALL of Leviticus. The other argument is that you should marry somebody not because of sexual attraction or lust. If that was the case I'd be gay as anything because most of the people I care about or get on with that aren't my family are dudes. Also assuming you can see them you're already allowing their physical side to impact on your opinion of them and are selecting them for their appearance subconciously.

 

[CrashBang]

It's entirely up to someone if they want to abstain until marriage. There's nothing wrong with it, exactly, unless everyone did it. If that was the case then we've just regressed a few hundred years
What I don't approve of is filth like the Jonas Brothers promoting it, selling the idea to kids who are, most likely, too young to even be thinking about sex anyway

 

[Agayek]

The way I see it is that enforced pre-marital chastity is a terrible thing. Associating a stigma, or even worse outright punishment, with pre-marital sex is just bad. It's a natural, biological imperative, and if the right precautions are taken, it's much healthier than the alternative.

I can't say that "saving yourself" is bad either though, to be honest. If someone doesn't feel comfortable with it outside of marriage, they definitely should not be forced.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that society can go fuck itself, especially those parts that try to control how people behave.

 

[Kiroy]

I always wanted to be in a long term relationship with the first girl I have sex with. You know, the whole first and only deal. I know this is unrealistic and probably will not happen but I can hope, right?

 

[Mr. Socky]

snip

Preach. That is how i feel and foud out through experience.
And that is why i have decided to stay on this path as well.

Believe me, I need no incentive to preach. I may, however, need incentive to shut-up. And yndsu, good for you.

EDIT: Also, "sexual compatibility" is something that takes work no matter the couple. Waiting until marriage won't change the learning curve. And besides, if you met somebody wonderful that had trouble, um... enjoying... would you want to give up on who could be the love of your life simply because he/she isn't perfect at the moment?

Not precisely what I meant by sexual compatibility. You might find out that you're not attracted to your partner's body type. Or that he or she unconsciously does something you find annoying during sex. Or, as has happened plenty of times in human history, it turns out that one (or both) of you is gay. Slightly more dramatic stuff than just needing more practice.

Not here to sway anyone to my views, by the by. Just putting some information out there for passers by to consider.

It's an interesting thought, but I believe that being gay is a choice, not a certainty. I view it as a genetic predisposition. And honestly, what half-of-a-couple doesn't do something to annoy the other half? This is pure conjecture, so don't hold me to this, but I wouldn't be surprised if people are more willing to try and work through sexual problems simply because the end result is so much fun. Learning to work through any form of marital problem is good for the relationship. I suppose that applies more to relationships in general.
I also get the feeling that I'm significantly more inclined to wait around for a relationship (rather than looking for it actively) meaning that when I'm in a relationship I tend to be substantially more insistent on fixing the relationship instead of starting over. This is probably one of my actually good personality traits (and in this area I imagine that good is relative in many people's eyes) so please don't think I'm taking a holier-than-thou position. I'm a little spaced out right now, so feel free to nitpick the above paragraphs if anything is confusing or poorly written.

 

[Marik2]

To add to the plethora of sex threads dominating the forums at the moment, here's a personal moral conundrum for you fine Escapists

What is your stance on this subject? I guess first of all you have to come to terms with your own views of sex. Do you view it as something special or sacred that should only be shared between two people in love? Or is it just a pleasurable biological function that is enjoyable and fun to share? Something completely different?

Now, in my view (note- MY VIEW) pre-marital chastity is an incredibly bad and even stupid idea.

I was raised in a Mormon household, and when I finally came to terms with my own sexuality (which was downright suppressed by my parent's religion) I realised how much I disagreed with the church's doctrines on sex (I have many other problems with Mormonism too, but that's another story).

Now I'm a bit of a sleep-around. I just enjoy sharing this wonderful part of life with a girl who I have taken a liking to. It's a pleasurable experience for both parties, and I'm not using them for my own purposes. It's purely for fun, and it is safe and I make damn sure I'm not hurting anyone.

Keep in mind I'm not justifying my actions at all (our modern society seems intent on portraying sexuality in the worst possible light. Since when was anything sexual 'dirty?').

So yes, pre-marital chastity is stupid, for these reasons.

Any healthy relationship has a large part of it set in physicality and sexuality. Relationships are about trust and knowing each other. Before you bind yourself to another in law wouldn't you want to be completely comfortable in every aspect of each other? Do you want to be awkward and unsure with each other in such an important aspect? What if learning about each other in this way completely changes your mind about being married to each other? Sexuality is SO important, and you want to downright ignore it until you have promised to spend your lives together?

So yes, chastity is an old-fashioned and pointless ideal. I understand how it can be seen as romantic to have this one thing kept out of reach until after marriage, but this hardly constitutes a valid reason to potentially screw up your relationship.

The reason I brought this up is because I've spoken to a few girls recently who have this ideal (I wasn't cracking on to them!), and it just baffles me.

So Escapists, what is your stance on this subject?

I am 19 and still a virgin.

I have decided to have sex once me and the girl I have chosen have promised each other we will stay by each other side.

By then one already has to have worked out all the trust issues by now.

 

[Sir_Auron_the_Badass]

I also feel against it, as it is completely stifling to what is a completely natural part of themselves (kinda in the same boat as OP because of parents). I won't hold it against someone if they do reserve themselves, but only if they are doing it because they want to, not because their religion is telling them to. Religion should have no place in the bedroom, and, in my opinion, it is downright idiotic for them to label something so natural, fun, and (if done right) healthy as sinful, especially when people do so before marriage.

 

[Marik2]

Sexual compatibility is as important for long-term happiness in a relationship as emotional and mental compatibility. Holding off until marriage risks finding out that you and your partner really aren't turned on by eachother, which almost inevitably leads to infidelity and unhappiness. So stop screwing around and screw.

If a couple stayed off sex till they got married they should have already know what turns on the other just by talking.

 

[priestswearseatbelts]

Only if both parties have remained virginal and the relationship is monogamous; and are expecting the same virtues of their partner; of choice.

Otherwise you run the risk of simply seeing a wife as property you don't want to be second hand. Or setting a double for one party to remain pure, for the others benefit (control).

Not that I view sex as freeing.... quite the opposite in fact.

These are, really, concerns for religious people. For those who hold no stock in the, crazed, rantings of the mentally affected, uneducated and dehydrated prophets. That supposedly communicated with God... way back when. Before he forgot our phone number. This shouldn't be an issue or a problem.

 

[l00kmumn0hands]

You should always do what's right for you. That said...
I think premarital sex is a good idea. I'm currently in my first long term relationship and honestly, as much as i love my girlfriend, I find myself wondering what sex would be like with other women. Not because I'm bored but because I'm curious. I can only imagine how much worse this feeling might be if I were middle aged, married with kids, and thinking I might have missed out on something.

 

[higgs20]

it's neither a good or a bad idea really, if you want to refrain from sex until you're married then bully for you, it's not something I would have chosen to practice, but i don't see anything wrong with it

 

[Troublesome Lagomorph]

Not at all. Sex exists to create offspring. Unless you're planning on having offspring out side of marriage, then it's a bad idea.

 

[Laser Priest]

It's not specifically "bad".

I think treating marriage as the pass to sex is incredibly stupid, especially if you consider marriage an important act. You're locking people in a legally binding contract because their instinct shot their brain and, chances are, you've just set them up for a horrible relationship.

So yeah, actually it is bad. Very bad.

 

[Laser Priest]

Not at all. Sex exists to create offspring. Unless you're planning on having offspring out side of marriage, then it's a bad idea.

Just because that's why it exists doesn't mean that's all people plan on using it for.

See: The existence and wild success of birth control methods.

 

[default]

Not at all. Sex exists to create offspring. Unless you're planning on having offspring out side of marriage, then it's a bad idea.

No, no, and no. Sex is far more for humans than just to create offspring. It is a way of expressing love and the deepest emotions we can have for another human being. It forms a strong emotional attachment between two people.

It's more than just the chemicals.