Poll: Virginity. purity, innocence

[Artemis923]

Virgins suck.

I can only recommend banging a virgin if you yourself are a virgin.

Gee thanks.

I'm 22, still a virgin, and don't see that changing any time soon. If it were to change, I wouldn't really care if my partner was a virgin as well, or more experienced. All I'd really require of them is a little sensitivity and patience.

Well, that's a virgin's view.

I stick by what I said. No offense was intended.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

This might be helpful to you:
http://kidshealth.org/teen/sexual_health/stds/std_myths.html#
You should also understand that condoms only help prevent the spread of specific STI's but others can be spread regardless of condom usage. Of course it is better to use a condom than not, however, diseases such as Genital Herpes, for example, can be spread even if a condom is used. Mononucleosis can be spread without sexual inercourse, and although it is only about 1/100 people who die from complications from mono a year, it still does happen.

I was only talking about the contraceptive benefits of... contraceptives (I didn't even say condoms, I know for a fact there's no way the birth control pill could prevent an STD), not their ability to prevent STDs. Clearly some diseases are passed in ways that a condom can not prevent but nobody got pregnant from another's sweat.

I just find being sensible is preferable to being terrified. I play probabilities, not possibilities.

A virgin has a terribly low chance of giving you an STD when compared to any other sexual partner - provided the virgin is a clean individual. If they are not clean then they've got a higher chance. By "clean" I mean by general hygiene standards of an individual.

Cleanliness isn't really the primary issue in regards to virgins, however, some can be born with an STI, or had blood contact with someone infected somewhere along the way via injury.

There is no reason to be terrified, instead you should get tested, there are MANY places that offer free testing, so there really is not an excuse for one not being tested other than laziness or fear. People should be regularly tested, for their own sake and others. If you had been exposed, it allows you to start early treatment, if you have not, it gives you peace of mind. Also it is much easier to get a partner to be willing to test if you show that you have already been doing so yourself.

I think it shows an actual level of responsiblity and actual caution and selectiveness rather than just saying," oh I'm picky about who I sleep with". I find that those who wish to have tests prior to be far more selective than those who do not. It is more of " show me, don't tell me." This you can prove, saying " Oh I am careful or picky about who I will be with" doesn't.

Being upfront in a relationship with this as a requirement prior to sex is the easiest way to go. When they know this condition has to be met as well upfront, they are usually quite respectful and willing to meet that condition. If they are not, you just did yourself a favor by finding that out up front and not wasting your time.

 

[Abomination]

I think it shows an actual level of responsiblity and actual caution and selectiveness rather than just saying," oh I'm picky about who I sleep with". I find that those who wish to have tests prior to be far more selective than those who do not. It is more of " show me, don't tell me." This you can prove, saying " Oh I am careful or picky about who I will be with" doesn't.

Being upfront in a relationship with this as a requirement prior to sex is the easiest way to go. When they know this condition has to be met as well upfront, they are usually quite respectful and willing to meet that condition. If they are not, you just did yourself a favor by finding that out up front and not wasting your time.

I prefer to not live in a world where romance gets replaced by presenting someone with your "I have no STDs" papers. I would request them from someone who insisted on having sex with me and I didn't "like the look of them" or I felt there was a high probability they could have STDs but to do so with the type of sexual partners I've been with? Sure, it's practical but a terribly unromantic thing to do.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

I think it shows an actual level of responsiblity and actual caution and selectiveness rather than just saying," oh I'm picky about who I sleep with". I find that those who wish to have tests prior to be far more selective than those who do not. It is more of " show me, don't tell me." This you can prove, saying " Oh I am careful or picky about who I will be with" doesn't.

Being upfront in a relationship with this as a requirement prior to sex is the easiest way to go. When they know this condition has to be met as well upfront, they are usually quite respectful and willing to meet that condition. If they are not, you just did yourself a favor by finding that out up front and not wasting your time.

I prefer to not live in a world where romance gets replaced by presenting someone with your "I have no STDs" papers. I would request them from someone who insisted on having sex with me and I didn't "like the look of them" or I felt there was a high probability they could have STDs but to do so with the type of sexual partners I've been with? Sure, it's practical but a terribly unromantic thing to do.

LOL! Where is the romance is saying " I want to wait for marriage?" or " I want to wait for the " right person"? Or I only want to have sex with someone who " looks like they are not unsavory?" I do not see romance in any of those things.

Putting this upfront as a condition for sex, also allows you to have more time to get to know one another as well to determine if you really have an interest in that person. You can still have just as much passion in a relationship where you are " waiting to be sure" as you can when while you wait to determine that you get tests as well. You should understand that you cannot judge whether or not someone is infected " by the looks of them", that is a myth. If you had read the links I gave above, you would understand that.

 

[Abomination]

I think it shows an actual level of responsiblity and actual caution and selectiveness rather than just saying," oh I'm picky about who I sleep with". I find that those who wish to have tests prior to be far more selective than those who do not. It is more of " show me, don't tell me." This you can prove, saying " Oh I am careful or picky about who I will be with" doesn't.

Being upfront in a relationship with this as a requirement prior to sex is the easiest way to go. When they know this condition has to be met as well upfront, they are usually quite respectful and willing to meet that condition. If they are not, you just did yourself a favor by finding that out up front and not wasting your time.

I prefer to not live in a world where romance gets replaced by presenting someone with your "I have no STDs" papers. I would request them from someone who insisted on having sex with me and I didn't "like the look of them" or I felt there was a high probability they could have STDs but to do so with the type of sexual partners I've been with? Sure, it's practical but a terribly unromantic thing to do.

LOL! Where is the romance is saying " I want to wait for marriage?" or " I want to wait for the " right person"? Or I only want to have sex with someone who " looks like they are not unsavory?" I do not see romance in any of those things.

Putting this upfront as a condition for sex, also allows you to have more time to get to know one another as well to determine if you really have an interest in that person. You can still have just as much passion in a relationship where you are " waiting to be sure" as you can when while you wait to determine that you get tests as well. You should understand that you cannot judge whether or not someone is infected " by the looks of them", that is a myth. If you had read the links I gave above, you would understand that.

I personally do not find waiting until marriage for sex to be romantic OR practical. I find it incredibly risky, actually.

There is far more to a sexual encounter than JUST the factor they aren't unsavory. Courtship, seduction, mutual attraction, location, emotional state... I'd just not rather add "paperwork" into that formula.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

I think it shows an actual level of responsiblity and actual caution and selectiveness rather than just saying," oh I'm picky about who I sleep with". I find that those who wish to have tests prior to be far more selective than those who do not. It is more of " show me, don't tell me." This you can prove, saying " Oh I am careful or picky about who I will be with" doesn't.

Being upfront in a relationship with this as a requirement prior to sex is the easiest way to go. When they know this condition has to be met as well upfront, they are usually quite respectful and willing to meet that condition. If they are not, you just did yourself a favor by finding that out up front and not wasting your time.

I prefer to not live in a world where romance gets replaced by presenting someone with your "I have no STDs" papers. I would request them from someone who insisted on having sex with me and I didn't "like the look of them" or I felt there was a high probability they could have STDs but to do so with the type of sexual partners I've been with? Sure, it's practical but a terribly unromantic thing to do.

LOL! Where is the romance is saying " I want to wait for marriage?" or " I want to wait for the " right person"? Or I only want to have sex with someone who " looks like they are not unsavory?" I do not see romance in any of those things.

Putting this upfront as a condition for sex, also allows you to have more time to get to know one another as well to determine if you really have an interest in that person. You can still have just as much passion in a relationship where you are " waiting to be sure" as you can when while you wait to determine that you get tests as well. You should understand that you cannot judge whether or not someone is infected " by the looks of them", that is a myth. If you had read the links I gave above, you would understand that.

I personally do not find waiting until marriage for sex to be romantic OR practical. I find it incredibly risky, actually.

There is far more to a sexual encounter than JUST the factor they aren't unsavory. Courtship, seduction, mutual attraction, location, emotional state... I'd just not rather add "paperwork" into that formula.

I will take the paperwork. No matter how well you think you know someone, you can grow up with them, they be your highschool sweetheart, everyone around them speaks wonderful of them, they can volunteer in their community and be considered a great guy, then you find out much later after living with them for a while they are a con artist lying drug addict that pretended to go to college for an entire semester while they were out pool sharking all day. The truth is people LIE. It is better to be safe than sorry.

 

[Abomination]

I will take the paperwork. No matter how well you think you know someone, you can grow up with them, they be your highschool sweetheart, everyone around them speaks wonderful of them, they can volunteer in their community and be considered a great guy, then you find out much later after living with them for a while they are a con artist lying drug addict that pretended to go to college for an entire semester while they were out pool sharking all day. The truth is people LIE. It is better to be safe than sorry.

And you are more than entitled to your preference. Far be it for me to tell you how to filter your potential sexual partners.

 

[Westaway]

It is an overblown concept that is pushed by religious people as a way to control their children through fear and shame.

Its not only religious people however. For example, if you go to certain sites like 4chan thats frequently visited by certain demographic (known for their specific type of facial hair), you can see that some, mostly... unsocial people also a huge fixation on virginity, which i doubt stems from religion.

Dunno...they've all grown up in a society that's been heavily influenced by religion. Same way people say stuff like "Thank God I'm an atheist", because it's jsut one of those things.

They get it from Japanese Virginity Worship.

 

[Xan Krieger]

Speaking as a perma-virgin I don't care if a woman had sex before. By the time you're 23 like me practically everyone has already had sex anyway.

 

[Something Amyss]

Yeah, I've heard of so-called `everything but` virgins.
And it does make you wonder where you lose your `real` virginity. I don't buy the hymen breaking as a marker of it because many girls have their hymen break through exercise many years before having any kind of sex.

I don't see the point in lying about things like virginity. But I'm the kind of person who hates lying even if it's not a huge lie.

And when you're a teenager, you come across all sorts of other issues about virginity because of these things. The hymen can break through all sorts of methods, from exercise to masturbation, so that seems like a silly method. Soem cultures still rely on it; some Middle Eastern cultures expect women to bleed on their honeymoon so they "fake it" with bits of meat or the "artificial hymen." Yes, that's a thing.

And, of course, males have no analogue to the hymen, so when do they lose their virginity? What about gays and lesbians? Our culture kind of views penis-in-vagina intercourse as the definition of sex. Both gays and lesbians can penetrate their partners, but a lot of people don't count it as sex for the same reason straight people don't count the "alternatives." Is penetration required? Most of the women I know have used tampons at some point in their life, but I don't think many of them would consider a tampon their "first," even if they'd never had anything inside them before. Yet this was apparently so much a thing it was addressed in sex ed.

As for lying about virginity, I can see it in a few circumstances, but those are mostly where the truth will lead to physical harm or the like. Of course, at that point, there are PROBABLY bigger problems than the lie so maybe it's moot. Pretending you had sex (or didn't) to improve your image just seems dumb. But then again, I've never been one of the cool kids, so what would I know?

Shh...biblical loopholes.

Not quite the same, but you know the Leviticus section that deals with homosexuality?

18:22 Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.

20:13 If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

My reaction has always been "okay, so you can't have vaginal sex with a dude. Gotcha."

Also, I giggle when the phrase "loopholes" is used in reference to sex. Partially because I have the mind of a five year old.

And she's not getting it back!

I knew a girl who had sex with another girl's boyfriend for months and justified it by saying that it wasn't really cheating because they only ever had butt sex.
I think she genuinely believed it too.

This is related to what I was saying to Phasmal (part of the reason I quoted you both in the same post), but it seems to dovetail with the ambiguity as to what sex actually is in our culture, and how far we'll go to justify "not sex." Personally, I don't think you even need to get to sex for it to be cheating, so I think it's sort of moot, but the more relevant point is that I totally wouldn't be surprised at the whole "buttsex doesn't equal cheating" thing, because to a good chunk of society, anal doesn't mean sex.

Because ponies.

I know I'm dating myself a bit here, but I was in high school when the Clinton sex scandal hit. You know, this one?


As a result, there was a lot of discussion as to whether or not oral sex equaled sex, because it turned out she went down on him. And there was the cigar thing, bu that was referenced more with snickers and giggles than actual discussion.

Honestly, a bizarrely large number of people came down on the "not sex" side of things. I find it baffling that something with "sex" in the name isn't considered sex, especially since it's not some obscure use of the word or something.

 

[BOOM headshot65]

I personally do not find waiting until marriage for sex to be romantic OR practical. I find it incredibly risky, actually.

!

Your going to have to run that one by me, because it makes no sense what so ever, because there is literally NO risk involved in waiting, because nothing can happen from nothing.

OT: Its not a deal breaker, but I would prefer it. Of course, its kind of a moot question now because I am more or less spoken for, and she is a virgin and even stricter about it than I am, and would h;ave very unkind words for those who say she should just get it on with someone and stop worrying about it. She takes pride in the fact that we are going to be one of the 1:4 couples that get married as virgins, and will set it to prove that sex doesnt matter in a relationship (she would only have it to have kids anyway).

Of course, this has not stopped us from talking about what we both want and what we will do. With that said, anyone who isnt an evangelical Chrisitan would say "Wow, you guys are SO boring!" Why? We wouldnt like ANYTHING of it. No toys, no out of the ordinary, no anything except the most intensly concentrated vinella known to man. And its just because both of our opinion on such things are "Sorry, not interested." Hell, the last time we talked about it the conversation was along the lines of
"Me: So, what about anal?"
"Her: Um.......maybe if I was really drunk or felt like it was a really romantic night, but otherwise no."
"Me: And oral?"
"Her: Oh HELL NO! Theres no way I would do that!!"
"Me: Good. The feelings mutual. I mean, why would I stick my man-bits into your mouth. I kiss you there! That would be like kissing my own man parts. *shudder*"

So tell me, it thats our reaction to something as seemingly "vinella" as oral and anal, what do you think we would do toward more bizarre (but apparently "fun".....to some people I guess) things out there. Although, we decided I will let her be the one who "controls things" the first go around so that its less painful for her, since she can feel if she is hurting and control herself better to ease the pain.

 

[Username Redacted]

The value placed on virginity is a primitive belief.

Indeed. It's amazing what people believed in prior to Maury Povich running all those paternity tests.

On a more topical note I'd probably be a bit weirded out if I encountered a girl in the same age range as me (30 (+/-) 4) who was a virgin. Thankfully this hasn't happened yet so I can't tell you what my exact reaction would be but I cannot imagine this leading to a healthy relationship. Reason being that to me sex is just sort something you check off on the way to becoming a mature adult so for someone to intentionally delay that is kind of a red flag for the potential of actual mental health issues (maybe a bit harsh assessment?).

 

[Something Amyss]

I will take the paperwork. No matter how well you think you know someone, you can grow up with them, they be your highschool sweetheart, everyone around them speaks wonderful of them, they can volunteer in their community and be considered a great guy, then you find out much later after living with them for a while they are a con artist lying drug addict that pretended to go to college for an entire semester while they were out pool sharking all day. The truth is people LIE. It is better to be safe than sorry.

I think Abomination was speaking more to the paperwork of marrigae, though I admit I could be wrong here.

I've had partners who outright got offended that I wanted to use protection when sleeping with them. Yeah, that was awkward.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

I personally do not find waiting until marriage for sex to be romantic OR practical. I find it incredibly risky, actually.

!

Your going to have to run that one by me, because it makes no sense what so ever, because there is literally NO risk involved in waiting, because nothing can happen from nothing.

OT: Its not a deal breaker, but I would prefer it. Of course, its kind of a moot question now because I am more or less spoken for, and she is a virgin and even stricter about it than I am, and would h;ave very unkind words for those who say she should just get it on with someone and stop worrying about it. She takes pride in the fact that we are going to be one of the 1:4 couples that get married as virgins, and will set it to prove that sex doesnt matter in a relationship (she would only have it to have kids anyway).

Of course, this has not stopped us from talking about what we both want and what we will do. With that said, anyone who isnt an evangelical Chrisitan would say "Wow, you guys are SO boring!" Why? We wouldnt like ANYTHING of it. No toys, no out of the ordinary, no anything except the most intensly concentrated vinella known to man. And its just because both of our opinion on such things are "Sorry, not interested." Hell, the last time we talked about it the conversation was along the lines of
"Me: So, what about anal?"
"Her: Um.......maybe if I was really drunk or felt like it was a really romantic night, but otherwise no."
"Me: And oral?"
"Her: Oh HELL NO! Theres no way I would do that!!"
"Me: Good. The feelings mutual. I mean, why would I stick my man-bits into your mouth. I kiss you there! That would be like kissing my own man parts. *shudder*"

So tell me, it thats our reaction to something as seemingly "vinella" as oral and anal, what do you think we would do toward more bizarre (but apparently "fun".....to some people I guess) things out there. Although, we decided I will let her be the one who "controls things" the first go around so that its less painful for her, since she can feel if she is hurting and control herself better to ease the pain.

I would think the risks involved in waiting until marriage would be that you could have completely different sex drives, thus risking the makings for a crappy marriage. If you have someone with a high sex drive and someone with a low sex drive, it causes resentment in the relationship and results in an unfulfilling marriage. However, if you have people with compatible sex drives and you determine this prior to considering marriage, they are more likely to be satisfied with their sexual partner and it is less risky for the resentment build up that exists in sexually disfunctional relationships.

Say you have sex with her the first time, you think it is the greatest thing ever and want to do it again and again, and she decides then she doesn't like it and she never wants to do it again? Since you have agreed to "until death do us part" you're stuck with celebacy for life! LOL

 

[Abomination]

I would think the risks involved in waiting until marriage would be that you could have completely different sex drives, thus risking the makings for a crappy marriage. If you have someone with a high sex drive and someone with a low sex drive, it causes resentment in the relationship and results in an unfulfilling marriage. However, if you have people with compatible sex drives and you determine this prior to considering marriage, they are more likely to be satisfied with their sexual partner and it is less risky for the resentment build up that exists in sexually disfunctional relationships.

Say you have sex with her the first time, you think it is the greatest thing ever and want to do it again and again, and she decides then she doesn't like it and she never wants to do it again? Since you have agreed to "until death do us part" you're stuck with celebacy for life! LOL

Pretty much got the "general" jist of it.

While I would be more likely to jump into bed with someone I would be less likely to actually tie the knot. Marriage is something I'm serious about because it's both a relationship commitment AND a legal contract.

Before I agree to marry someone I want to make sure we are sexually compatible - at least. How can I be sure how much someone loves me if they won't even engage in intercourse with me? Hell, I wouldn't marry someone who couldn't satisfy my sexual needs and if I couldn't satisfy a girl's sexual needs I wouldn't want to marry her for that reason too.

Rumpy-bumpy should be fun, not a chore. You don't buy a car before you take it for a test drive.

There?s already a thread going on about cheating and I can assure you two people having a sexually dysfunctional relationship would be the prime contender on why one of them will sleep with another person. ?You can only have sex with me, and we?re not going to have sex!? can be a bit of a deal breaker.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

I would think the risks involved in waiting until marriage would be that you could have completely different sex drives, thus risking the makings for a crappy marriage. If you have someone with a high sex drive and someone with a low sex drive, it causes resentment in the relationship and results in an unfulfilling marriage. However, if you have people with compatible sex drives and you determine this prior to considering marriage, they are more likely to be satisfied with their sexual partner and it is less risky for the resentment build up that exists in sexually disfunctional relationships.

Say you have sex with her the first time, you think it is the greatest thing ever and want to do it again and again, and she decides then she doesn't like it and she never wants to do it again? Since you have agreed to "until death do us part" you're stuck with celebacy for life! LOL

Pretty much got the "general" jist of it.

While I would be more likely to jump into bed with someone I would be less likely to actually tie the knot. Marriage is something I'm serious about because it's both a relationship commitment AND a legal contract.

Before I agree to marry someone I want to make sure we are sexually compatible - at least. How can I be sure how much someone loves me if they won't even engage in intercourse with me? Hell, I wouldn't marry someone who couldn't satisfy my sexual needs and if I couldn't satisfy a girl's sexual needs I wouldn't want to marry her for that reason too.

Rumpy-bumpy should be fun, not a chore. You don't buy a car before you take it for a test drive.

There?s already a thread going on about cheating and I can assure you two people having a sexually dysfunctional relationship would be the prime contender on why one of them will sleep with another person. ?You can only have sex with me, and we?re not going to have sex!? can be a bit of a deal breaker.

I admittedly felt sorry for Heather's husband when she told me she has never had an orgasm from a man. When his wife is telling her friends that man has never given her an orgasm, you can't help but feel bad for a guy to never have the opportunity to feel what real sex is like.

I personally have a high sex drive and am very content with a partner who does as well. I have been in a relationship before with a guy who did not have a very high sex drive, and it was definately NOT fulfilling and left you wanting more. However, there is no need to "cheat" when that happens. Be honest with them and break it off and move on and find someone you are compatible with.

 

[Abomination]

it was definately NOT fulfilling and left you wanting more. However, there is no need to "cheat" when that happens. Be honest with them and break it off and move on and find someone you are compatible with.

When there's marriage involved though "break it off" isn't the most easy of solutions. "What they don't know won't hurt them" is also a justification used in those situations... and it's actually true: if they don't ever find out they won't get hurt.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

it was definately NOT fulfilling and left you wanting more. However, there is no need to "cheat" when that happens. Be honest with them and break it off and move on and find someone you are compatible with.

When there's marriage involved though "break it off" isn't the most easy of solutions. "What they don't know won't hurt them" is also a justification used in those situations... and it's actually true: if they don't ever find out they won't get hurt.

I agree the whole marriage thing makes it a bit more complicated than that. And I honesty think when someone says the word" marriage" it is like cursing at me. That is a VERY scary word. It makes you feel like you are suffocating, you can't even breathe and like you need to run away.. like you are on fire.

Although you should also consider that it is far more harmful to you to cheat when married, because at that point, when your spouse finds out they will own your ass in court and you can expect to be paying for it financially. Rather than cheat, it would be better to get divorced first then move forward from there otherwise you will have even more hell to pay in court. You can get sympathy from the court by claiming emotional distress caused by a spouse from lack of affection rather than gain wrath from the court by having it shown you were a liar and a cheat.

EDIT: Also the idea that "they won't find out" is a pretty ridiculous one considering the spouse usually knows when something is not right, and well in other cases, they could be setting you up to begin with for financial gain.

 

[Abomination]

it was definately NOT fulfilling and left you wanting more. However, there is no need to "cheat" when that happens. Be honest with them and break it off and move on and find someone you are compatible with.

When there's marriage involved though "break it off" isn't the most easy of solutions. "What they don't know won't hurt them" is also a justification used in those situations... and it's actually true: if they don't ever find out they won't get hurt.

I agree the whole marriage thing makes it a bit more complicated than that. And I honesty think when someone says the word" marriage" it is like cursing at me. That is a VERY scary word. It makes you feel like you are suffocating, you can't even breathe and like you need to run away.. like you are on fire.

Although you should also consider that it is far more harmful to you to cheat when married, because at that point, when your spouse finds out they will own your ass in court and you can expect to be paying for it financially. Rather than cheat, it would be better to get divorced first then move forward from there otherwise you will have even more hell to pay in court. You can get sympathy from the court by claiming emotional distress caused by a spouse from lack of affection rather than gain wrath from the court by having it shown you were a liar and a cheat.

You know how it is... nobody commits a crime thinking they'll get caught.

The one thing rings true though... before you get married: shag. Shag a lot. Get it out of your system. If you still love the person after the typical first 4 weeks of straight shagging and living with them for at least twice that - sharing everything and still having a comfortable sex life - then consider getting hitched.