Poll: Is your virginity worth saving?

[Spinozaad]

No. It's just sex. It's just an exchange of lots of fluids, hilariously unsexy sounds and awkward positioning.

It's also about one of the best things there is. Might as well start with having sex when you reach the ideal age: 17.

 

[AgentNein]

Male; so no.

why does being male make you not saving your virginity not worth it?

And I would elaborate your post lest the moderators get on you for posting something that lacks substance.

The acceptances of society at large in a great number of global communities should spell out quite clearly why gender has an impact on the importance of saving or losing one's virginity, and whether or not that that's a good or bad thing. Pretending you don't recognized that these social implications don't exist is naive at best, and unnecessarily troll-like and obnoxious at worst. He isn't saying that it is fair and/or correct, but it's clear that gender has an impact on what society thinks of one's response to this poll.

If the moderators get on his case, it's because they were eager to get offended at a statement nobody made. I'm hopeful they won't.

WOW, you need to chill the eff out dude. I LOVE anthropology so I'm well aware of everything you're saying, but different societies have different belief systems, and in some males have almost no sexual rights whatsoever, and in others, they're expected to be sexually upstanding. but the general specifics aren't what interested me. I was genuinely interested as to why this person equated being male with a disregard for virginity. I love hearing people's answers because it can reflect so much about them, it's interesting to me, and I in no way meant offense.

At best my question was enthusiastic and genuine curiosity, attempting to explore varying cultural norms across the diverse demographic that is the escapist.

The last sentence was meant to be a friendly reminder that low content posts are frowned upon at the Escapists, I myself have received several citations before. I'm glad he didn't receive moderation wrath, but I try to help a brother out.

looking at my post, I can see how you thought I was being rude, but I was probably in the middle of doing hw, in class, or half asleep while writing it and didn't realize it could be so easily misconstrued.

You don't need to be an ass.

If you can see why I'd misunderstand your post, why would you then end your clarification post with an insult?

Also, I genuinely don't believe your answer. I don't think you were in the middle of any sort of distraction, because then you wouldn't have had such an emphatic "genuine curiosity." You would be more focused in your post if you were so interested to hear his culturally-driven opinions, and distracting work or exhaustion wouldn't have been an obstruction that prevents you from showing this. I think that people don't bring up the subject of moderators unless they are trolling or serious, in which case to do so carelessly as a result of distraction would be a poor display of character. I also think low-content posts are just fine, especially in cases where they say all they need to, and especially in polling threads.

But wow, you must be an interesting person. Tell me more about your interest in anthropology. You must not have been able to fit that on your profile next to football, working out, Jesus, and writing undergrad as two words.

Jesus. "Male; so no." is low content, and because of that can be easily construed in many different ways. Some might take offense, and maybe it would've been a nice idea for the original author to clarify his stance. So as to avoid conflict.

So YOU can continue to think low content posts are just fine, but it's entirely in the right of other posters to point out that it's generally not just fine to the mods, and with good reason. And you are coming off pretty dickish, just FYI.

I could repeat that last paragraph right back to you with only minor adjustments, and be completely accurate. Observe:

So YOU can continue to think low content posts are [not] just fine, but it's entirely in the right of other posters to point out that it's generally [] just fine to the mods, and with good reason. And you are coming off pretty dickish, just FYI.

"Low Content Posts
This could be anything from simply answering a question to posting LOL. These forums are used for discussion and low content posts halt discussion. In order to participate in conversation one should present an explanation of the reasoning that informs your opinion. "I like pie" isn't an argument. The fact that you like pie is well and good, but why do you like that pie? This explanation offers others an opportunity to respond to your opinion and avoids forum spam."

Forum code of conduct. Just posting this to point out that there's a valid reasoning (THAT THE SITE ACTUALLY GETS BEHIND) for asking for more than "Guy: so no."

And yes, dickishness sometimes begets dickishness. Vicious cycle.

 

[144_v1legacy]

Male; so no.

why does being male make you not saving your virginity not worth it?

And I would elaborate your post lest the moderators get on you for posting something that lacks substance.

The acceptances of society at large in a great number of global communities should spell out quite clearly why gender has an impact on the importance of saving or losing one's virginity, and whether or not that that's a good or bad thing. Pretending you don't recognized that these social implications don't exist is naive at best, and unnecessarily troll-like and obnoxious at worst. He isn't saying that it is fair and/or correct, but it's clear that gender has an impact on what society thinks of one's response to this poll.

If the moderators get on his case, it's because they were eager to get offended at a statement nobody made. I'm hopeful they won't.

WOW, you need to chill the eff out dude. I LOVE anthropology so I'm well aware of everything you're saying, but different societies have different belief systems, and in some males have almost no sexual rights whatsoever, and in others, they're expected to be sexually upstanding. but the general specifics aren't what interested me. I was genuinely interested as to why this person equated being male with a disregard for virginity. I love hearing people's answers because it can reflect so much about them, it's interesting to me, and I in no way meant offense.

At best my question was enthusiastic and genuine curiosity, attempting to explore varying cultural norms across the diverse demographic that is the escapist.

The last sentence was meant to be a friendly reminder that low content posts are frowned upon at the Escapists, I myself have received several citations before. I'm glad he didn't receive moderation wrath, but I try to help a brother out.

looking at my post, I can see how you thought I was being rude, but I was probably in the middle of doing hw, in class, or half asleep while writing it and didn't realize it could be so easily misconstrued.

You don't need to be an ass.

If you can see why I'd misunderstand your post, why would you then end your clarification post with an insult?

Also, I genuinely don't believe your answer. I don't think you were in the middle of any sort of distraction, because then you wouldn't have had such an emphatic "genuine curiosity." You would be more focused in your post if you were so interested to hear his culturally-driven opinions, and distracting work or exhaustion wouldn't have been an obstruction that prevents you from showing this. I think that people don't bring up the subject of moderators unless they are trolling or serious, in which case to do so carelessly as a result of distraction would be a poor display of character. I also think low-content posts are just fine, especially in cases where they say all they need to, and especially in polling threads.

But wow, you must be an interesting person. Tell me more about your interest in anthropology. You must not have been able to fit that on your profile next to football, working out, Jesus, and writing undergrad as two words.

Jesus. "Male; so no." is low content, and because of that can be easily construed in many different ways. Some might take offense, and maybe it would've been a nice idea for the original author to clarify his stance. So as to avoid conflict.

So YOU can continue to think low content posts are just fine, but it's entirely in the right of other posters to point out that it's generally not just fine to the mods, and with good reason. And you are coming off pretty dickish, just FYI.

I could repeat that last paragraph right back to you with only minor adjustments, and be completely accurate. Observe:

So YOU can continue to think low content posts are [not] just fine, but it's entirely in the right of other posters to point out that it's generally [] just fine to the mods, and with good reason. And you are coming off pretty dickish, just FYI.

"Low Content Posts
This could be anything from simply answering a question to posting LOL. These forums are used for discussion and low content posts halt discussion. In order to participate in conversation one should present an explanation of the reasoning that informs your opinion. "I like pie" isn't an argument. The fact that you like pie is well and good, but why do you like that pie? This explanation offers others an opportunity to respond to your opinion and avoids forum spam."

Forum code of conduct. Just posting this to point out that there's a valid reasoning (THAT THE SITE ACTUALLY GETS BEHIND) for asking for more than "Guy: so no."

And yes, dickishness sometimes begets dickishness. Vicious cycle.

It's probably not kosher to claim devil's advocate halfway through an argument (it doesn't help my case either, feel free to take partial victory), but I'm enjoying this discussion (except for being called a dick, as justified as you feel it might be), so were go.

I realize I admitted "low-content" when I should have said "concise." These are not the same, and upon further analysis I'd say that the original post was the latter. I will explain. It will take a while.

Here are my examples of low-content posts, all paraphrased, and with corresponding slightly higher-content versions:

"Yahtzee's reviews are getting less funny." vs "Meh. Yahtzee's reviews seem to be getting a bit lazy."

"That was obnoxious." vs "Ugh. Another typical executive response."

Also, rarely does anyone complain about a low-content post. I feel that this guy's reasoning for responding as he did was instead out of an overly zealous attempt to show his idealistic views in comparison to what he saw as chauvinism, when what I saw was an observation on the state of society. This is a bit of potential over-analysis into a post that was probably meant as a basic reaction to his reasoning behind his decision. I think it's true, nonetheless.

The likelihood of this being over-zealousness is strengthened by his claim of Jesus as an interest in his profile, because is may imply an emphasis on the importance of putting aside the more inconvenient truths of life in favor of the ideals of religion, and is therefore more willing to claim the truths of his own ideals as law (this is based entirely on personal experiences and is therefore highly subjective).

I also think the part of his reaction-post (does that require a hyphen?) regarding the mention of anthropology (albeit in his second reaction posts) needs more content than the post to which he responded. It's a groundless statement (saying he's majoring in anthropology would be different) that might as well be replaced with "I enjoy Wikipedia." It's an attempt at claiming authority on a matter to back up his point, but the lack of likeliness in the extent of the truth in the claim implies that he felt a need to do so, and that (if subconsciously, even he felt his reaction wasn't a stable one. Furthermore, it isn't really the right subject matter, and a more relevant example might be psychology or social sciences.

In polls threads (and in normal threads, if to a lesser extent), I'd say that even low-content (or more preferably, again, concise) have value, hence the ignoring by both moderators and paragraph-posters alike, as they give a sense of a community's mass-reaction to an article, video, or what have you, and that allows people like us to make statements on the opinions of the whole should we feel its necessity, for instance, I'll often justify Nintendo's actions in response to the common situation of a number of people's short statements (whether concise but effective or low-content) of how terrible they are (mostly because I enjoy their games so much). In this way, they serve a purpose similar to that of political polling, and their length (specifically, their lack thereof) helps me to read them all and to do so quickly (the average person tends to skip long posts that they aren't personally invested in, as I'm sure you know). And the moderators seem to ignore posts with this type of value on the whole.

Regarding the examples in the low-content-prohibition rule, I'd describe the statement "LOL" has almost completely and truly useless, for while it does represent as piece of mass-reaction, it gives no insight as to why he/she thinks it, whether it be because the person has no personality, thinks this forum is like so many others, or is simply an idiot. It's far less useful than the original post under discussion, in spite of being only two words and one comma shorter (and the use of a comma implies at least a slight attention to detail, something that could be thought of as a real opinion and not a seemingly automated response).

I think the pie example requires a bit of context. After all, in a non-poll post "what's your favorite dessert?" (that's a shitty thread topic, I know, and probably doesn't warrant a response beyond "this is a shitty thread topic") the statement has a bit more merit, and in a poll asking "what's your favorite course of a meal, and why?" (again, a shitty thread topic), it still has a bit of merit, though substantially less. However, in a poll asking "do you like pie?" (a third shitty topic), it has not merit whatsoever, and anger may be justified, though is likely an ineffective endeavor. I think that the post in question fall barely outside of these exampled.

Most of this, I'll call it an essay, involves implications that are, again, highly speculative, and therefore highly subjective. If you want to respond to each or some of these paragraphs, you may, and I will most likely cease response since it is becoming a matter of opinion on my end (a result of playing devil's advocate, and would be hypocritical if I didn't specify the nature of the claims as experience-based and not one of accepted facts). Try not to insult me, not because I'd be offended (it's the internet), but because it'll say more about you than me.

I've enjoyed this. I hope you don't take this last post as anything other than the beginnings of a hypothetical scenario.

...

OT: I lost my virginity, and I'm glad I did, because each girlfriend I've had has resulted in a great deal of knowledge as to improving a relationship in the field of sex. It's beneficial to both partners, and teaches the do's and don'ts of lovemaking.

 

[BOOM headshot65]

Oh, it happens.

I never said it didnt happen. I was just saying its not worth getting worked up over IMO, and its Certainly not worth getting "Gib-Slapped", making her mad at me, and having her go home crying and thinking "This isnt who I fell in love with. I though he was better than that." over. Like I said, one of the reasons she loves me is because I DONT want sex with her until we are married.

My fiancee has been with twice as many guys as I have women, and she is still all strict about the whole no anal thing because I am so big that I can't get it in there without hurting her to the point where she doesn't want it anymore. My ex-wife and ex-girlfriend loved having me in their ass, but she can't take it, and yes, guys can get bigger than me, I promise. Women can also get tighter than my fiancee.

Oh, well, if thats all, then Im fine, because she doesnt want that. To her, sex is something that you do with your husband that while yes, it does make you closer, it is for having children first and foremost.

I have had bad sex. And yes, while bad sex is better than no sex, we all deserve Great Sex,

Well of course. Im not kidding myself, and neither is she. The first time we go at it, its going to SUCK (no puns please). The thing is, we dont give a shit. We arent dating/marrying eachother because we wanted sex. We are dating/marrying eachother because we are eachothers best friend, we have similar interest, and we like to spend time together. Yes, there will be problems. Even the lost puppy love-eqse "I love you.""No I love you more.""No, I love YOU more!" couple will have problems at some point. Its overcoming those problems that needs to happen, and it seems alot of young people dont understand that, as it seems that the first fight is seen as a sign that the relationship is dying, when it is completely normal. Go figure :/

and if we aren't having it, and all of our friends are (maybe not today or tomorrow, but eventually all of your married friends will be having amazing sex that leaves them unable to move or do anything other than breath for the next twenty minutes once they finish). If that happens, you and your beloved will begin to wonder why your relationship isn't like that, and begin resenting each other, and then comes the messy, hateful divorce where one of you sits helpelssly by themselves wondering how their ex can run around fucking every person they can, while the other still hasn't gotten over the relationship that ended over a year ago.

WTF! No, we will think "Oh. That was bad. Oh well. You want to go in the next room and beat up people while I snipe them on Borderlands?" As long as she gets pregnant, she doesnt care about how it is, and even then will most likely have nothing to go on since her first time was also to the ONLY person she is having sex with, and even if it is bad by others standards, she will still think it was the best thing since sliced bread. And even if we both agree "Yeah, that was pretty bad." we will get better with time, and we will be patient with eachother and work through it, not get mad at on another. Again, our relationship is built on friendship and common interest, with sex being left out because he's not on speaking terms with us.

 

[Spade Lead]

WTF! No, we will think "Oh. That was bad. Oh well. You want to go in the next room and beat up people while I snipe them on Borderlands?" As long as she gets pregnant, she doesnt care about how it is, and even then will most likely have nothing to go on since her first time was also to the ONLY person she is having sex with, and even if it is bad by others standards, she will still think it was the best thing since sliced bread. And even if we both agree "Yeah, that was pretty bad." we will get better with time, and we will be patient with eachother and work through it, not get mad at on another. Again, our relationship is built on friendship and common interest, with sex being left out because he's not on speaking terms with us.

And what about when she hits 30 or so, and her libido kicks in and all of a sudden she DOES want sex to be earth-shattering and amazing, and suddenly wonders about all the other guys who are out there that she could have had, and never did? I had my own cougar at one point, and it was AWESOME! She had a hard time keeping up with me still, but she was the best I had ever had in bed until now. Everyone thinks, "Oh hey, we will get married now and be together forever and nothing will ever come between us," and then magically, you grow up, and mature, and suddenly that great decision to get together and stay together when you are young is a horrible mistake, and you wonder, what else is out there (at least, that is why my ex-wife divorced me). You may not want to leave her, but you will wonder what else is out there and one of you will decide that you have to go explore. Look at the Amish. Have you ever seen a film about Amish teens going through Rumspringa? Sex, drugs, violence, lots of it, because they are suddenly free of all of their rules and religion. My ex-girlfriend was a quiet reserved virgin when she and I met. When she and I broke up after years of on-again-off-again relationships, broken up at one point by her getting married to someone else, then divorced, she found her freedom, and started fucking every guy she met. From what I understand (based on speaking to others, and a psychologist), that is a completely normal reaction to being in that situation. So who are you going to be, the one who whores himself out, or the one who stays at home wishing she wasn't out whoring herself? I did the latter, and it sucks ass.

 

[Griffolion]

-snip-

The 19 year old me, who, at that point was desperate to not be the only one among my friends to still not do it, would say virginity isn't worth saving.

Now, having met the woman I wish to spend my life with, I would have liked my first time (and obviously all times subsequent) to be with her exclusively.

Hindsight is a lovely thing, but it unfortunately can't change anything previous to the moment we're in right now.

 

[Powereaver]

Very much so.. id very much like to wait until a good relationship comes along with the right person.. i dont want to hand it off to just any Tom Dick or Harry... (female versions) ... i think its worth the wait too!

 

[BangSmashBoom]

But with your second reason. The Adultery one. If you marry a second time (after divorce or tragedy) then does that count that as adultery in your eyes; like it is classed in the Sermon on the Mount? Not because that is what is said there. But because you should only ever be intimate with one person?
Not trying to have a go at you or anything but I am just interested to know.

I admit I not know the bible as much as I should but I have read this on widows that Jesus mentioned that widows can marry, since even if you were married on earth people are never married in heaven. I forgot where in the bible.
For divorce "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery." Mark 10:11-12

I hope that answers your question.

 

[El Danny]

Personally I don't get 'saving your virginity', 'wasting' mine was one of the best things I've ever done. I lost mine at 15, with a girl I'd only been with for a week and a half. Seriously, when you've had the shittiest day in the world and you just want to collapse, sex is a brilliant anti-depressant. Not only that, but sex is one of the deepest and experiences you can have with another person, I don't understand why you'd want to restrict yourself to that with just one person your entire life.

Not only that but Hollywood has given us this idea that losing your virginity is one of the most romantic and graceful moments in your life.

It's not...

You will be so confused, and clumsy, creating romance and grace only comes with time and practice. Seriously, your future wife deserves better, I would not put someone I care about though that.

 

[Vegosiux]

Both virginity and sex are things that are too damn overhyped and overrated. Do what you feel comfortable with, and leave it at that, I say.

 

[BOOM headshot65]

And what about when she hits 30 or so, and her libido kicks in and all of a sudden she DOES want sex to be earth-shattering and amazing, and suddenly wonders about all the other guys who are out there that she could have had, and never did?

Then I would have to ask her if she had been replaced by an evil twin sister she had never told me about. Because that would be a complete and udder about-face for her personality-wise. She has always been very picky of who she falls in love with, to the point that I am the ONLY person she has ever loved or dated.

Everyone thinks, "Oh hey, we will get married now and be together forever and nothing will ever come between us," and then magically, you grow up, and mature, and suddenly that great decision to get together and stay together when you are young is a horrible mistake, and you wonder, what else is out there. You may not want to leave her, but you will wonder what else is out there and one of you will decide that you have to go explore.

Again, the would fly completely in the face of our personalities. Both of us believe that sex is something to be had with ONLY your spouse, and sex outside of marriage is "DO NOT WANT!!" to us, if for no other reason than abstainence is the only 100% way to avoid pregnancy[footnote]And before anyone pulls the "But condoms and the pill reduce it to a 99.7% avoidance of pregnancy when having sex": That is still less than 100%. I dont give a rats ass if it was 99.999999999% repeating, if its less then 100% it aint happening. Im not taking a chance that could ruin both of our futures and leave her with a baby just for a little happy time. When they come up with a birth control that is 101% effective at all times, and will still allow me to have kids later when I choose, let me know, and I will consider it.[/footnote]. We both made the promise that we will stay with eachother, because we both believe that the marriage vows of "Till death do you part" fricking means "TILL DEATH DO YOU PART!!" Shes even more strict about that than I am. Her family has gone through divorce time and time again and she hates her stepdad for cheating on her mom. We dont care about sex. Thats fact. We are going to get married when I am done with college. Thats fact (unless someone successfully divides by zero). There is a reason her parents, and my parents, and EVERY SINGLE one of our friends agrees we are going to stay together.


I mean, seriously. She says that fricking FRENCH KISSING is a "only for marriage" thing, and while a kiss on the lips is ok, she is still very shy about it. With that in mind, do you REALLY think she is going to want to have lots and lots of sex??

I will say it again: one of the reasons she likes ME and not others is because I DONT want sex with her. I have her on record as saying things like "The reason 50% of marriages end in divorce is because guys cant control themselves and keep it in thier pants. But you are one of the few who wont do that." If I try and have sex with her before we are married, I am becoming the very thing she hates about guys in this day and age.If I asked, I would destroy her trust in me because I promised her that we would wait. IF I ASKED, SHE WOULD SLAP ME, AND GO HOME CRYING THINKING "WHY?! I THOUGHT HE WAS DIFFERENT THAN THE OTHERS." I DO! NOT! WANT! THAT TO HAPPEN.

Look at the Amish. Have you ever seen a film about Amish teens going through Rumspringa? Sex, drugs, violence, lots of it, because they are suddenly free of all of their rules and religion.

Nope. That kind of behavior disgusts me. I have already gotten chewed out by afew other college students because rather than go and get wasted on my 21 birthday because I can legally drink beer, there will not be a SINGLE DROP entering my system. Of course, part of it might come from the various moral codes that I follow, but some of it may be because I just dont see the appeal.

My ex-girlfriend was a quiet reserved virgin when she and I met. When she and I broke up after years of on-again-off-again relationships, broken up at one point by her getting married to someone else, then divorced, she found her freedom, and started fucking every guy she met. From what I understand (based on speaking to others, and a psychologist), that is a completely normal reaction to being in that situation.

Well, we have both been anything but "normal" as far as relationships go, why stop now? Its "normal" for people dating in high school to break up after 3 months.....we are at 1.8 YEARS and still going strong. Its "normal" for someone to lose thier virginity at the age of 16 when the hormones kick in....We are both 19 and while the hormones did kick in, they got shoved out and told "SCRAM! Your not welcome here!" Its "normal" for 4 out of 5 marriages the couple has had sex before marrying......We will be the 1 out of 5 that doesnt.

So who are you going to be, the one who whores himself out, or the one who stays at home wishing she wasn't out whoring herself? I did the latter, and it sucks ass.

Neither. And she wont be either one. Again, it completely flys in the face of our respective personalities and natures. And that is: Sex is a beautiful thing to be shared, but only by a married couple....Sex is NOT important to a relationship, and in our case will make it worse, not better....Rather than sex, we will continuing bashing zombie brains in with baseball bats on Left 4 Dead 2, or watching Hetalia: Axis Powers, Gundam, and FullMetal Alchemist.

 

[BangSmashBoom]

And what about when she hits 30 or so, and her libido kicks in and all of a sudden she DOES want sex to be earth-shattering and amazing, and suddenly wonders about all the other guys who are out there that she could have had, and never did?

Then I would have to ask her if she had been replaced by an evil twin sister she had never told me about. Because that would be a complete and udder about-face for her personality-wise. She has always been very picky of who she falls in love with, to the point that I am the ONLY person she has ever loved or dated.

Everyone thinks, "Oh hey, we will get married now and be together forever and nothing will ever come between us," and then magically, you grow up, and mature, and suddenly that great decision to get together and stay together when you are young is a horrible mistake, and you wonder, what else is out there. You may not want to leave her, but you will wonder what else is out there and one of you will decide that you have to go explore.

Again, the would fly completely in the face of our personalities. Both of us believe that sex is something to be had with ONLY your spouse, and sex outside of marriage is "DO NOT WANT!!" to us, if for no other reason than abstainence is the only 100% way to avoid pregnancy[footnote]And before anyone pulls the "But condoms and the pill reduce it to a 99.7% avoidance of pregnancy when having sex": That is still less than 100%. I dont give a rats ass if it was 99.999999999% repeating, if its less then 100% it aint happening. Im not taking a chance that could ruin both of our futures and leave her with a baby just for a little happy time. When they come up with a birth control that is 101% effective at all times, and will still allow me to have kids later when I choose, let me know, and I will consider it.[/footnote]. We both made the promise that we will stay with eachother, because we both believe that the marriage vows of "Till death do you part" fricking means "TILL DEATH DO YOU PART!!" Shes even more strict about that than I am. Her family has gone through divorce time and time again and she hates her stepdad for cheating on her mom. We dont care about sex. Thats fact. We are going to get married when I am done with college. Thats fact (unless someone successfully divides by zero). There is a reason her parents, and my parents, and EVERY SINGLE one of our friends agrees we are going to stay together.


I mean, seriously. She says that fricking FRENCH KISSING is a "only for marriage" thing, and while a kiss on the lips is ok, she is still very shy about it. With that in mind, do you REALLY think she is going to want to have lots and lots of sex??

I will say it again: one of the reasons she likes ME and not others is because I DONT want sex with her. I have her on record as saying things like "The reason 50% of marriages end in divorce is because guys cant control themselves and keep it in thier pants. But you are one of the few who wont do that." If I try and have sex with her before we are married, I am becoming the very thing she hates about guys in this day and age.If I asked, I would destroy her trust in me because I promised her that we would wait. IF I ASKED, SHE WOULD SLAP ME, AND GO HOME CRYING THINKING "WHY?! I THOUGHT HE WAS DIFFERENT THAN THE OTHERS." I DO! NOT! WANT! THAT TO HAPPEN.

Look at the Amish. Have you ever seen a film about Amish teens going through Rumspringa? Sex, drugs, violence, lots of it, because they are suddenly free of all of their rules and religion.

Nope. That kind of behavior disgusts me. I have already gotten chewed out by afew other college students because rather than go and get wasted on my 21 birthday because I can legally drink beer, there will not be a SINGLE DROP entering my system. Of course, part of it might come from the various moral codes that I follow, but some of it may be because I just dont see the appeal.

My ex-girlfriend was a quiet reserved virgin when she and I met. When she and I broke up after years of on-again-off-again relationships, broken up at one point by her getting married to someone else, then divorced, she found her freedom, and started fucking every guy she met. From what I understand (based on speaking to others, and a psychologist), that is a completely normal reaction to being in that situation.

Well, we have both been anything but "normal" as far as relationships go, why stop now? Its "normal" for people dating in high school to break up after 3 months.....we are at 1.8 YEARS and still going strong. Its "normal" for someone to lose thier virginity at the age of 16 when the hormones kick in....We are both 19 and while the hormones did kick in, they got shoved out and told "SCRAM! Your not welcome here!" Its "normal" for 4 out of 5 marriages the couple has had sex before marrying......We will be the 1 out of 5 that doesnt.

So who are you going to be, the one who whores himself out, or the one who stays at home wishing she wasn't out whoring herself? I did the latter, and it sucks ass.

Neither. And she wont be either one. Again, it completely flys in the face of our respective personalities and natures. And that is: Sex is a beautiful thing to be shared, but only by a married couple....Sex is NOT important to a relationship, and in our case will make it worse, not better....Rather than sex, we will continuing bashing zombie brains in with baseball bats on Left 4 Dead 2, or watching Hetalia: Axis Powers, Gundam, and FullMetal Alchemist.

Dude I'm proud of you and your girl friend, I pray that you two will treat the marrage as a team, rather you guys being obstacles of each other, I pray that you guys treat it as an opportunity to bond, rather then a sentence to death, I pray that your relationship becomes stronger over the years because you guys love eachother, because sex isn't everything but love is.
P.S. I remember a verse in the bible I forgot which one it was but it basiclly means that the love between a husband and a wife is meant to represent the love that God has for us his children, Amen!

 

[GregerFisk]

I guess it depends. If you want to do the whole "saving it for the right girl" thing go ahead, I just wouldn't do it just because you can't get laid. If you can't get laid but deep down you want to, do something about it, don't bullshit yourself.

I'm glad you have realized the greatness of AxCx and linked the best song ever written!