Poll: Virginity. purity, innocence

[Colour Scientist]

Well, the Bible says that a if a women who marries isn't a virgin, she has to be executed, so I guess virginity is something important to people.

So, as long as I don't get married, I'm in the clear?
Excellent!

OP: I lost my virginity to a virgin. I thought it was nice to have someone to share the "learning curve" with. To be honest though, it probably wouldn't have bothered me if he wasn't one.


Virginity isn't a big deal but I think it's preferable to lose it to someone you're comfortable with, when you feel ready.
I don't think I'd be too turned off by someone who was a virgin but it would bother me if it was a huge issue for them. If they were overly eager to lose it or obsessed with keeping it, that kind of fixation with sex and virginity would freak me out.

 

[OmniscientOstrich]

If I meet someone with low enough standards that they actually want to fuck me, I'm not going to start complaining about it. Really though, I've never understood slut shaming. I mean even if you don't give a shit about equality, I don't know why you'd engage in a practice that only serves to cock-block yourself.

 

[Colour Scientist]

Think about it.. You put a part of yourself, inside another person. That to me is kind of a big deal, and a bit weird.

You make it sound like some sort of organ transplant, it's more like sticking your finger in someone's ear.

 

[Something Amyss]

I don't value virginity.
I value honesty. If someone isn't a virgin but is the type of person I would want to date (monogamous, not a cheater), then I don't care how many people they have been with before.

I was just scrolling down and noticed this, and it kinda made me think of the culture we've developed. Specifically the fact that virginity is so prized that we've developed lies and rationalisations about virginity, both for men and women. And, of course, the different standards between the sexes, since guys are inclined to pretend they've lost theirs and girls are inclined to go the other way, societally. You've got people looking for a loophole, so they decide oral and anal sex aren't sex and consider themselves virgins, or come up with other workarounds ("once doesn't count," for example).

On a related note, I just found out not long ago that one of my best friends lost his virginity at 30. Which means about 15 years of posing and pretending he had sex. Ridiculous and unnecessary.

 

[Something Amyss]

So, as long as I don't get married, I'm in the clear?
Excellent!

...I think there might be a few more passages to worry about there.

You make it sound like some sort of organ transplant, it's more like sticking your finger in someone's ear.

More like their mouth. They're both warm, moist, and have teeth. *rimshot*

...I keed, but people really do treat it more seriously than they probably should.

 

[Colour Scientist]

So, as long as I don't get married, I'm in the clear?
Excellent!

...I think there might be a few more passages to worry about there.

Shh...biblical loopholes.

I was just scrolling down and noticed this, and it kinda made me think of the culture we've developed. Specifically the fact that virginity is so prized that we've developed lies and rationalisations about virginity, both for men and women. And, of course, the different standards between the sexes, since guys are inclined to pretend they've lost theirs and girls are inclined to go the other way, societally. You've got people looking for a loophole, so they decide oral and anal sex aren't sex and consider themselves virgins, or come up with other workarounds ("once doesn't count," for example).

On a related note, I just found out not long ago that one of my best friends lost his virginity at 30. Which means about 15 years of posing and pretending he had sex. Ridiculous and unnecessary.

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.

 

[Phasmal]

I don't value virginity.
I value honesty. If someone isn't a virgin but is the type of person I would want to date (monogamous, not a cheater), then I don't care how many people they have been with before.

I was just scrolling down and noticed this, and it kinda made me think of the culture we've developed. Specifically the fact that virginity is so prized that we've developed lies and rationalisations about virginity, both for men and women. And, of course, the different standards between the sexes, since guys are inclined to pretend they've lost theirs and girls are inclined to go the other way, societally. You've got people looking for a loophole, so they decide oral and anal sex aren't sex and consider themselves virgins, or come up with other workarounds ("once doesn't count," for example).

On a related note, I just found out not long ago that one of my best friends lost his virginity at 30. Which means about 15 years of posing and pretending he had sex. Ridiculous and unnecessary.

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.

 

[Abomination]

I am a selfish man and have taken the womenhead of 5 fair maidens in my life. Teaching a girl how one can be sexual and enjoy sex is both something to be proud of and something to be cautious with. Due to social pressures a female is supposedly placing a lot of trust in you and at the same time is in a terribly fragile emotional situation.

It's fun to have a virgin but after the 4th time it was becoming almost a routine chore and I wished for a more experienced partner. So I guess now I?m done with virgins ? mostly because I?m engaged but also because I?ve passed on enough knowledge to the uninitiated, someone else can carry that torch.

While the risk of STDs is real I do not concern myself with them too much. The type of girl I have gone for are the type who simply wouldn't settle for folks who do have such diseases. Virginity is not something I feel protects one against STDs to the degree that it's worth being part of anti-disease consideration - just don't fuck people who have an unsavory lifestyle.

 

[A Weakgeek]

it's more like sticking your finger in someone's ear.

The only difference is when you ask for the other, you get a weird look. Ask for the other, you get slapped.

Life is unfair sometimes

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.

Yeah, its funny how some people think of it. I heard of this one 'everything but' virgin, who wasnt a butt virgin. I wonder if women like that are the reason some men want virgins?

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

I am a selfish man and have taken the womenhead of 5 fair maidens in my life. Teaching a girl how one can be sexual and enjoy sex is both something to be proud of and something to be cautious with. Due to social pressures a female is supposedly placing a lot of trust in you and at the same time is in a terribly fragile emotional situation.

It's fun to have a virgin but after the 4th time it was becoming almost a routine chore and I wished for a more experienced partner. So I guess now I?m done with virgins ? mostly because I?m engaged but also because I?ve passed on enough knowledge to the uninitiated, someone else can carry that torch.

While the risk of STDs is real I do not concern myself with them too much. The type of girl I have gone for are the type who simply wouldn't settle for folks who do have such diseases. Virginity is not something I feel protects one against STDs to the degree that it's worth being part of anti-disease consideration - just don't fuck people who have an unsavory lifestyle.

I'm sorry, but the statement " The type of girl who wouldn't settle for folks who have such diseases" is a terribly misinformed thing to say. From interning at a STD clinic, there is no way for you to know who is infected and who is not by outward appearance or even what they claim to be their lifestyle. Often those that tested positive had only had ONE partner, and that partner is who infected them. There are also cases where one is exposed prior to having sexual intercourse, as we have children with STI's that have never had sex. Yes, poor choices can increase the probability of infection, however, it still does happen even with the most " wholesome" of lifestyle choices. Making good choices does decrease your risks, however, it does not mean that you should not be tested. Anyone who is considering becoming sexually active should be tested prior to becoming sexually active, and you should be regularly tested after as well.

The "girls" you have been with may be quite selective. That does not mean they had not already been exposed prior to you, and you very well can be a carrier without showing symptoms.

 

[Abomination]

I am a selfish man and have taken the womenhead of 5 fair maidens in my life. Teaching a girl how one can be sexual and enjoy sex is both something to be proud of and something to be cautious with. Due to social pressures a female is supposedly placing a lot of trust in you and at the same time is in a terribly fragile emotional situation.

It's fun to have a virgin but after the 4th time it was becoming almost a routine chore and I wished for a more experienced partner. So I guess now I?m done with virgins ? mostly because I?m engaged but also because I?ve passed on enough knowledge to the uninitiated, someone else can carry that torch.

While the risk of STDs is real I do not concern myself with them too much. The type of girl I have gone for are the type who simply wouldn't settle for folks who do have such diseases. Virginity is not something I feel protects one against STDs to the degree that it's worth being part of anti-disease consideration - just don't fuck people who have an unsavory lifestyle.

I'm sorry, but the statement " The type of girl who wouldn't settle for folks who have such diseases" is a terribly misinformed thing to say. From interning at a STD clinic, there is no way for you to know who is infected and who is not by outward appearance or even what they claim to be their lifestyle. Often those that tested positive had only had ONE partner, and that partner is who infected them. There are also cases where one is exposed prior to having sexual intercourse, as we have children with STI's that have never had sex. Yes, poor choices can increase the probability of infection, however, it still does happen even with the most " wholesome" of lifestyle choices. Making good choices does decrease your risks, however, it does not mean that you should not be tested. Anyone who is considering becoming sexually active should be tested prior to becoming sexually active, and you should be regularly tested after as well.

The "girls" you have been with may be quite selective. That does not mean they had not already been exposed prior to you, and you very well can be a carrier without showing symptoms.

I realise it isn't 100% foolproof but at the same time I'm mostly juggling with probabilities than entire possibilities.

If I concerned myself with the idea that every girl could potentially be a hive of every terrible infection dwelling between the folds of her vagina I'd never get it up in the morning. I don't want to get hit by a bus, doesn't mean I'll never cross a street.

The strange thing is the girls I suspected DID have STDs eventually turned out to actually have them... and the girls I have been with never have had them. When you've had as many sexual partners as myself it seems a bit strange that I've kept a perfect batting average in that area.

Then again I also believe that contraceptives are 100% effective, just they're not 100% foolproof. Lo and behold I've never fathered a child or even had a pregnancy scare.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

I am a selfish man and have taken the womenhead of 5 fair maidens in my life. Teaching a girl how one can be sexual and enjoy sex is both something to be proud of and something to be cautious with. Due to social pressures a female is supposedly placing a lot of trust in you and at the same time is in a terribly fragile emotional situation.

It's fun to have a virgin but after the 4th time it was becoming almost a routine chore and I wished for a more experienced partner. So I guess now I?m done with virgins ? mostly because I?m engaged but also because I?ve passed on enough knowledge to the uninitiated, someone else can carry that torch.

While the risk of STDs is real I do not concern myself with them too much. The type of girl I have gone for are the type who simply wouldn't settle for folks who do have such diseases. Virginity is not something I feel protects one against STDs to the degree that it's worth being part of anti-disease consideration - just don't fuck people who have an unsavory lifestyle.

I'm sorry, but the statement " The type of girl who wouldn't settle for folks who have such diseases" is a terribly misinformed thing to say. From interning at a STD clinic, there is no way for you to know who is infected and who is not by outward appearance or even what they claim to be their lifestyle. Often those that tested positive had only had ONE partner, and that partner is who infected them. There are also cases where one is exposed prior to having sexual intercourse, as we have children with STI's that have never had sex. Yes, poor choices can increase the probability of infection, however, it still does happen even with the most " wholesome" of lifestyle choices. Making good choices does decrease your risks, however, it does not mean that you should not be tested. Anyone who is considering becoming sexually active should be tested prior to becoming sexually active, and you should be regularly tested after as well.

The "girls" you have been with may be quite selective. That does not mean they had not already been exposed prior to you, and you very well can be a carrier without showing symptoms.

I realise it isn't 100% foolproof but at the same time I'm mostly juggling with probabilities than entire possibilities.

If I concerned myself with the idea that every girl could potentially be a hive of every terrible infection dwelling between the folds of her vagina I'd never get it up in the morning. I don't want to get hit by a bus, doesn't mean I'll never cross a street.

The strange thing is the girls I suspected DID have STDs eventually turned out to actually have them... and the girls I have been with never have had them. When you've had as many sexual partners as myself it seems a bit strange that I've kept a perfect batting average in that area.

Then again I also believe that contraceptives are 100% effective, just they're not 100% foolproof. Lo and behold I've never fathered a child or even had a pregnancy scare.

This might be helpful to you:
http://kidshealth.org/teen/sexual_health/stds/std_myths.html#
(although that site is not factually correct in that you cannot get an STI when you have had no sexual contact, it is helpful in busting a few of the myths)

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 intercourse, and although it is only about 1/100 people who die from complications from mono a year, it still does happen.

EDIT: This one is a bit better:
http://www.stdtestexpress.com/std-myths/

 

[scorptatious]

Honestly, I don't think I'd really care whether or not a potential sex partner was a virgin. So long as I really like the girl in question, I don't think it matters.

 

[Abomination]

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.

 

[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.