|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
| GUYS!!! If you met the right woman, could you wait for the sex till marriage?
Posted: 5/8/2006 9:07:28 PM | Huh? What? Youre a virgin I say to her. And then she says yes and I want to wait until marriage and then she grins from ear to ear and slits her eyes and sticks her chin out high jutting out from her chest and up and nods excitedly....wait wait Im thinking...who should I be? A devilish Jack Nicholson who grins and blurts loudly: Well Im your man sweetheart!...or a caring angelic like calm understanding mellow Robert Redford type stand in who pulls his chair in closer and leans his body in intently across the table and takes the girls two hands in his and lets his heart share some warmth before speaking... so well, instead I just say as it happens I know this great gyno isnt that great and also a woman whose practice is midwifery..isnt that double great? But all joking aside sure I'd date / call any girl who wants her relationship to a man to be that special. Would she still have me after I wrote the above is the real catch thing.
- - -
Films this thread bring to mind: Sweet Home Alabama, also Anything Else. | |
|
| GUYS!!! If you met the right woman, could you wait for the sex till marriage?
Posted: 5/11/2006 3:04:16 PM | Women aren't like cars. It's just a bad example and one that should be avoided. A couple who find they are right for each other should 'work' at it. If they're actually open with each other, there's a lot they can accomplish. When it's not up your standards the first few times but the person is still right, you just need to learn from each other what's missing.
Then again, what the hell should I know. Never been there. | |
|
| GUYS!!! If you met the right woman, could you wait for the sex till marriage?
Posted: 5/11/2006 3:45:29 PM | Not read all of this but from the original post…
So I'm interested in how many men would wait till marriage if they met the right woman? Even if you were both NOT virgins, do you think you could wait if that was her choice? Yes it would wait, because it would be meaningless if it wasn’t her choice to participate in any sexual intercourse.
I'm not saying you can't do other things, but the actual intercourse...could you wait for it? I would not insist on something she was not prepared to do. Even if she is willing it does not mean that I would be willing until I feel that it’s right.
Also, what if you went on a first date and the girl tells you she's waiting for marriage, how would you react? Not ever call her again? Or maybe stick around? I would be willing to wait. Let’s get to the heart of this... Marriage is not so much being officially ‘married’ but it is the joining of two people. There are people who are officially married but are not married in reality - and there are people who are not officially married but who are married in reality. If we are officially married and married in reality as well, that’s good - but if we are officially married but not married in reality, that’s not good. Marriage is the joining of two people not a marriage certificate that says so.
| |
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| GUYS!!! If you met the right woman, could you wait for the sex till marriage?
Posted: 5/13/2006 9:33:34 PM | lets groove on 5/11/2006 3:04:16 PM
Women aren't like cars. It's just a bad example and one that should be avoided. A couple who find they are right for each other should 'work' at it. If they're actually open with each other, there's a lot they can accomplish. When it's not up your standards the first few times but the person is still right, you just need to learn from each other what's missing.
Then again, what the hell should I know. Never been there.
Yeah that's all well and sounds good, but what if one of the couple DOESN'T want to "work at it" after marriage? As I have mentioned, I was in a couple of relationships where the woman refused to even think about doing anything beyond standard positions. I am surprised they did oral...even the few times they did (claimed they didn't like it)... And heaven forbid I should ask her to wear anything sexy, even just for us in the bedroom...
 | |
|
| |
| GUYS!!! If you met the right woman, could you wait for the sex till marriage?
Posted: 5/13/2006 10:01:15 PM | | I enjoy sex way too much to wait that long. Besides, I don't share the same religious beliefs that insist that you abstain from sex outside of wedlock. There for, I really don't see any point in waiting. The right woman for me, would not wish to wait that long either. She would have to share the same desires as I do, for me to consider her to be "The One". | |
|
| GUYS!!! If you met the right woman, could you wait for the sex till marriage?
Posted: 5/15/2006 4:54:17 PM | IN RESPONSE TO POST #797: Dude, who put a burr up your ass? 
You certainly have a right to your opinion, but just because someone has a differing view does not necessarily mean that they:
- Are selfish and greedy
- Disrespect women
- Need to reorder their priorities
If you really want to bash someone, how about the neanderthals who beat their women?
Otherwise, express your opinion and leave it at that.  | |
|
| GUYS!!! If you met the right woman, could you wait for the sex till marriage?
Posted: 5/15/2006 5:00:44 PM | In response to the original question...if she were the girl of my dreams...then yes. I could wait for marriage, weather a long distance relationship, take on children that aren't mine, move to the other side of the world, hunt down and kill Osama Bin Laden (if it were necessary), and even put the toilet seat down...just waiting for that girl to show up... | |
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| GUYS!!! If you met the right woman, could you wait for the sex till marriage?
Posted: 5/15/2006 5:23:07 PM | | lol I know what you guys are talking about...but c'mon...the girl of my dreams would incite my passion with her looks, intelligence and personality. Making the sex great is just physics and practice...you guys never heard Dr Ruth or Sex with Sue? Great sex doesn't just happen...you gotta work for it (or get really really drunk) | |
|
| GUYS!!! If you met the right woman, could you wait for the sex till marriage?
Posted: 5/15/2006 6:42:16 PM | tristanandisolt, your user name fits with your views.
You're not alone. Many, many people idealize idealized love. You're probably familiar with the story, but for those who are unaware of the larger context: the sad story of Tristan and Isolde (sad means "triste" in French) was born at the same time -- the 1300's--as a new concept, that of "agape", or heightened compassionate love that placed the highest good not on sexual consummation, but on the intense spiritual feelings between the two "lovers".
One of the troubles with this concept, which took on inevitable tragic consequences for those who enacted it, is that it drove the wedge between spirit and sexuality-- which was started by the Church Fathers long before-- deeper. Spirit was the be-all of love, the romantic yearning, the giving of one's life for the beloved, the exclusion of any other element in life to the obsessive contemplation of one's love.
There are many reasons why this approach is still popular today, with toned-down modifications:
1) It is safe. If one is spending all their time writing flowery poetry and prose, and pining for their love object (and they are "objects". Again, it is the IDEA of love that triumphs here, not the reality of a flawed flesh-and-blood other), then they don't have to face the complexities and naked (in body and soul) revelations that come with sexuality. And there is no more intimate and potentially dangerous (for the relationship) act than fucking one's lover.
2) It is perceived as more "pure". The spirit is posited as superior to the flesh (in a secular way, but agreeing, in conclusion, with organized Christianity). The "saving one's self" for marriage comes from this notion: having had sex with past lovers automatically defiles the potential mate, however subtly that may be stated or subconsciously understood.
3) It is a "rush", just as (ironically) it is a rush for players to make conquests and fuck others. Not enough is made of spiritual adrenaline, spiritual excitement. Sexuality is transmuted: instead of conjoining and expending with one's Love, it is sublimated and transformed into a beatific, at times potent, outpouring of emotion for the Beloved. If/when the Beloved takes his- or her-self away, a new "object" is found, and the process continues.
4) It is, at its lowest, a ploy crafted to ensnare the other with profuse (spiritual) desire. The pedestal effect. The other can simply be blown away by all the attention. (Of course, it's just as likely that it can backfire into nausea on the part of the recipient, too.)
Sex without spirit is coarse and brutal.
But spiritual yearning without sex, in the context of two who are courting, is pallid and ineffective. Ultimately, though, it is thoroughly dangerous, because the same trials, complexities, and out-and-out impossibilities (at its worst) are going to be there in either case. In the "waiting for marriage" scenario, though, it just means that the stakes have gone through the roof by the time this path even gets a tentative start. | |
|
| |
| GUYS!!! If you met the right woman, could you wait for the sex till marriage?
Posted: 5/15/2006 8:31:56 PM | wow rory27...very impressive argument. I still disagree but lol thats what debate is for...seeing the other persons side and then disregarding it . But seriously you put together a good argument. I think personally I'm more balanced than that (and yes that is after years of being the swooning romantic who used far too many pedestals in his time...now I see women as not that much different from men...possibly in the way they go about things but not in terms of their needs and motivations). I have no problem with the occasional one night stand, or the transitory relationship where both of us get what we need at that time...and yet...yes a part of me stubbornly clings to the romantic ideal. I don't see why the two can't be compatible...a pragmatist and a romantic at the same time. I was just saying that were I too meet someone who's religious or moral beliefs lead them to "saving themself" for marriage, were they in all other ways the person I've been looking for, then I would gladly make that sacrifice. I truly believe that so long as you have the equipment...sexual satisfaction can be improved and perfected with time...so I'm not so worried that the initial sex would not be great...hell I remember my first time...it wasn't so great but I still enjoyed it and it didn't lessen my feelings for the girl I was with. Nothing wrong with following higher ideals if your'e feet are planted firmly in the ground...
But interesting comments all the same. | |
|
| GUYS!!! If you met the right woman, could you wait for the sex till marriage?
Posted: 5/15/2006 9:08:57 PM | No problems. Always heartening to debate with someone who doesn't take things personal.
I have no problem with the occasional one night stand, or the transitory relationship where both of us get what we need at that time
But it's not an either/or situation: wait till marriage vs a pre-decided one- or two-night fling. I'm argueing in favor of long-term relationships that should start with sex very early in the relationship. If it turns into a one-night stand, or for one week or a month, it doesn't necessarily equate to the man or woman just wanting sex and then fleeing to the next pursuit. My contention, throughout this and other related threads, is that it's only when the sex starts that you have any idea if there's a chance for a relationship.
Sex is a great way, an indispensible way, to find out many things about the other, and to see if you have a chance to get to long-term status. I'm repeating myself somewhat. I know it's a long thread, so I'll try to be brief:
Having (not talking, commiserating, understanding, having a mutual vision about) sex is the only way two prospective lovers will ever be able to find out if they're sexually compatible:
a) There are many questions that have to be answered as to the physical fit of the partners(length and girth differences of the man; depth of the woman). Questions of basic sexual ability (erectile function; premature ejaculation; delayed ejaculation; lubrication of the woman; interruption of sex because of past trauma or squeamishness; general health and fitness level, if applicable).
b) Sex is the best way to find out about the big question of honesty of the other: many people, in order to cement a hoped-for bond with their courter, will "fudge" details (doncha just love those eupemisms ) about their sexual preferences and openness in order to facilitate keeping the marriage-station arrival on track. When the two are in the throes of hot, steamy sex, though, it's hard to convincingly lie about either your overall distaste or ho-hum attitude for sex, or for your lack of passion for this one particular person.
c) Along with the honesty issue, one or the other can tell their sweetie that they, too, have an insatiable appetite for sex. When the "big day" of the wedding passes, however, and the day-to-day realities of live-together routine take over, it can (and frequently does) happen that their sexual libidos are widely disparate. This is no one's fault, in and of itself: if one has a desire to fuck once a week, and the other seven times a week, the relationship will deteriorate-- the one with the higher sex drive will become angry and feel duped; the one with the lower drive will become resentful of the other's advances, and begin to withdraw. Anyone can talk an idealized future: but all the wish-fulfillment can't change individual physiology.
d) Along the same line as above, "openness" and "exploration" can be touted and looked forward to, among naive courters: after marriage, though, again, one can become set in a reduced pattern : limited positions, turning down new experiences (can be anything: sex outside; role-playing; style changes), at the befuddled realization of the adventurous one.
I could add more, but the post is long enough as it is.
I'll repeat something I said earlier: misplaced idealism kills more than rash adventure ever does. | |
|
|
| Page 33 of 132
|
19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59 |
|
Home
login 
One of the more sensible and apt posts of this long thread.